47th Agenda 

47th Session Issues

UN Policy on Nationalist-Separatist Movements

During the last fifty years the United Nations has dealt with numerous threats to world peace. In the process, they have spent thousands of hours debating and attempting to solve the crises in the Middle East and southern Africa. Yet, threats to world peace abound in the developing world. In 1988, The Economist, a British weekly news magazine said, "Turn south for the killing fields," as it detailed the twenty-five "big wars" in process during one week in March of that year.

With such a large number of conflicts waiting to be defused, statesmen bound by divergent national interests and limited time and resources, daily have to make the difficult choice of which crisis to attend to immediately, and which to defer to a later date. Nationalist-Separatist Movements attempts to accomplish this by dealing with conflicts which have been discussed in the United Nations, and are to date unresolved. This is an umbrella item; the United Nations has never addressed nationalist-separatist movements as a group, but does address them on a case-by-case basis.

Since a large number of cases could be discussed within the context of this issue, the burden of choice as to which crisis warrants immediate attention rests with the individual delegates. To qualify for discussion under this agenda item, a nationalist-separatist movement must meet the following criteria:

1. Any nationalist-separatist movement debated must have been addressed by the UN and resolutions must have been passed by the UN with specific regard to that issue before 1 January 1997.
2. A nationalist-separatist movement must be in existence and active before 1 January 1997 and must be continuing its activities as of 1 April 1997.

Four examples that fit these criteria have been selected for this book. Hopefully, they will serve as models for research and preparation. This list should NOT be construed as exclusive. Numerous other cases of nationalist-separatist movements for which the United Nations has taken action may emerge or re-emerge. Bosnia and Rwanda would be two examples of recent movements.

Nationalist-Separatist Movements

Nationalism

A nation is a social group that shares a common ideology, common institutions and customs, and a sense of homogeneity. The people of a nation have a strong group sense of belonging associated with a particular territory considered to be their own. A nation can be distinguished from a state in that a state is a legally defined entity which may include several nations.

Nationalism, as a political philosophy, is largely a product of 18th century Enlightenment and emerged alongside the development of democracy. At that time, people in the Americas and Europe came to reject their role as passive subjects and began to participate in government. As they did so, they invariably rejected artificial political boundaries and sought to regroup into more natural ethnic, linguistic, religious, or cultural domains. In short, the drive to create a nation-state began. Since that time, a nation-state has been seen by many as an ideal political institution. It allows one political entity (or state) to rule one nation, thus lessening the likelihood of political, social or economic inequities, or human rights abuses.

Today there are between 3,000 and 5,000 nations in the world. Some are very small in population and area - several exist on just a few acres. Other nations are huge, with populations in the millions. For example, the Kawthoolei, in South Asia, has 4.5 to 5 million Karen people (it is larger than 48% of the member states in the United Nations), and the Oromo nation in East Africa has more than 20 million people. Unlike a state, a nation does not require a central military-political bureaucracy to exist. More than 95% of the world’s 168 states are multinational, that is, composed of many nations, some unconsenting. Thus, only a few of the world’s states are really nation-states: Iceland, Western Samoa and a handful more. Nations without a state make up the world of internationally unrecognized nations. States with more than one nation (multinational states) include the former Soviet Union - only 50 percent of the people are ethnic Russians. There are 15 other major nationalities and many smaller national/ethnic groups in the former Soviet Union. Other nations exist in more than one state (multistate nationalities). These include Germans in the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic, and the Kurds in Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Syria and the Soviet Union. Still others are non-state nations, such as the Palestinians.

The Rise of Separatism

Modern separatist or devolution movements are a natural outgrowth of calls for nationalism in 19th century Europe. Woodrow Wilson’s support for "self-determination" and Russian cries that oppressed people should throw off the yoke of imperialism fueled the flames. The trend toward decentralization and nationalism is now far advanced in the developing world where it is the preeminent political motivator.

After World War II, when the colonial empires were dismantled, a host of new states with short-lived, western-style parliamentary democracies came into being. But, it was soon clear that virtually everything about these artificial political units was wrong. Their boundaries were the arbitrary frontiers drawn in Berlin or Paris in the 19th century, and bore little relation to prevailing ethnic or linguistic patterns. The new governments of the developing nations often reflected the political ideals of their departing masters rather than the history or wishes of their people.

