Rotaract Global MUN - HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL STUDY GUIDE

Rotaract Global Model United Nations | September 4-7, 2014 | Westminster
www.RotaractMUN.org |
- 1 -
HUMAN RIGHTS
COUNCIL
STUDY – GUIDE
Prepared by:
Najaf Raza
&
Joseph Mensah
On the date of:
15th July
2014

- 2 -
Word of Welcome
Secretary General of Rotaract Global Model United Nations 2013
Dear Delegates,
It is my absolute pleasure to welcome you to the 2014 edition of Rotaract
Global Model United Nations. We are privileged to hold this conference in
Westminster, a city that has been a bastion of diplomacy and debate for
centuries – and which saw the birth of the UN nearly 60 years ago.
Having engaged with Model UN since my school days, I can confidently
say that the activity is in my blood. I sincerely believe that there is no better
activity for young people trying to engage with the issues currently
troubling our world today. It goes without saying that these issues are
dangerous, as they are numerous, and I could not even begin to summarise
them in such a limited space. However, simply from reading your applications, I have been
inspired by the massive contribution young people are willing to make to solving these
problems. This is why I have decided that the conference shall be based around the theme:
Leaders of Tomorrow.
I do not mean to suggest by this that our conference will nurture you and prepare you to make
future contributions. Rather, I propose that you are already leaders – young people poised to
make a meaningful difference to international affairs. With our conference as your unique
gathering place and speaking platform, I can guarantee that your debate contributions will not
simply be academic exercises. Instead, they will form part of a meaningful policy proposal that
Rotaract will ensure reaches the desks of the UN.
With this collective spirit in mind, I hope you are extremely excited to read the Study Guide of
your committee. Having handpicked your chairs personally, I can assure you that they are world-
leaders in their field. Put simply, there are few people who are more qualified to write this guide
than them. So, use their sterling work as a starting point for your research, and be inspired to
read and research far beyond the confines of this guide.
I feel extremely honoured to welcome this unprecedented gathering of great young minds to
London. I am fascinated to hear the solutions you propose, and pledge to do all in my power to
translate them into meaningful political change.
Yours Sincerely,
Adam McLaren
Secretary General, Rotaract Global Model United Nations 2014

- 3 -
Delegates,
My name is Najaf Raza and I am a Postgraduate student of Law at BPP Law School in London. I
am passionate about the rights of humans across the world, particularly the relationship between
human rights and globalisation. I am involved in political campaigning locally and consistently
work with charities to enhance human rights for those less fortunate. I believe the youth have the
power to change the future and I strongly support debate and discussion of political issues. I
enjoy hearing differing views and hearing young people engage with world issues, as it falls to
the next generation to find peace where peace is needed. I am so excited to meet a group of
MUNers with the same visions as my own – welcome to the London Conference!
Best,
Najaf Raza
Chairperson of the Human Rights Council

- 4 -
Delegates,
It is my distinct pleasure to extend to you a warm welcome to the Human Rights Council of
RotaractMUN 2014! I am very excited to be part of this the committee! So a bit about me - I am
very passionate about the work of the United Nations and have an ecstatic interest in humanity,
international relations, diplomacy, culture and art. I have passionately participated in some of
the world´s most prestigious simulation conferences of international organizations - notably
Model United Nations and Model EU - inter alia in New York, Boston, Saint Petersburg,
Cambridge, Bucharest, Cluj-Napoca, Oxford, Sofia, Moscow and Boston, taking a great
spectrum of roles.
For RotaractMUN 2014, I am particularly delighted to see that you are drawn to the intellectual
challenge of tackling the problems of the international community. It goes without saying that I
am excited about the exceptional pleasure of meeting passionate and intelligent people from
around the world. You will have an amazing opportunity to participate in one of the most
thought provoking and lively RotaractMUN councils and foster fruitful debate on the current
world issues.
Best,
Joseph Mensah
Chairperson of the Human Rights Council

- 5 -
Introduction to the Human Rights Council
History
The United Nations Human Rights Council (hereinafter UNHRC) is an inter-governmental body
within the United Nations system and is one of the most prominent institutions of the United
Nations. The UNHRC is the successor to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights
(hereinafter CHR) and is a subsidiary body of the United Nations General Assembly. The
council works closely with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (hereinafter
OHCHR) and engages the United Nations' Special procedures.
The General Assembly established the UNHRC by adopting a resolution (A/RES/60/251) on
March 15th, 2006, in order to replace the previous CHR, which had been heavily criticized for
allowing membership to countries with poor human rights records.
Organization
The members of the General Assembly elect the 47 members who will form the Council. The
term lasts for three years and no country may occupy a seat for more than two consecutive
terms. The seats are divided amongst the UN regional groups; 13 for Africa, 13 for Asia, 6 for
Eastern Europe, 8 for Latin America and the Caribbean (GRULAC), and 7 for the Western
European and Others Group (WEOG).
The UNHRC holds regular sessions three times a year; in March, June and September. The
UNHRC can decide at any time to hold a special session to address human rights violations and
emergencies, at the request of one-third of the member states.

- 6 -
Topic A – ISIS: A human rights crisis in Iraq?
The topic chosen for the Human Rights Council debate relates to the urgent issue relating the
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) and Iraq. Iraq is in a current state of civil turmoil. It
has been speculated by the UN Human Rights Council that Iraq are in danger of descending into
sectarian war. ISIS are a jihadist group which have branched off from Al-Qaeda and believe they
are the caliphate of all Muslims. ISIS is reported by UN reports to have committed gross human
rights violations through thousands of killings of civilians based on sectarian discrimination.
Public executions have become commonplace, and the future of ISIS’s aims threatens the future
of civilians in Iraq. Without action from nation states and the UN Human Rights Council, it is
possible Iraq will descend into an even deeper crisis.
In this topic, we will look at the history of Iraq and in particular, the history of sectarian in the
region. An analysis of the minority sects will also be analysed with a focus on the UN’s
intervention during a number of wars between Iraq and other countries. Finally, actions the UN
should undertake and the questions we would like the delegates to explore will be set out. This
study guide aims to give you the initial background to the topic, from which you can continue to
research the problems occurring in Iraq to this very day.
A. Statement of the problem
Iraq – The Republic
Iraq has been plagued by instability since the toppling of the British monarchy. In this part of the
study guide we shall present a short history of Iraq and a chronology of the main events.
The British monarchy was ousted from power in Iraq in 1958. The Ba’athist nationalist party
took power in 1968 through a coup under the leadership of General Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr.
During the 1960s, the first Iraqi-Kurdish War commenced from 1961 until 1970 which resulted
in 100,000 casualties but no internal political changes in Iraq.
The Iran-Iraq War lasted from 1980-1990, following long border disputes and fears from the
Iraqi government of Shia rebellion in the light of the Iranian Revolution. The UN Security
Council asked for a ceasefire but the war continued until 1988. Finally, the UN Security Council
passed Resolution 598. The UN Security Council later pointed out that Iraq had used chemical

