Axel Model United Nations: Topic Guide for Special Conference

SPC-Axmun III

Crisis in Crimean Peninsula

For the first time after the events in the Balkans at the end of the last

century, Europe is facing a serious crisis in its territories. The situation in

Ukraine and especially in Crimea and the eastern regions of the country is a

charged powder keg ready to blow, from one moment to another. The

international community and especially the United Nations, needs to find a

way to normalize the situation in an area which is crucial for the European

Union as well as for several other nations. This geopolitical area is

fundamental for ensuring peace and security, economic wellbeing and most

of all, energy security. The issues in the country span a variety and all of

them need a feasible short term solution that will lead to a long term new

stability. It is necessary to consider the different aspirations of the citizens

who to move eastwards or westwards; it is crucial to secure an

internationally recognized and a legitimate government; it is fundamental to

avoid military fights in the Crimean peninsula in order to not to drive a wider

armed conflict. International laws and treaties have to be considered in order

to understand if we are facing a process of auto determination of a

population or if we have to suppress an act of international aggression. What

is clear is that the United Nations Security Council has to find concrete

solutions in order to not let the situation degenerate into a bloody conflict

that will affect too many people.

The risk of falling into a new “Cold War” situation is extremely high, we are

living in times in which the energy strategies and the political influences in

certain areas are the engine of new international relations, but it is the

precise duty of this UN body to ensure a strong respect of the international

rules in order to not let the world walk in the direction of a “dog eat dog”

power system.

RECENT HISTORY

The following two parts of this study guide (b and c) will only be a neutral and

short overview of the facts that lead to the actual situation, in order to not

influence the further research that each delegate is expected to conduct to

better understand the topic. The critical issues and the problems will be

discussed briefly in the last part.

Although there is no limit to Ukraine’s historical biography, the background

guide will only be a brief summary of the recent history and a description of

the events of the last months, in order to better understand where the roots

of this crisis stands, leaving a deeper research of the ancient history of the

country to each delegate.

December 1991 was a period which saw Ukraine blessed by an

independence backed by more than 90% of its citizens. The first elected

president Leonid Kravchuk, in charge since 1994, had attempted to

strengthen Ukraine’s identity as an independent nation. He was defeated by

Leonid Kuchma in 1994, who also went on to win the 1999 elections. Kuchma

adopted a multi-vector policy and built closer relations with Russia. Since

gaining independence Ukraine has struggled to build democratic and

accountable state institutions. During these first 13 years the citizens faced

many problems, from hyperinflation and economic mismanagement to

corruption and human rights abuses. As the 2004 presidential elections

approached, a growing dissatisfaction existed among Ukrainians.

Two candidates presented themselves at the elections and prior to the voting

procedure it was not clear which candidate enjoyed greater support. One

was Viktor Yushenko, the “opposition candidate” and the second one was a

name that we are going to face again in the next pages, Viktor Yanukovych,

the “establishment candidate”. Yushenko despite pressures against his

campaign, secured a narrow lead after the first round, but not enough votes

to win outright. In the second round electoral fraud materially affected the

outcome but Yanukovych was declared the winner by the commission. After

the announcement of the result, the 22nd of November was the first day of

the so called Orange Revolution, where massive and non-violent protests

took place and a political crisis sprung out. After this, on 3 December, the

Supreme Court took the issue out of the political realm, when it ordered that

the second round be repeated on 26 December. On 10 January 2005 the

Central Election Commission officially declared that Yushenko had won the

repeat election with a margin of almost 8%. The revolution created high

expectations that Ukraine would break with semi-authoritarian and oligarchic

rule and start to construct a genuinely democratic state. Nevertheless from

late 2005 Ukraine always looked in a power crisis; the common people lost

interest in politics and patience with a political class which appeared more

interested in its own business than in delivering stability and prosperity,

revealing themselves as immature and often corrupted. In the years that

separate the Orange Revolution from today, due to the energy crisis and the

world economic downturn, most citizens were concerned mostly with their

deteriorating living conditions. The main legacy of the revolution may be that

because it happened once it could happen again if the political elites do not

become more accountable to their citizens, and this is exactly what

happened after the Vilnius meeting.

