Security Council LaudeMUN 2021 Review
The South China Sea Dispute
The Security Council of the 2021 edition of LaudeMUN represented most probably the most challenging committee of this conference, given both the Security Council’s reputation for being incredibly difficult and the high stakes that were at place given its topic, the South China Sea Dispute. I’ve had the most wonderful opportunity to participate in this committee as the delegate of the United States of America, hence, I’ve decided to share my amazing experience in this committee with you.
The Security Council during a committee session
Introduction into the topic
The South China Sea dispute has been ongoing for a couple of decades now, being an issue that has attracted international interest thanks to the fact that it represents a vital global trade route. The countries at the coastline all have legitimate claims in the South China Sea according to the UNCLOS, the set of international laws which govern maritime matters. The UNCLOS clearly outlines the Exclusive Economic Zones of countries neighbouring the sea, however, even though the limits are clearly stated, some countries in the region have not been willing to follow them. The People’s Republic of China has been claiming most of the sea, through an area delimited by a so-called ‘nine-dash line’, citing historical claims, which, according to international law, are not relevant in the case of such disputes. This has naturally caused a great deal of tension in the region, as the control of the sea and its islands provides advantages relating to trade and natural resources, which should be split rightfully between the countries as international law so clearly outlines. As for the involvement of the USA, which I represented, it is only natural for one of the largest world powers to take an interest in the region, not only for economic reasons relating to trade routes and the right to freedom of navigation, but also in order to support their allies in the region, such as the Philippines.
If you wish to learn more about this topic, be sure to check out our article on this topic, linked below:
Debates of the committee
Even before the conference started, it was quite certain that the committee will be by large split between the two ideologies of how the conflict in the South China Sea should be managed and resolved. However, the polarization proved to be even more poignant during the opening speeches, as most countries in the committee criticized China’s actions in the territory and supported the application of international law, as the United States did as well. Given the fact that the US has been one of the most vocal countries in this matter and representing a world power as well, it was important for me to be able to not only rally support but know how to manage it as well.
Even though there was a clear majority of the delegates who were in agreement with my country’s views, there were, naturally, some clashes as well. Both China and North Korea were fully and utterly against the proposals outlined by the Western Powers, with North Korea rejecting them by principle, given its very tense relations with the United States. Out of the two of them, the biggest threat was China, as they were the ones actually involved in the dispute, and, even though they received little support in the committee, the fact that they yielded the veto power was a serious cause of concern.
After some general debate on the General Speaker’s List, which allowed for the delegates to point out their main points of interest and how their policy outlined in relation to the two clear blocks that would form when offering solutions, it became apparent which issues we needed to spend the most time debating on. We kicked off the moderated caucus debates by addressing the issue of the legitimacy of the claims in the region, which yielded a quite disappointing conclusion: even though the countries nearing the South China Sea were happy to comply with international law and status when discussing the splitting of territory, China was vehemently against any concessions, standing by their historical claims, despite them not having relevance in international law.
The Security Council in the debating stages
Another very important issue that caused much turbulence in the committee was the establishment of a comprehensive code of conduct, governing matters pertaining to military activities and freedom of navigation. Whereas China appeared to reluctantly agree to the latter, as long as the ships do not carry military equipment of any kind, which offered the rest of the committee a sense of hope in reaching a passable resolution, it was impossible to gain approval of military drills and exercises in the region, since, as China claims most of the sea, they do not wish to have any foreign military ships in their region, under almost any circumstances.
However, not all appeared to be doomed, or at least not in the debating stages of the committee, as one key issue that we managed to reach a joint solution, together with the Chinese delegation, was the exploitation of resources in the South China Sea, as they agreed that they are very much vital for other countries in the region and, despite the fact that they were not willing to give the other countries ownership over these resources, China appeared to be in agreement with allowing them to exploit both fishing resources, but also oil and natural gases, that lay in the lawfully outlined exclusive economic zones of the coastal countries.
Resolution writing
After much debate that went on during the committee sessions, we felt like we were prepared to start drafting a working paper, which, if you haven’t had the chance to attend a MUN conference before, is a formal document that outlines the solutions that a certain country block proposes in order to solve the debated issue. As there were many points that needed to be addressed, the writing of the working paper took also moved into the second day, however, work went quite smoothly given the fact that the entire committee, with the already two outlined exceptions, were contributing to it.
The most laborious part of the writing process was the code of conduct, as we wished for it to be very comprehensive and address many of the issues that have plagued the South China Sea in the last couple of decades. Some of the most crucial issues that we managed to include in the code of conduct were how disputes between the parties in the South China Sea will be resolved after the resolution would be adopted and how military activities were going to be conducted at sea, especially from foreign nations, pieces that turned out to be, only naturally, in agreement with the US view, who wishes to expand its influence in the region.
The Security Council coming together in order to finish the Working Paper
In order to ensure that only the application of the code of conduct but also that of the resolution if it were to be passed, we included a set of clauses relating to the sanctions that would be imposed when these two were not respected, which would vary according to the gravity of the violations. It became soon apparent that these would be a non-negotiable for China who, even though we had managed to reach certain compromises in regards to both resource and island distribution, was completely against such a sanction system. At first, I thought that maybe conceding on this issue would be a good strategy, in the hopes that maybe now the resolution would pass, however, at times like this, especially when you are representing a country known to be stubborn in its opinions, I decided against it - negotiations and compromises are important, but they naturally all have a limit.
Debating and voting on the resolution
Once the working paper was finished and verified by the Chairpersons and the Secretariat, the next natural step was to introduce it to the committee. Support for it was overwhelming, as expected from the debates, however, China and the DPRK were very much not in favour of it. China cited multiple issues that they found problematic on their part, such as the harsh code of conduct and its sanctions and the allowance of military activities in the region without their express approval, while the DPRK naturally supported them and added that they could not stand for a resolution submitted by the USA, a Western Power not even involved in the conflict. Fair point in my personal opinion, but of course, as a delegate, I denied any accusations that the US is trying to gain influence and that they are simply trying to find peace.
After quite a small number of amendments, which were, however, meant to strike out important clauses of the resolution, that thankfully did not pass though, it was time for us to enter voting procedure. The observer delegations were sent out of the room and the remaining members were invited to vote, using a roll-call procedure. From the very start, I knew that we were doomed: even though we had a more than a clear majority, ever since China cast its veto on the resolution it simply could not pass any longer. As the delegate of the USA I was absolutely outraged, however, it was all in good fun, as trying to align the policies of such different countries is almost impossible not only in real life, but also at MUN conferences.
Closing thoughts
I have a confession to make - the Security Council is, for certain, my absolutely favourite committees of all that are offered at MUN conferences (followed closely by the ICJ, if anyone wanted to know) and, given the fact that I have attended about five of them, I can easily say that this might have been the best experience yet. It was such a great challenge to represent the USA on such a controversial topic and to collaborate and go head to toe with spectacular delegates, all under the guidance of our amazing Chairpersons and the brilliant members of the Secretariat. All in all, LaudeMUN 2021 was a smashing experience for me and I absolutely cannot wait for next year’s edition.
.png)
Comments