- 7 -
weapons during the war. The UN Security Council were criticised for not making it clear that it
had only been Iraq, and not Iran, that had used chemical weaponry during the war.
By 1990, Iraq embarked on another war with Kuwait over territorial disputes.
The biggest issue in Iraq was sectarian differences. Saddam Hussein’s Iranian Republican Guard
suppressed Shia revolts in 1991 alongside Kurdish revolts in northern Iraq. Thousands of people
were killed and over 2 million fled Iraq from the terror of the Husseini regime.
Sectarian violence significantly increased after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Sunni minorities
and Shia majorities became increasingly violent towards one another. The Ba’athist party were
removed from power by the Western countries but the new Iraqi government has not been able
to control sectarian violence. The war was officially declared finished in December 2011 when
troops withdrew from the country.
ISIS
ISIS is the English acronym for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. ISIS is a group of
Muslim Sunni Jihadists who have become a threat rapidly through their territorial takeover of
regions in Iraq. ISIS believe they are a caliphate and therefore have the right to control all of the
Muslim population. ISIS therefore wish to take political control of Iraq and the Levant, which
consists of Kuwait, Jordan, Israel, Palestine and Cyprus. ISIS follows a Wahhabist approach to
Islam, and its violence is specifically targeted at Shia Muslims and Christians.
ISIS has the political aim of establishing their caliphate in the Sunni majority regions of Iraq and
Syria. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, now known as Amir al-Mu’minin Caliph Ibrahim, is named the
caliph of the group.
ISIS has committed gross human rights violations since their existence. In June 2014, ISIS took
control of most of Mosul, the second largest populated city of Iraq. They have carried out a
multitude of attacks on Mosul, killing thousands of civilians in the process. Over 500,000 people
have fled Mosul to escape the control of ISIS. ISIS have claimed to have killed 1,700 Iraqi
soldiers and have released thousands of videos of executions. A further 270 soldiers, militiamen
and technicians have been executed in July. ISIS announced in July 2014 that they are aiming to
embark on female genital mutilation (FGM) for the women of Mosul, amounting to 4 million
women, between the ages of 11 and 46.
B. Analysis of the problem
History of insurgencies
Iraq first developed an insurgency with the 2003 invasion from the United States. The
insurgency is thought to have perpetuated a proliferation of sectarian violence between Sunnis
and Shias. The displacement of the civilian population ensued as a result of the insurgency. By
October 2006, the UNHCR recorded there were over 1.6 million Iraqi refugees and by 2008 this
number rose to 4.7 million.
The effect of this insurgency was to make Iraq one of the top 5 unstable countries in the world
from 2005 to 2008. There was a distinct difference in civilian deaths after the Iraqi security took
the lead on operations from June 2009. However, overall the civilian death toll between 2008
and 2011 was 5,740 according to UN officials.
The Iraqi insurgency groups are composed of a dozen or so large organisations. 10% of these are
non-foreign groups. The largest insurgency group is the Ba’athist party, whose goal was to take

- 8 -
back power over government. After the execution of Saddam Hussein, their leader, the party has
become increasingly fragmented. Salafi insurgents, more commonly known as Wahabbis, are a
large insurgent group whose focus is on attacking non-Muslims and Shia Muslims.
Al-Qaeda and the development of ISIS
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant was formed through a variety of different insurgent
groups, including the Mujahideen Shura Council and Al-Qaeda. ISIS has gained support since
the fall of Saddam Hussein, as Sunni Iraqis have felt discriminated against politically and
economically. ISIS is formed of Wahabbi Sunnis and has taken a particularly brutal attitude
towards civilians compared to other insurgencies. The group consisted of 4,000 fighters but it is
now thought to have grown considerably in the past year. It has a particularly strong link with
Al-Qaeda and is often thought to be an offshoot of the insurgent group. However, Al-Qaeda
leaders have tried to distance themselves from this association in the light of the thousands of
civilians they claim to have killed.
The split between Al-Qaeda into ISIS and other Sunni militant groups first began in 2006. These
groups were dissatisfied with Al-Qaeda’s tactics and their targeted killing of civilians. ISIS has
become a prominent group since 2013. The leader, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, announced an
alliance between ISIS and Al-Nusra Front, another Sunni militia group in 2013. However these
reports were denied by Al-Nusra and fighting ensued between the two groups. After eight
months of infighting, Al-Qaeda decided to denounce association with ISIS.
ISIS is known for being one of the most violent militia groups in Iraq. Between 5 to 22 June
2014, it was reported by the UN that over 1,000 civilians were killed by ISIS. Alongside this,
there have been reports of increased crime and violence against women including rape and
murder.
On 28 June 2014 Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi announced that ISIS was now going to be called the
Islamic State. He announced that the group was the new caliphate and he was the caliph. This
notion has been criticised and rejected by Muslim scholars and communities around the world.
ISIS has blown up various mosques across Mosul, the city it now controls (the second largest
city in Iraq). To mark Eid al-Fitr in July 2014, ISIS released a 30 minute video of mass
executions they had carried out.
Sectarian differences
The main underlying issue in Iraq has been sectarian differences. There are predominantly three
different sects living in Iraq.
The Kurds
Kurds are estimated to have a population of 20 to 25 million. It is believed this estimate is likely
to be inaccurate, as Middle Eastern countries often downplay the number of Kurds in their
country to undermine their large minority status. In Iraq, Kurds are estimated to have a
population of 4 to 6 million, primarily located in northern Iraq. Jordan, Syria and other Middle
Eastern countries were created out of the Ottoman empire. The idea of creating Kurdistan fell
behind.
Kurds have a history of being treated as inferior citizens of Iraq. From 1972 Kurdish rebellions
received shipments from the US in support of their struggle against the Iraqi military forces.
However, the US prioritised a pact with Iran and this led to a strong offensive attack from the
Iraqis on the Kurds once again. The Kurds were massacred by the thousands under Saddam
Hussein’s regime. In 1988 Saddam Hussein dropped chemical gas, killing 5,000 Kurds.
Statistical analysis from the Economist shows that 98 per cent of Kurds would want
independence if they could have it.