OVERVIEW OF THE UKRAINIAN

CRISIS AND ITS TWO FACES

The situation that we are facing now could be divided in two different parts,

the “National” one, and (Crimea Crisis), the “International” one. Dividing this

into two movements will help us better understand where and when the

international community should intervene. The first part “officially” started

after the stepping back of Yanukovych. The first mass protests were pacific,

similar to the Orange revolution, but as it was easy to predict, violence

succeeded the protests. The months of December, January and February

were characterized by explosions of violence between the protesters and the

police, which ended in some cases with death causalities, and short

“ceasefire” moments. Russian president Vladimir Putin promised a huge

financial help to Yanukovych, leaving the citizens divided between those who

were still supporting the government and those who were for a radical

change and pushing for more protests in order to remove the government.

The symbolic place of the manifestation was Maidan Square, a place which

garnered international fame and with the eyes of the world constantly on

what was happening there. Despite the international attention and

pressures, all the struggle was consumed inside the country, between

citizens that belonged to different ideas and between the official forces and

the participants of the manifestations, hence making it a “National” phase.

This phase ended with the liberation of Yulia Tymoshenko and the fleeing of

president Yanukovych. With a transition government ruling the country, the

situation switched from a “National” to an “International” one.

On the 27th of February 2014, armed forces without on their uniforms

entered in the Crimean city of Simferopol, got into the building of the

Supreme Council of Crimea and exposed a Russian Flag. From that moment

the escalation of the Crisis was very quick, Crimea was an autonomous

region of Ukraine, with a majority of Russian speaking citizens and with

enormous strategic importance for the Russian government because of the

naval bases and access to Black Sea. Citing the need of protecting Russian

citizens in Crimea, Russian president authorized his official military forces

and in only a few days, supported by a wide portion of the inhabitants and

also by some members of the Ukrainian Army, all the “hot spots” of the

peninsula like airports, harbors, military bases, TV stations, were brought

under control of the Russian forces. The Crimean parliament decided to hold

a referendum that took place on the 16th of March, and thanks to a

unanimous consensus of the voters, on the 17th of March, Crimea declared

its independence from Ukraine. Pushing the ongoing situation, The U.N

Security Council failed while trying to pass a resolution about the “invasion”

and the referendum, driven by the veto power used by the Russian

Delegation. On the 27th of March the U.N General Assembly voted in favor of

GA/11493, a resolution that calls upon states not to recognize political

changes in the Crimea Region.

Ukraine is one of the countries inside the Eastern Partnership program,

founded in 2008, along with Moldova, Georgia, Belarus, Azerbaijan and

Armenia. This program was created in order to enforce the trading situation

and the economic situation of these counties, placed in strategic positions for

the European ones, to give them stability and to help in their growing

process. This was only the first step, in fact the second one was supposed to be the signing of an association agreement with the European Union that

would lead to an even closer partnership with the goal of the creation of

common standards with the European countries in both economic and social

fields. Ukraine was the first country that started to work to accomplish this

integration process, since early 2009 and this was very well considered by all

those citizens who wanted to finally distance themselves from the former

Soviet Union state of mind and appreciate the European system, seeing it as

a successful model of development for the Ukrainian future. After years of

preparation, the moment of the Association agreement signing was

supposed to be the Meeting held in Vilnius, 28-29 of November 2013.

Ukraine was facing the concrete possibility of an economic default and the

sign was seen as the only way to get out of this, thanks to a financial plan and

the cancellation of all the custom duties for the goods that would be moved

in and out. President Yanukovych on the date of 21 November interrupted

the process that would have led to the sign, probably after Russian

pressures, and this was the “casus belli” that made the situation collapse and

led us to the actual scenario.