A premier case in point was the British colony of India. In the late 1940’s it fractured into India and Pakistan amidst a blood bath and a refugee crisis unequaled before or since. Pakistan itself did not last long. The people of Bangladesh launched their own separatist movement and seceded in 1971. Even today border strife continues as the three nations dispute the frontiers drawn hastily by the departing British in 1947.

Nationalist-Separatist Movements

Groups seeking to resolve their desire for national identity and establish a true nation-state often form separatist groups known as national liberation organizations (NLOs). Examples of such groups include the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War, the Irish Republican Army, the South-West African People’s Organization, and the Eritrean Liberation Front. NLOs do not possess legal authority over a specific territory; they are seeking to "liberate" that territory from the current regime and obtain that authority.

These movements have varying organizational structures and disparate levels of power and influence. They may choose nonviolent means, such as the Parti Quebeco did in Canada, or they may choose violence that results in civil war or terrorist attacks as have the Eritreans in Ethiopia and the Basques in Spain, respectively. Although nationalism is the driving force behind most NLOs, and all desire an independent state, they seldom have anything else in common. Some NLOs seek to overthrow a government viewed as dictatorial, exploitive and under the control of an external influence. The Sandanistas in Nicaragua were an example of this type of NLO. Others pit colonial peoples against colonial powers such as the struggle of the MauMaus against the British in Kenya. Many nations resist annexation and absorption by states that they believe will strip them of their nationality, land and resources, such as the people of East Timor.

NLOs usually employ a military policy of some type and make extensive use of the media. Palestinians will not become ethnic Israelis," and the Oromo will not become "Ethiopian" despite efforts to force that outcome. To do so would erase their nationality, history and country. Yet, these peoples are rarely identified by their own names in the media; instead they are commonly referred to as rebels, separatists, extremists, dissidents, insurgents, terrorists, tribals, minorities, or ethnic groups.

Contemporary research indicates that international wars waged to regain lost territory and revolutions undertaken by an ethnic minority in the interest of national self-determination have accounted for 70 % of all international conflicts. Most armed resistance begins as low intensity conflict, in the form of small skirmishes along borders or at sea, either by individuals or small groups. Such low intensity conflict presents the danger of escalation to a more destructive level of violence. With the spread of modern weapon capabilities, it has the potential to become extremely destructive.

CASE STUDIES

Indonesia (East Timor)

Timor is an island located in the extreme east of a South Pacific island chain known as the Lesser Sundas (see map). Under colonial rule, the island was split between the Dutch (west half) and the Portugese (east half). When the Dutch colonies of that area gained their independence in 1949, they formed the United States of Indonesia.6 East Timor remained under Portuguese rule.

In 1974, a new government took over in Lisbon and pledged to commit itself to deco Political parties formed in East Timor and the independence movement began. The three main parties were: The Uniano Democratica Timorense (UDT), a conservative party that first supported the colonial regime, then moved toward a gradual colonization ending in a federation with Portugal; The Frente Revolucinaria de Timor-Leste Indepente (FRETILIN), a leftist organization favoring East Timorese independence; The APODETI, a party with little local support favoring integration with Indonesia.

In August 1975, civil war between FRETILIN and UDT broke out. The Portugese governor fled, as the FRETILIN gained control. Facing the imminent threat of invasion by Indonesian troops, FRETILIN urged the governor to return, but was refused. FRETILIN declared East Timor’s independence on 28 November, 1975. On 7 December 1975, Indonesia began a full-scale invasion which met fierce resistance, but prevailed in the end.

The UN quickly responded to the annexation. The Security Council condemned the invasion and asked the Secretary General to send a special representative to East Timor (SC res 384 (1975)). On the urging of Portugal, which is still recognized as the administering colonial power by the United Nations, the Security Council called for the withdrawal of all Indonesian troops (SC res 389(1976)). The General Assembly confirmed the right of the East Timorese to self determination in resolution 3485 (XXX) of 12 December 1975, and again in resolutions

• 31/53 of 1 December 1976,
• 32/34 of 28 November 1977,
• 33/39 of 13 December 1978,
• 34/30 of 21 November 1979,
• 35/27 of 11 November 1980,
• 36/50 of 24 November 1981, and
• 37/30 of 23 November 1982.