- 9 -
Shia Muslims
There are roughly 60-65 per cent of Shias which make up the total population and are therefore
in the majority. However, Saddam Hussein had a strong sectarian bias against Shias and Kurds.
He was seen to be ethnically cleansing Iraq and the entirely Sunni government marginalised
Shias. Saddam also supported Wahhabism and this in turn led to even further persecution of Shia
Muslims.
The invasion of Iraq in 2003 prompted an increase in sectarian fighting in the country. Islamic
Jihadists and Al-Qaeda targeted attacks on Shias. It is speculated that these attacks, which
primarily took place in 2006 and 2007, had the aim of creating instability in Iraq. They believed
attacks would create violent reactions from the Shias. This would delegitimise the new Iraqi
government which represented the Shia population. The group precipitating the attacks were
formerly known as the Mujahideen Shura Council. By the end of 2006 they renamed themselves
ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq). ISIS are currently the biggest threat to Iraqi civilians. Their
origins lie in an interest to create sectarian divide and violence and this is an integral part of a
study of Iraq.
C. Proposed Solutions
a) The UN Human Rights Council have compiled a report through the UN Assistance
Mission for Iraq describing activities of the Islamic State of Iraq (ISIS). The report states
the ISIS is carrying out “large-scale killings, injuries and destructions and damage to
livelihoods and property”
b) The UN Human Rights Council believes Iraq is in danger of going into full-scale
sectarian war and the international community is “running out of time to act”
c) A proposed solution is for the UN Human Rights Council to convene countries and
discuss a UN-led action against ISIS, in particular after the evidence compiled through
the report
d) Dialogue with the Iraqi government – sectarian violence is becoming exacerbated as a
result of ISIS’s attack on Shia Muslims and Kurds. An appeal to the Iraqi government
would be more beneficial for all states and the UN rather than an offensive military
action without their collaboration
D. Past Actions
During the Iran-Iraq war of 1980, the UN Security Council became involved. The UN Security
Council asked for a ceasefire but the war continued until 1988. Finally, the UN Security Council
passed Resolution 598. The UN Security Council later pointed out that Iraq had used chemical
weapons during the war. The UN Security Council were criticised for not making it clear that it
had only been Iraq, and not Iran, that had used chemical weaponry during the war.
Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. In November 1990, the UN Security Council allowed member
states to use any authorised means by which to stop the invasion. This led to the Persian Gulf
War in which 34 nations launched missions to stop Iraq.
As a result of Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, The UN imposed Resolution 661 which allowed for
economic sanctions on Iraq with a full trade embargo. The UN stated these sanctions would only

- 10 -
be removed with the removal of weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was struck with poverty and
malnutrition during the time of the sanctions.
George Bush, at the time of his presidency, insisted that Iraq were in violation of 16 UN
Security Council regulations. He argued that Iraq were in possession of threatening amounts of
Weapons of Mass Destruction.The UN Security Council sent a team to investigate in the country
which they were permitted to do. Their findings showed that there was no sign of any weapons.
The rise of ISIS as a threat to Iraqi civilians has rapidly increased over the last year, although
they have been present in Iraq since the early 2000s. The gross human rights violations have
become an international emergency. The Human Rights Watch, which is an international
agency, has said there is a growing threat in Iraq from ISIS.
Navi Pillay, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, has stated that ISIS have been
“actively seeking out – and in some cases killing – soldiers, police and others, including
civilians, whom they perceive as being associated with the government.”
Iraqi History Timeline (taken from the BBC website)
1914 - 1918 - World War I.
1920 - Britain creates state of Iraq with League of Nations approval.
1920 - Great Iraqi Revolution - rebellion against British rule.
1921 - Faysal, son of Hussein Bin Ali, the Sharif of Mecca, is crowned Iraq's first king.
1932 - Iraq becomes an independent state.
1939 - 1945 - World War II. Britain re-occupies Iraq.
1958 - The monarchy is overthrown in a military coup led by Brig Abd-al-Karim Qasim and Col
Abd-al Salam Muhammad Arif. Iraq is declared a republic.
1963 - Prime Minister Qasim is ousted in a coup led by the Arab Socialist Baath Party (ASBP).
Arif becomes president.
1963 - The Baathist government is overthrown by Arif and a group of officers.
1968 - A Baathist led-coup ousts Arif. Revolution Command Council (RCC) takes charge with
Gen Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr as chairman and country's president.
198 - Iraq bombs Iran as hostilities increase
1974 - Iraq grants limited autonomy to Kurdish region.
1979 - Saddam Hussein succeeds Al-Bakr as president.
1980 - 1988 - Iran-Iraq war.
June 1981 - Israel attacks an Iraqi nuclear research centre at Tuwaythah near Baghdad.
March 1988 - Iraq attacks Kurdish town of Halabjah with poison gas, killing thousands.
1990 - Iraq invades Kuwait, prompting what becomes known as the first Gulf War. A massive
US-led military campaign forces Iraq to withdraw in February 1991.
April 1991 - Iraq subjected to weapons inspection programme.
March 1991 - Southern Shia and northern Kurdish populations - encouraged by Iraq's defeat in
Kuwait - rebel, prompting a brutal crackdown.
1991 - Gulf War
1991 - Jubilation follows Gulf War ceasefire
April 1991 - UN-approved safe-haven established in northern Iraq to protect the Kurds. Iraq
ordered to end all military activity in the area.
June 1993 - US forces launch a cruise missile attack on Iraqi intelligence headquarters in
Baghdad in retaliation for the attempted assassination of US President George Bush in Kuwait in
April.
April 1995 - UNSC Resolution 986 allows the partial resumption of Iraq's oil exports to buy
food and medicine (the "oil-for-food programme").

- 11 -
October 1995 - Saddam Hussein wins a referendum allowing him to remain president for
another seven years.
October 1998 - Iraq ends cooperation with UN Special Commission to Oversee the Destruction
of Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (Unscom).
Operation Desert Fox
December 1998 - After UN staff are evacuated from Baghdad, the US and UK launch a
bombing campaign, "Operation Desert Fox", to destroy Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological
weapons programmes.
February 1999 - Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr, spiritual leader of the Shia
community, is assassinated in Najaf.
December 1999 - UNSC Resolution 1284 creates the UN Monitoring, Verification and
Inspection Commission (Unmovic) to replace Unscom. Iraq rejects the resolution.
February 2001 - Britain, US carry out bombing raids to try to disable Iraq's air defence network.
The bombings have little international support.
November 2002 - UN weapons inspectors return to Iraq backed by a UN resolution which
threatens serious consequences if Iraq is in "material breach" of its terms.
March 2003 - UK's ambassador to the UN says the diplomatic process on Iraq has ended; arms
inspectors evacuate; US President George W Bush gives Saddam Hussein and his sons 48 hours
to leave Iraq or face war.
March 2003 - US-led invasion topples Saddam Hussein's government, marks start of years of
violent conflict with different groups competing for power.
November 2004 - Major US-led offensive against insurgents in Falluja.
August 2005 - Draft constitution is endorsed by Shia and Kurdish negotiators, but not by Sunni
representatives.
October 2005 - Voters approve a new constitution, which aims to create an Islamic federal
democracy.
December 2005 - Iraqis vote for the first, full-term government and parliament since the US-led
invasion.
May/ June 2006 - An average of more than 100 civilians per day are killed in violence in Iraq,
the UN says.
December 2006 - Saddam Hussein is executed for crimes against humanity.
January 2007 - US President Bush announces a new Iraq strategy; thousands more US troops
will be dispatched to shore up security in Baghdad.
UN says more than 34,000 civilians were killed in violence during 2006; the figure surpasses
official Iraqi estimates threefold.
December 2007 - Britain hands over security of Basra province to Iraqi forces, effectively
marking the end of nearly five years of British control of southern Iraq.
March 2009 - US President Barack Obama announces withdrawal of most US troops by end of
August 2010. Up to 50,000 of 142,000 troops now there will stay on into 2011 to advise Iraqi
forces and protect US interests, leaving by end of 2011.
December 2009 - The al-Qaeda-linked Islamic State of Iraq claims responsibility for suicide
bombings in Baghdad that kill at least 127 people, as well as attacks in August and October that
killed 240 people.
August 2010 - Seven years after the US-led invasion, the last US combat brigade leaves Iraq.
December 2011 - US completes troop pull-out.
April 2013 - Insurgency intensifies, with levels of violence matching those of 2008. By July the
country is described as being in a full-blown sectarian war zone once again.
October 2013 - Parliamentary elections set for April 2014. Government says October is deadliest
month since April 2008, with 900 killed. By the year-end the UN estimates the 2013 death toll
of civilians as 7,157 - a dramatic increase in the previous year's figure of 3,238.
April 2014 - Prime Minister Al-Maliki's coalition wins a plurality at first parliamentary election
since 2011 withdrawal of US troops, but falls short of a majority.

- 12 -
June 2014 - Sunni rebels led by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) surge out of
Anbar Province to seize Iraq's second city of Mosul, moving on to the oil refinery centre of
Baiji. Tens of thousands flee amid reports of atrocities. Iran and the US offer assistance.
E. Bloc Positions
United States
The US has always been in support of the suppressed population in Iraq. The attacks on New
York and Washington became linked to Saddam Hussein, prompting George Bush, President of
the US at the time of the attacks, to launch a defensive campaign against Iraq. He insisted that
Iraq were in breach of 16 UN Security Council violations and contested he was sure they were in
possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
The US decided to launch an attack in Iraq breaching the authority of the UN Security Council
who had not allowed any country to invade Iraq. The US established the Coalition Provisional
Authority to govern Iraq and banned members of the Ba’ath party from being able to join the
Iraqi government.
The leader of Al-Qaeda was killed by US forces in 2006 and Saddam Hussein was executed for
war crimes and human rights atrocities. By 2007 the Iraqi government asked the US to make a
timetable of withdrawal. After this, the UK and other allies such as Denmark began taking
troops out of the country. On December 18th
2011 the final US troops were withdrawn from the
country and Iraqi Interior Ministers reported crime and civilian death went down to its lowest
since the 2003 invasion.
United Kingdom
Britain had imposed a monarchy on the Iraqis from the early 1900s. Although Iraq was granted
formal independence in 1930, it was believed the British still ruled Iraq. Britain was responsible
for creating the boundaries of Iraq. Britain came to protect Iraqi field oils in during the Second
World War. The next time Britain became involved in the area was after the Iraqi war with Iran.
Britain joined with Germany, the US and France to arm Iraq and halt the imminent Islamic
threat they believed Iran was precipitating.
Tony Blair, Prime Minister at the time of the attacks on Washington and New York, formed an
alliance with the US and joined in their war in Iraq in the belief there were Weapons of Mass
Destruction in the country.
Russia
The Soviet Union gave military support to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war because they were
worried of an Islamic revolution if Iran were to win the war. During the Saddam Hussein
regime, the Soviet Union did not support his invasion of Kuwait. Russia supported the UN
Resolution authorising the use of military force against Iraq.
During the invasion of Iraq, there was some speculation in Western countries as to whether the
Russians had assisted Saddam Hussein in removing the Weapons of Mass Destruction before the
US and other countries went to occupy the country.
Relations between Iraq and Russia have been speculatively improving over recent years. There
was an official Iraqi state visit to Russia for the first time since 1981. Russia is in support of the
territorial jurisdiction of Iraq and strongly opposes calls for Kurdish separation.
Russia has helped to supply Iraq with weapons to help them fight ISIS in 2014.