Since that time the issue has been tabled.

Portugal has charged Indonesia with the massacre of 200,000 Timorese civilians. The Indonesian government has thus far kept the province closed to tourists, most journalists, diplomats and commercial developments.11 Relief workers and Catholic priests report that the Indonesian government withholds food from supporters of FRETILIN and prevents refugees in "relocation" camps to grow food crops, using hunger as an instrument of pacification in East Timor.

During the three weeks of civil war in 1975, 1500-2000 people died. Since the invasion, an estimated 60,000 to 300,000 (1/6 to 1/2 of the total population) have died in East Timor due to war, starvation and disease. Slow negotiations between Portugal and Indonesia continue today, albeit with little result.

Kampuchea/Cambodia (involving Vietnam)

Kampuchea was the staging ground for one of the bloodiest conflicts in the last twenty years. From 1975 to 1978, a Khmer Rouge leader named Pol Pot engaged in a genocidal resettlement program that claimed the lives of one to three million Khmers. The program was a ruthless drive to create a communist utopia. Instead it created death by hunger and disease and allowed mass executions. The carnage was stopped only when Vietnam invaded Kampuchea and overthrew the Khmer Rouge government in December 1978.

After that, a guerrilla war was fought between the People’s Republic of Kampuchea (PRK), a Soviet backed regime established after the Vietnamese invasion, and the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea (CGDK). The CGDK holds Democratic Kampuchea’s United Nations seat, was supported by most governments outside the former Soviet block, and brought together the Khmer Rouge, the Sihanoukist National Army (ANS) and the pro-western Khmer People’s National Liberation Front (KPNLF). The CGDK was supported by the United States and China.

The Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), saw the occupation of one nation by another as a potential threat to the stability of the region, and sought to negotiate the withdrawal of Vietnam’s troops.

While fighting was fierce at times, its intensity diminished after 1985 when a major offensive backed by Vietnamese troops was launched. The offensive was designed to push refugee camps out of Kampuchean territory, thereby making them useless as guerrilla staging areas. The Soviet Union had been Vietnam’s principle backer in the occupation of Kampuchea. The Soviet base at Cam Ranh Bay had given the Hanoi government additional economic and military support. The Soviets are estimated to have provided one to three billion rubbles a year in aid to support the occupation.

Vietnam had announced that it will withdraw all troops by the end of 1990. The PRK, which had a 40,000 man army with more than 100,000 local militiamen insisted that they would be able to control the country despite the threat of the Khmer Rouge faction with its approximately 20,000 "fanatically dedicated fighters." Fear remained that the Khmer Rouge would be victorious and return the country to the madness of Pol Pot.

The role of the United Nations was limited because the Phnom Penh government (PRK), was not recognized by the organization, but the United Nations still sponsored diplomatic efforts to end the occupation of Kampuchea. The UN introduced a peace plan that would: involve the deployment of an international peace force to supervise a ceasefire and free elections; disarm the Khmer Rouge to prevent the resurrection of Pol Pot; included pledges from the five permanent Security Council members not to arm any faction in Kampuchea.

Reaction from the various parties was positive as no one had refused the plan and all asked questions about its implementation. Additional political pressure was generated by the United Nations Ad Hoc Committee of the International Conference on Kampuchea, but it had limited effectiveness because Hanoi was not recognized it. The United Nations’ major impact on the Kampuchean dilemma was the annual debate in the General Assembly, which produced a resolution calling for an independent government and the withdrawal of Vietnamese troops (Res. 43/3). Support for the resolution steadily increased since it was first submitted in 1986.

New Caledonia (with France)

Since the 19th century the native Melanesians, or Kanaks as they are known, have been pressing for independence from France. Events have come to a violent point in the past four years.

In 1853, following the discovery of rich nickel deposits, France annexed the South Pacific island of New Caledonia. The native Kanaks (literally translated as men) have been fighting for autonomy since that time. The French moved to the island in large numbers throughout the late 19th century acquiring the best land. The Kanaks were sent to reservations, and several thousand were killed while resisting.