- 13 -
Iran
Iran has pledged it is willing to support Iraq to revolt against the anti-Shia militia in the country
including ISIS. In 2014, Iran has supplied Iraq with attack jets to help them fight against ISIS.
Surprisingly, Iran has decided to work alongside the US military troops to create an international
military aid combat against ISIS. In July 2014, 750 US militant troops were stationed in Iraq,
using the Iranian attack jets to create a strong force against the militia group.

- 14 -
F. Thinker’s (Questions A Resolution Must Answer)
a) Why does sectarian violence occur? Is it the fault of the leadership/ government, or
primordial and historic differences?
b) Is foreign influence to blame for the sectarian divide and violence in Iraq?
c) Did the invasion of Iraq in 200 do more harm than good for the safety of the civilians?
d) Why has an Islamic fundamentalist group been able to gain territorial power over regions
in Iraq?
e) Should the problem of ISIS be solved by military intervention or will foreign
intervention make the situation worse?
f) How do the human rights violations caused by ISIS compare with the rest of the Middle
East? Is sectarian violence an innate part of Middle Eastern countries?
g) In the face of this situation, what capacities do member states in the UNHRC have the
power to cause a change in Iraq?
h) What are the human rights violations created by ISIS? What do you propose to stop
them?
G. Recommended Readings
Kurdish history and chronology of events: http://middleeast.about.com/od/iraq/a/me071022.htm
Shia Muslim history: http://www.modarresi.org/english/iraqshia.htm
ISIS analysis of threat: http://www.channel4.com/news/iraq-isis-isil-human-rights-violations-
execution-death-toll
ISIS history: http://www.eurasiareview.com/13062014-dawn-islamic-state-iraq-ash-sham-
analysis/
ISIS human rights violations: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/18/us-iraq-security-
civilians-idUSKBN0FN0T720140718
UN Human Rights report on ISIS:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewYork/Stories/Pages/Iraqhumanrightsreport.aspx
Russia, Iraq and US relations:
http://www.aei.org/article/foreign-and-defense-policy/regional/europe/russia-america-iraq/

- 15 -
Topic B – A Right to Immigration And Its Limits
A proper definition of Immigration would be the movement of people into another country or
region to which they are not native in order to settle there, especially as permanent residents or
future citizens.
During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, there were a series of events that included the
shifting of political borders, expansion of territories as well as contractions. These changes are
directly linked with extreme phases in defining nationhood: mostly very broad, inclusive ones
and almost always very narrow and highly exclusive ones. The recent issues with immigration
and nationhood date back to the origins of nation-building. It may be fair to say that they are
caused by the unresolved contradictions between exclusive ideas of the nation-state and
inclusive ideas of republican and universal principles of individual human and civil rights; and
also between very rigidly interpreted citizenship regulations and a liberal asylum law.
Global migration raises several important and highly ethical issues. One of the most significant
is the question of whether liberal democratic societies have strong moral obligations to admit
immigrants. However, despite the theoretical and practical importance of this question, it has
received little attention.
Historically, most policy makers have argued that liberal states are morally free to restrict
immigration at their discretion, with few exceptions. Recently, however, liberal egalitarians have
begun to challenge this conventional view in two lines of argument. The first contends that
immigration restrictions are inconsistent with basic liberal egalitarian values, including freedom
and moral equality. The second maintains that affluent, liberal democratic societies are morally
obligated to admit immigrants as a partial response to global injustices, such as poverty and
human rights violations.
While many arguments for open borders have been enormously influential, they have also been
subject to a number of objections. It is believed that some activists overstate the moral
importance of free international mobility, and thus fails to establish that freedom of international
movement is a genuine human right.

- 16 -
A. Statement of the problem
At the end of this century the issue of immigration has become a battlefield on which different
concepts of the future of the nation-state and of cultural and national identity are being fought.
In most developed countries, mostly western, the discussion is taking place between two
extreme positions, one that denies a country in question is de facto an immigration country and
one that compares the country in question with traditional immigration societies like the United
States, Canada, or Australia. Both arguments are too simplistic. Neither is immigration a recent
and temporary phenomenon in many parts of the world nor can it be ignored that the migration
history for a specific country is different from other nations with regard to the processes of
nation-building, patterns of territorial expansion, the scale of immigrant settlement, national
identity formation, and legal regulations of nationhood and immigration.
The rapid increase in the size of the immigrant flow reaching many nations, the major changes
in the national origin composition of the immigrant population, and the decline in the skills of
immigrants relative to the skills of native workers have rekindled the debate over immigration
policy. The current debate revives the old concerns over immigrants "taking jobs away" from
native workers and finding it difficult to adapt in a particular nation’s economy, as well as
questions whether immigrants pay their way in the welfare state.
B. Analysis of the problem
The Development of Immigration since 1945
There are around eleven million immigrants living in West Europe, making up about 5 per cent
of total population. Relatively few have gone to industrially less developed countries like
Norway, Austria and Denmark, while large concentrations are to be found in highly
industrialized countries like Belgium, Sweden, West Germany, France, Switzerland and Britain.
This analysis concentrates on the four last-named which have about 90 per cent of all
immigrants in West Europe between them.
Most immigrants in Germany and Switzerland come from Southern Europe. The main groups in
Germany are Italians (574,000 in 1970), Yugoslavs (515,000), Turks (469,000), Greeks
(343,000) and Spaniards (246,000). In Switzerland, the Italians are by far the largest group
(532,000 m 1969) followed by Germans (116,000) and Spaniards (98,000).
France and Britain also have considerable numbers of European immigrants, but in addition
large contingents from former colonies in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean. France has 617,000
Spaniards, 612,000 Italians, 480,000 Portuguese, as well as 608,000 Algerians, 143,000
Moroccans, 89,000 Tunisians, about 55,000 black Africans and an unknown number (probably
about 200,000) from the remaining colonies (euphemistically referred to as Overseas
Departments) in the West Indies and the African island of Réunion. The largest immigrant group
in Britain comes from the Irish Republic (739,000 in 1966). Most of the other Europeans were
displaced persons and the like who came during and after the war: Germans (142,000), Poles

- 17 -
(118,000). Cypriots number 60,000. There are also an increasing number of South Europeans,
often allowed in on a short-term basis for work in catering and domestic service. Coloured
immigrants comprise about one third of the total, the largest groups coming from the West
Indies (269,000 in 1966), India (240,000) and Pakistan (75,000).
The migratory movements and the government policies which direct them reflect the growing
importance and changing function of immigrant labour in many parts of the world, especially
West Europe. Immediately after the Second World War, Switzerland, Britain and France
recruited foreign workers. Switzerland needed extra labour for the export boom permitted by her
intact industry in the middle of war-torn Europe. The ‘European Voluntary Workers’ in Britain
(initially displaced persons, later Italians) were assigned to specific jobs connected with
industrial reconstruction. The reconstruction boom was not expected to last. Both Switzerland
and Britain imposed severe restrictions on foreign workers, designed to stop them from settling
and bringing in their families, so that they could be dismissed and deported at the least sign of
recession. France was something of an exception: her immigration policy was concerned not
only with labour needs for reconstruction, but also with permanent immigration to counteract the
demographic effects of the low birth-rate.
When West German industry got under way again after the 1949 Currency Reform there was at
first no need for immigrants from Southern Europe. An excellent industrial reserve army was
provided by the seven million expellees from the former Eastern provinces of the Reich and by
the three million refugees from East Germany, many of whom were skilled workers. Throughout
the fifties, the presence of these reserves kept wage-growth slow and hence provided the basis
for the ‘economic miracle’. By the mid-fifties, however, special labour shortages were
appearing, first in agriculture and building. It was then that recruitment of foreign workers
(initially on a seasonal basis21) was started. Here too, an extremely restrictive policy was
followed with regard to family entry and long-term settlement. ‘Rotation’ of the foreign labour
force was encouraged. In this stage, the use of immigrants in the Countries mentioned followed
the pre-war pattern: they were brought in to satisfy special and, it was thought, temporary labour
needs in certain sectors.
Net migration rates for 2011: positive (blue), negative (orange), stable (green), and no data
(gray)
Discrimination
Upon arrival in developed nations, immigrants from under-developed areas have little basic
education or vocational training, and are usually ignorant of the language. They know nothing of
prevailing market conditions or prices. In capitalist society, these characteristics are sufficient to

- 18 -
ensure that immigrants get poor jobs and social conditions. After a period of adaptation to
industrial work and urban life, the prevailing ideology would lead one to expect many
immigrants to obtain better jobs, housing, etc. Special mechanisms ensure that this does not
happen in the majority of cases. On the one hand there is institutionalized discrimination in the
form of legislation which restricts immigrants’ civic and labour market rights. On the other hand
there are informal discriminatory practices based on racialism or xenophobia.
In nearly all West European countries, labour market legislation discriminates against
foreigners. They are granted labour permits for a specific job in a certain firm for a limited
period. They do not have the right to move to better-paid or more highly qualified positions, at
least for some years. Workers who change jobs without permission are often deported.
Administrative practices in this respect have been liberalized to some extent in Germany and
Switzerland in recent years, due to the need for immigrant labour in a wider range of
occupations, but the basic restrictiveness of the system remains. In Britain, Commonwealth
immigrants (once admitted to the country) and the Irish had equal rights with local workers until
the 1971 Immigration Act. Now Commonwealth immigrants will have the same labour market
situation as aliens. The threat of deportation if an immigrant loses his job is a very powerful
weapon for the employer. Immigrants who demand better conditions can be sacked for
indiscipline and the police will do the rest. Regulations which restrict family entry and
permanent settlement also keep immigrants in inferior positions. If a man may stay only for a
few years, it is not worth his while to learn the language and take vocational training courses.
Informal discrimination is well known in Britain, where it takes the form of the colour bar. The
PEP study, as well as many other investigations, has shown that coloured immigrants encounter
discrimination with regard to employment, housing and the provision of services such as
mortgages and insurance. The more qualified a coloured man is, the more likely he is to
encounter discrimination. This mechanism keeps immigrants in ‘their place’, i.e. doing the dirty,
unpleasant jobs. Immigrants in the other European countries also encounter informal
discrimination.
Immigrants rarely get promotion to supervisory or nonmanual jobs, even when they are well-
qualified. Discrimination in housing is widespread. In Britain, adverts specifying ‘no coloured’
are forbidden, but in Germany or Switzerland one still frequently sees ‘no foreigners’.
The most serious form of discrimination against immigrant workers is their deprivation of
political rights. Foreigners may not vote in local or national elections. Nor may they hold public
office, which in France is defined so widely as to include trade-union posts. Foreigners do not
generally have the same rights as local workers with regard to eligibility for works councils and
similar representative bodies. The main exception to this formal exclusion from political
participation concerns
Irish and Commonwealth immigrants in Britain, who do have the right to vote (the same will not
apply to those who enter under the 1971 Act). But the Mangrove case shows the type of
repression which may be expected by any immigrants who dare to organize themselves. Close
police control over the political activities of immigrants is the rule throughout Europe, and
deportations of political and trade-union militants are common. After the May Events in France,
hundreds of foreign workers were deported. Foreign language newspapers of the CGT labour
federation have been repeatedly forbidden. The German Foreigners Law of 1965 lays down that
the political activity of foreigners can be forbidden if ‘important interests of the German Federal
Republic require this’—a provision so flexible that the police can prevent any activity they
choose. Even this is not regarded as sufficient. When Federal Chancellor Willy Brandt visited
Iran in March 1972 to do an oil deal, the Shah complained strongly about Iranian students being
allowed to criticize him in Germany. The Greek and Yugoslav ambassadors have also protested
about the activities of their citizens. Now the German Government is working on a new law that