In the 1960’s, the fight was broadened by educated Kanaks returning from Paris universities. They were inspired by the black power movements in the United States and Africa. The Kanaks believed that European whites have prospered on their island while they had been kept poor.

In November 1984, tensions between the French settlers (or caldoches) and the Kanaks flared when the natives boycotted local elections and threatened to create a "provisional government". In that same month, a settler was shot to death marking the beginning of a series of events that have disrupted life on the island.

On 12 January 1985, the leader of the Kanak movement was assassinated by French police. Violence and further unrest followed the shooting. Events became so grave that the Prime Minister of France flew 50 hours for a 12 hour visit to express his personal concern in an attempt to calm the island. Although he announced plans to strengthen French military forces on the island, the Prime Minister did say that he supported a proposed plan for a referendum on independence.

By May 1985, the referendum plan was in dispute. The Kanaks were calling for a ballot on independence immediately with only their people allowed to vote. The French settlers were outraged that their own government was now turning against them. The government formulated a compromise plan: the territorial assembly would be reconstructed to provide for elections to the assembly from four separate regions. In exchange for this first step toward autonomy, the Kanaks would accept postponing the independence referendum until at least 1987.

When the regional elections were held in September 1985, the Kanaks had won three of the four districts. This was not surprising considering that the French population is centered near the capital city of Noumea. Election turnout was high and calmed the island at least for the short time. In France at this time, the situation in New Caledonia had become an election issue.

The newly elected Prime Minister turned away from the previous administrations promises of independence. Instead, he called for an immediate vote on total independence of continued territorial status. This invoked speedy action by the South Pacific Forum, a regional body comprised of Australia, New Zealand and other island nations, who called for reinscription of New Caledonia on the United Nations list of "non-self-governing" territories. This action would put the island under the auspices of the United Nations’ Fourth Committee. The plan was adopted by the General Assembly in December 1986.

On 13 September 1987, 98.3% of the ballots rejected the idea of independence in a national referendum. This was only a nominal victory for the French, however, as the Kanaks, for the most part, boycotted the election. Only 59% of the electorate cast a vote that day. Since 43% of the population is Kanak, the leaders hold that their boycott was a success. The French Prime Minister went to New Caledonia to negotiate a plan to give the Kanaks more autonomy. With resolution 43/34 the Fourth Committee noted with satisfaction the dialogue and called for a report to the Forty-fourth General Assembly.

Western Sahara (with Morocco)

The territory of Western Sahara has been in dispute since 1957 when Morocco laid claim to the Spanish held territory. In 1972, Morocco announced its intentions to annex the territory. On 14 November 1975, the Spanish conceded and concluded an agreement transfering power to Morocco and Mauritania who partitioned the territory. In January of 1976, the Spanish military withdrew and Morocco and Mauritania took over.

Protests against such a partition had been made as early as 1974, by the Algerians and the people of the territory who had organized a liberation movement called Frente Polisario (or Polisario Front). The United Nations’ General Assembly and International Court of Justice both sided with the people of the region. On 16 October 1975, the International Court of Justice concluded that no ties of territorial sovereignty existed between Western Sahara and the Kingdom of Morocco or the Mauritanian entity. In the decolonization of the territory, therefore, the principle of self-determination through the free expression of the will of its people should apply.

On 27 February 1976, the Frente Polisario proclaimed Western Sahara the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. By August of 1979 the Mauratanians had withdrawn leaving the Moroccans and Frente Polisario engaged in a protracted war. Backed in part by Algeria, the Frente Polisario has fought for a 103,000 square mile area of the Sahara for thirteen years. Separating the Polisario and Moroccan troops is a 1,000 mile Moroccan-built wall of rocks. The wall has succeeded in keeping recent bloodshed to a minimum by facilitating the Moroccan troops’ ability to maintain safe ground.

The Polisario hopes that independence will be achieved through a referendum under the auspices of the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity, which recognize the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. Despite large scale international support (of a verbal nature) for the Sahrawi Republic, Morocco continues to spend up to $1 million a day on the war. The Algerians, on the other hand, provide less (no accurate estimates exist) and if their support were withdrawn most observers believe the Polisario would quickly fall.

See also resolutions: 1514, 42/78 and 43/33.