- 19 -
would go so far as to make police permission necessary even for private meetings of foreigners
in closed rooms.
United Nations system recognition of links between migration and development
Although migration was not factored into the MDG framework, it has been part of the United
Nations broader development agenda for some time. Several international agreements recognize
the importance of migration to sustainable development.
As early as 1994, for example, 179 Member States of the United Nations adopted the
Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development. The
Programme of Action includes one chapter entirely devoted to international migration, and
another chapter focusing on population distribution, urbanization and internal migration. For
example, the Programme of Action calls upon all States to:
Encourage more cooperation and dialogue between countries of origin and countries of
destination in order to maximize the benefits of migration to those concerned and increase the
likelihood that migration has positive consequences for the development of both sending and
receiving countries (UNFPA, 1995).
More recently, the report of the United Nations System Task Team on the Post-2015 United
Nations Development Agenda (United Nations, 2012) recognized migration as a key dimension
of global population dynamics and an enabler for inclusive social and economic development.
IOM and UN DESA (2012) outline the important ways in which migration can have an impact
on development. The significance of migration for development is further underscored by UN
DESA (2012), which notes that migration is the big hole in the traditional development agenda,
and states that:
The importance of international migration cannot be overemphasized. It is a powerful force for
social change and cultural interaction and has significant impacts on the development process
and functioning of modern economies. Migratory pressures are bound to increase in the future…
(UN DESA, 2012:47).
Labour migration in the post-2015 development agenda
Although there is some agreement that increasing labour mobility would generate net overall
benefits, there can also be redistribution effects and short-term costs. These will ultimately
depend on the characteristics of migrants and labour market conditions in both sending and
receiving countries. For instance, workers in receiving countries fear that increased competition
from unskilled migrant workers may lead to lower wages or even unemployment. Although the
evidence suggests that these effects are either absent or small – especially when compared to the
magnitude of the gains (UNDP, 2009) – they matter to those groups affected and by extension to
politicians. In some cases, governments may need to implement supporting policy measures to
minimize potential transitory negative effects.
In addition, some have questioned the extent to which the poorest households can actually
benefit from greater labour mobility. Migrating often requires significant financial resources
(e.g. to cover transport and settling costs) and social networks, which might not be available to
all strata of society. Consequently, migrants and remittances may not be necessarily linked to the
poorest households and regions.
There are also concerns related to social cohesion, national security and public services capacity.
Even if these issues in most cases lack a strong empirical grounding, politicians in receiving

- 20 -
countries tend to be overwhelmingly cautious – largely due to voters’ negative perceptions of
migration.
Moreover, politicians in source countries may be concerned about “brain drain”, although the
evidence appears to be mixed. Therefore, it could be argued that those interested and directly
benefiting from migration are left with no clear advocates.
Our main objective is to consider if and how international labour migration could be adequately
incorporated in a future global development framework. For instance, the role of labour
migration as an additional tool to reduce global poverty (and demographic deficits) could be
mentioned in a general narrative or statement on the goals, in a strengthened MDG 8, or in
national road maps to achieve the goals.
With less than two years remaining, expectations on what could be effectively achieved on this
future agenda are fairly modest, particularly taking into account the dangers of overloading an
already complex process. That said, at this stage it is important to be ambitious, since the
political process will eventually narrow down the scope of the issues to be addressed.
Ultimately, there is an intrinsic value in having discussions that contribute to raising awareness
and improving the quality of the debate on the role of international migration in development.
Immigration and Society
The impact of immigration on many developed societies may now be summarized quite simply
this way;
Economic effects: the new industrial reserve army of immigrant workers is a major stabilizing
factor of the capitalist economy. By restraining wage increases, immigration is a vital
precondition for capital accumulation and hence for growth. In the long run, wages may grow
more in a country which has large-scale immigration than in one which does not, because of the
dynamic effect of increased capital accumulation on productivity. However, wages are a smaller
share, and profit a larger share of national income than would have been the case without
immigration. The best illustration of this effect is obtained by comparing the German and the
British economies since 1945. Germany has had large and continuous increases in labour force
due to immigration.
At first, wages were held back. The resulting capital accumulation allowed fast growth and
continuous rationalization. Britain, for instance, has had virtually no growth in labour force due
to migration (immigration has been cancelled out by emigration of British people to Australia,
etc).
Every phase of expansion has collapsed rapidly as wages rose due to labour shortages. The long-
term effect has been stagnation. By the sixties, German wages overtook those of Britain, while
economic growth and rationalization continued at an almost undiminished rate.
Social effects: The inferior position of immigrant workers with regard to employment and social
conditions has led to a division of the working class into two strata. The split is maintained by
various forms of discrimination and is reinforced by racialist and xenophobic ideologies, which
the ruling class can disseminate widely through its hegemony over the means of socialization
and communication. Large sections of the indigenous workers take the position of a labour
aristocracy, which objectively participates in the exploitation of another group of workers.
Political effects: the decline of class consciousness weakens the working class movement. In
addition, the denial of political rights to immigrants excludes a large section of the working class
from political activity, and hence weakens the class as a whole. The most exploited section of

- 21 -
the working class is rendered voiceless and powerless. Special forms of repression are designed
to keep it that way.
C. Proposed Solutions
By virtue of the serious problems that are connected with immigration, quite a few proposals
have been made time and again about how it may be effectively tackled. Many scholars are of
the opinion that real immigration reforms will require serious attention and commitment, and do
not require new legislation, but merely appropriate funding and faithful implementation of
current laws by the various governments. But the question here is: Can the ‘Right to
Immigration’ be curtailed?
Here are some of the proposals that have been made by various scholars and organizations:
Maintain and increase efforts to enhance border security.
a) Reject amnesty proposals.
b) Strengthen interior enforcement measures in all nations faced with the issue of illegal
immigration
c) Promote economic development and good governance in developing countries to stem
the “push-pull effect” that fosters illegal immigration.
d) Review and simplify immigration and work visa programs.
e) Reform the immigration services of nations so as to make them capable to handle legal
immigration more effectively and efficiently.
Replacement Migration as a solution
Considering the fact that many nations are faced with the problem of Declining and Ageing
Populations the population division of the UN has been discussing ‘Replacement Migration’.
United Nations projections indicate that between 1995 and 2050, the population of Japan and
virtually all countries of Europe will most likely decline. In a number of cases, including
Estonia, Bulgaria and Italy, countries would lose between one quarter and one third of their
population. Population ageing will be pervasive, bringing the median age of population to
historically unprecedented high levels. For instance, in Italy, it was predicted that the median
age rise from 41 years in 2000 to 53 years in 2050. The potential support ratio, that is, the
number of persons of working age (15-64 years) per older person will often be halved, from 4 or
5 to 2.
Focusing on these two striking and critical trends, the report examines in detail the case of eight
low-fertility countries (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation,
United Kingdom and United States) and two regions (Europe and the European Union). In each
case, alternative scenarios for the period 1995-2050 are considered, highlighting the impact that
various levels of immigration would have on population size and population ageing.
Major findings of this report include:

- 22 -
In the next 50 years, the populations of most developed countries are projected to become
smaller and older as a result of low fertility and increased longevity. In contrast, the population
of the United States is projected to increase by almost a quarter. Among the countries studied in
the report, Italy is projected to register the largest population decline in relative terms, losing 28
per cent of its population between 1995 and 2050, according to the United Nations medium
variant projections. The population of the European Union, which in 1995 was larger than that
of the United States by 105 million, in 2050, will become smaller by 18 million.
Population decline is inevitable in the absence of replacement migration. Fertility may rebound
in the coming decades, but few believe that it will recover sufficiently in most countries to reach
replacement level in the foreseeable future.
D. Bloc Positions
EU
Migration is now firmly at the top of the European Union’s political agenda. The Arab spring
and events in the Southern Mediterranean in 2011 further highlighted the need for a coherent
and comprehensive migration policy for the EU. The Commission has already presented a range
of policy proposals and operational measures on migration, mobility, integration and
international protection in its Communications of 4 and 24 May 2011. In its Communication of 4
May, the Commission highlighted the need for the EU to strengthen its external migration policy
by setting up partnerships with non-EU countries that address issues related to migration and
mobility in a way that makes cooperation mutually beneficial. To this end and reflecting the
Stockholm Programme and the Stockholm Programme Action Plan, the European Council’s
June Conclusions invited the Commission to present an evaluation of the Global Approach to
Migration and set a path towards a more consistent, systematic and strategic policy framework
for the EU’s relations with all relevant non-EU countries. This should include specific proposals
for developing the Union’s key partnerships, giving priority to the Union’s neighborhood as a
whole.
Canada
To combat a shortage of skilled labor that has been stifling the country's economic growth since
the 1970s, Canada has adopted one of the most open immigration policies in the world. As of
2010, the foreign-born population makes up 21.3 percent of the country's total population.
On April 1, the already immigration-friendly country launched a Start-up Visa Program in an
effort to attract highly skilled foreign entrepreneurs. Immigrants with funding from Canadian
venture capital firms or investment groups for a start-up business will be eligible for immediate
permanent residency. If the new business fails, the entrepreneur will not be subject to
deportation.
Japan
In a country where nationals favor a racially unique and homogenous society, the foreign
population accounted for only 1.7 percent of the total population in 2010, according to the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Japan's strict immigration—or,
rather, anti-immigration—policies have drawn heavy criticism.
Like Canada, Japan is facing a rapidly declining population in which the low birthrate can barely
match the death rate of the country's senior citizens. The population now sits at 128 million, but
analysts estimate the number will have shrunk by a third in 2060, forcing the country to embrace
more open policies. Japan rolled out a new point-based system last spring to rate immigrants.

- 23 -
Immigrants earn points based on their academic background and research or business
experience, among other factors. Those who score higher—mainly professionals like professors,
doctors, and corporate managers—will be given preferential treatment.
Australia
In 2012, Australia received a total of nearly 15,800 asylum claims, up 37 percent from the
previous year, according to the United Nations. The country's Department of Immigration and
Citizenship states that the Migration Act 1958 requires any noncitizen or person who is
unlawfully in Australia to be detained. People without a valid visa are considered unlawful—
including children. Migrant children, especially asylum seekers, have been detained in
immigration detention centers for months or even years.
The Australian Government has responded to human rights complaints by removing children
from detention centers and into community detention, or local housing. However, as of February
2013, there were still 1,062 children in the detention centers, according to the Australian Human
Rights Commission.
Amid all the controversy, reports in April indicated that preparations have been made to bring
children back to the notorious Curtin Immigration Detention Centre, which closed down in 2002
due to riots and protests. It reopened in 2011 and currently holds only adult single men. A
portion of the center could be declared an "alternate place of detention," which the government
does not define as a detention center.
United Arab Emirates
The flood of illegal immigrant workers from Southeast Asia and India have helped buoy the
UAE to become one of the Middle East's most successful economies, but its immigration laws
have yet to catch up, according to Foreign Policy.
One of the country's most controversial laws prohibits foreigners from participating in labor
unions. This means that living conditions for migrants often include 80-hour work weeks,
intense manual labor, and below-minimum-wage salaries.
United States of America
U.S. immigration law is very complex, and there is much confusion as to how it works. The
Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA), the body of law governing current immigration
policy, provides for an annual worldwide limit of 675,000 permanent immigrants, with certain
exceptions for close family members. Congress and the President determine a separate number
for refugee admissions. Immigration to the United States is based upon the following principles:
the reunification of families, admission of immigrants with skills that are valuable to the U.S.
economy, protection of refugees, and promotion of diversity.
E. Thinker’s (Questions A Resolution Must Answer)
a) Is There a Human Right to Free Movement?
b) To what extent is a country allowed to influence who lives on its territory by regulating
immigration?
c) What does it mean that the earth is originally owned by humanity?
d) What are the conditions under which individuals can demand permission to immigrate in
virtue of being co-owners?

- 24 -
e) Is it right to forcibly prevent would-be immigrants from living in a particular country?
f) Is the desire to preserve national culture and pride a valid justification for immigration
restriction?
F. Recommended Readings
Milanovic, Branco. 2005. Worlds Apart. Measuring International and Global Inequality
Miller, David. 2005. “Immigration: The Case for Limits.” In Andrew Cohen (ed.),
Contemporary Debates in Applied Ethics. Malden: Blackwell
Ridge, Michael. 2003. “Giving the Dead Their Due.” Ethics 114, pp 38-59
Risse, Mathias. 2005a. “What We Owe to the Global Poor,” The Journal of Ethics, Vol. 9, No.
1-2, pp 81-117

Rotaract Global MUN - HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL STUDY GUIDE

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Rotaract Global MUN - HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL STUDY GUIDE

Ähnlich wie Rotaract Global MUN - HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL STUDY GUIDE (20)

Mehr von Adrian Dan Pop

Mehr von Adrian Dan Pop (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Rotaract Global MUN - HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL STUDY GUIDE