Suggestions for Research

When researching United Nations Documents it may be helpful to consult the work of Fourth Committee, The Decolonization Committee and the Trusteeship Council, in addition to Special Political Committee, the General Assembly and Security Council resolutions. Several National-Separatist movements are not addressed directly, but are considered through the human rights issues of refugees, indigenous peoples, hunger and so on.

Questions

It has been the policy of the UN to not interfer in the internal affairs of a country. The UN does become involved in many internal struggles on a humanitarian level. And, while it would be a clear violation of national soviernty for the UN to involve itself in the politics of a country, there must be a line established where more than humanitarian assistance is the appropriate course of action for the UN.

1. At what point should the UN take action beyond humanitarian?
2. What limitations should be set, if any, for action beyond humanitarian?
3. Military action is the pervue of the Security Council. If a policy is established to interven in the internal affairs of a country beyond humanitarian assistance, what role will the GA and SC have and which body will authorize military action?

Sources

Ben Noach, Simon, "Israel and the UN: 41 Years of Hostility and Keeping Peace." L.A. Heritage, S.W. Jewish Press, 5 May 1989.

Brown, Seyom, New Forces Old Forces and the Future of

World Politics, Boston: Scott, Foresman/Little, Brown College Division, 1988.

Budiardjo, Carmel and Liong, Liem Soei, The War Against East Timor. London: Zed Books Ltd.

Cooper, Nancy and Moreau, Ron, "The Unmaking of a Quagmire (Cambodia),"Newsweek, Jan. 30, 1989.

Couloumbis, Theodore A., Wolfe, James H., Introduction to International Relations: Power and Justice, 3rd edition, Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1986.

Clay, Jason, Ed., East Timor: Five Years After the Indonesian

Invasion, Testimony presented at the Decolonization Committeee of the United Nations General Assembly, October 1980. Petersborough, N.H.: Cultural Survival Inc.

Dunnigan, James F., & Bay, Austin, A Quick and DirtGuide to War, New York: William Morrow, 1986.

Jones, Clayton, "Seeking a Cambodia Settlement," Christian ScienceMonitor, 17 Jan. 1989.

Issue before the 43rd United Nations General Assembly, New York: UNA/USA, 1988.

Martin, Thomas S., "Devolutionism: The New Nationalism Movement

Transforming the World," Utne Reader, No. 30, Nov/Dec 1988.

Macleod, Scott, "Peace is at Hand (Kampuchea)," Time, 30 Jan. 1989.

Manegold, C.S. and Spencer Reiss, "A Bloody Road to Peace," Newsweek, 17 April 1989.

Nietschmann, Bernard, "Third World War: The Global Conflict over the Rights of Indigenous Nations, Utne Reader, No. 30, Nov/Dec 1988. Excerpted from Cultural Survival Quarterly, Sep. 1987.

Osmanczcyk, Edmund Jan, Encycopedia of the United Nations and International Agreements, Philadelphia: Taylor and Francis, 1985.

Papp, Daniel S., Contemporaty International Relations: Frameworks for Understanding. Macmillan Publishing Co.: NY, 1984.

Pletka, Danielle, "A Forgotten War in the Desert," Insight, January 11, 1988.

Plano, Jack C., & Olton, Roy, The International Relations Dictionary, 3rd ed.,Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, 1982.

Rourke, John T. International Politics on the World Stage, 2nd ed., Guilford,Connecticut: The Dushkin Publishing Group, Inc., 1989.

Russell, Gei, "Cambodia," Christian Science Monitor, June 10, 1988. Tallbott, Strobe, "Defanging the Beast (Kampuchea)," Time, Feb. 6, 1989.

Tessitore, John, et al., Eds., Issues before the 43rd General Assembly of the United Nations. Lexington: Lexington Books, 1989.

United Nations Press Release, SC/5101, 8 June 1989.

Wayne, E.A., "Prospects for Peace in Cambodia," Christian Science Monitor, Jan. 19, 1989.

Wendzel, Robert L. International Politics: Policy Makers and Policymaking. John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1981.

Worldmark Encyclopedia of the Nations: United Nations, 7th ed. New York: Worldmark Press, Ltd., 1988.

"The World’s Wars", The Economist, March 12, 1988.