Geopolitics: analysis of how geography influences political international relations.

The struggle over

hegemony in places and spaces.

Political Realism: theory of political philosophy that attempts to explain, model and prescribe political
relations. States that power is the primary end of political action. In the domestic arena: politicians. In
the international arena: nation states.

Realpolitik: politics driven by practical/pragmatic concerns, rather than ideological ones. It presents the
idea that in politics compromise is necessary, and pragmatism (rather than ideology) should be a guiding
force.

National interest: what the states seek to protect or achieve in relation to each other. Different nations
chart their own course in international relation and arrange their priorities according to their national
interests.

NATO: created to backfire against the Soviet Union’s threat on the western countries. Given that they
wanted to not only take control over the west, but all of the east as well, the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization’s creation made it possible to make an alliance between the US (main founder of the
alliance), Canada and Europe against the threat of the east taking military measures with the capabilities
of all of the allied states.

Washington Treaty:

Article 1: settle international disputes by peaceful means so peace, security and justice are not
endangered.

Article 2: strengthening of free institutions to further develop intl relations. Encourage economic
collaboration between states.

Article 3: all allies will develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.

Article 4: allies will consult when any of them feel threatened.

Article 5: an attack to one ally, is an attack to all allies. Article 51 of the UN charter states that each one
has the right of individual or collective self-defense.

Article 6: armed attacks include vessels, forces, or aircraft of any of the parties.

Article 8: no international agreements between allies is in conflict with this treaty.

Article 9: North Atlantic Council, which sets up subsidiary bodies as may be necessary, and establish a
defense committee which shall recommend guidelines for the implementation of articles 3 and 5.

Article 10: parties unanimously can welcome another European state to agree and become a party to
this treaty and contribute to security in the alliance.
Article 11: ratifications made need to be ratifies by founding members (Belgium, Canada, France,
Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States) to be approved.

Article 12: review of the treaty is to be done with a minimum 10 years after it has been in force, by
request of any of the parties.

Article 13: a party may cease to be a part of NATO after 20 years of the implementation of the treaty,
one year after announcing it to the government of the USA.

Which has been the role of NATO in armed conflicts throughout history? which conflicts has it been
involved in?

NATO is a crisis management organization that has the capacity to undertake a wide range of military
operations and missions. Its purpose is to guarantee freedom and security of its members through
political and military means.

Counter piracy in the Gulf of Aden and off the Horn of Africa: 2009. Operation Allied Protector, tackling
counter piracy to improve the safety of commercial maritime routes and international navigation off the
Horn of Africa. Operation Ocean Shield focused on at-sea counter piracy operations of the Horn of
Africa (approved in the same year by the NAC).

Operation Active Endeavour: initiated in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 to deter, defend, disrupt and
protect against terrorist activity in the Mediterranean. Helped secure one of the busiest trade routes in
the world by hailing merchant vessels and boarding suspect ships, intervening to rescue civilians on
stricken oil rigs and sinking ships.

International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan: under request of the Afghan authorities in
2001 to develop new Afghan security forces and enable their authorities to provide a secure
environment around the country, conductive to functioning democratic institutions and establishment
of the rule of law, preventing Afghan territory from becoming safe haven for terrorists. It was one of the
largest international crisis management operations ever, with contributions from 51 countries. Closed in
2014 after goal was met.

NATO and Iraq: from 2004-2011, consisted of training, mentoring and assisting the Iraqi Security Forces.
Allies rose above their differences to aid Iraq establish effective security forces. Outcome: creation of
the NATO Training Mission in Iraq. Members contributed with either financial contributions or donations
of equipment. NATO also worked with Iraqi government on a structured cooperation framework to
develop the alliances relationship with Iraq.

NATO and Libya: 2011. Implementing of a no-fly zone, arms embargo and authorization of member
countries to take all necessary measures to protect Libyan civilians. The NATO-led Operation Unified
Protector was comprised of: enforcement of arms embargo on Mediterranean high seas to prevent
transfer of arms, enforcement of a no-fly zone to prevent aircrafts from bombing civilians, air and naval
strikes against military forces involved in attacks and threats to Libyans.

Assisting the African Union in Darfur, Sudan: 2007. African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) NATO
provided air transport for 37k AMIS personnel, including training and mentoring.
Pakistan earthquake relief assistance: NATO assisted in urgent relief effort, airlifting 3,5k tons of supplies
and deploying engineers, medical units and specialist equipment. 2006. Overtime, the alliance has
helped coordinate assistance to other countries (natural disasters) including Turkey, Ukraine and
Portugal.

Hurricane Katrina: 2005. NAC approved a military plan to assist the US in coordinating the movement of
urgently needed material and supporting humanitarian relief operations.

Second Gulf Conflict: NATO deployed NATO AWACS radar aircraft and air defense batteries to enhance
defense of turkey in the Display Deterrence Operation. 2003.

NATO in North Macedonia: response to a request of Macedonian government to help mitigate rising
ethnic tension. NATO implemented three successive operations in the previously known Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia: Operation Essential Harvest disarmed ethnic Albanian groups in the country,
Operation Amber Fox provided protection for international monitors overseeing the implementation of
the peace plan, Operation Allied Harmony (2002) assist the government in ensuring stability in the
country through advisory elements.

NATO’s first counter-terrorism operation: after 9/11 attacks. Operation Eagle Assist. Consisted of seven
NATO AWACS radar aircraft that helped patrol skies over the US.

NATO in Bosnia and Herzegovina: after Yugoslavia break-up. The alliance responded enforcing UN arms
embargo on weapons in the Adriatic Sea, and enforced a no-fly zone declared by the UNSC. NATO
engaged in combat with Bosnia, by shooting down four Bosnian Serb fighter-bombers conducting a
bombing mission in 1994. Operation Deadeye (1995) began to fight Bosnian Serb air forces, but failed
without compliance from them. This led to Operation Deliberate Force, targeting Bosnian Serb
command and control installations and ammunition facilities. This was a key factor to ending war in
Bosnia by having them agree to negotiate.

Current operations

NATO in Afghanistan: NATO is currently leading Resolute Support (launched on 2015), a non-combat
mission which provides training, advice and assistance to afghan security forces and institutions. Key
functions: supporting planning, programming and budgeting; assuring transparency, accountability and
oversight; supporting adherence to the principles of rule of law and good governance; supporting the
establishment and sustainment of processes such as force generation, recruiting, training, managing and
development of personnel. The legal basis of the Resolute Support Mission rests on a formal invitation
from the Afghan Government and the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) between NATO and
Afghanistan, which governs the presence of Allied troops. Resolute Support is a follow-on mission to the
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).

NATO in Kosovo: Today, approximately 3,500 Allied and partner troops operate in Kosovo as part of
NATO's Kosovo Force (KFOR). Following Kosovo's declaration of independence in February 2008, NATO
agreed it would continue to maintain its presence on the basis of UN Security Council Resolution 1244. It
has since helped to create a professional and multi-ethnic Kosovo Security Force.

Securing the Mediterranean Sea: NATO operations are not limited only to zones of conflict. After 9/11
Operation Active Endeavor focused on detecting and deterring terrorist activity in the Mediterranean.
Ended in 2016 and was succeeded by Sea Guardian, flexible maritime operation able to perform full
range of maritime security tasks. Currently it is performing three tasks: maritime situational awareness,
counter-terrorism at sea and support to capacity building. It could also perform: upholding freedom of
navigation, conducting interdiction tasks and protecting critical infrastructure. It helps support the
alliance’s three core tasks: collective defense, crisis management and cooperative security.

Training mission in Iraq: It is a non-combat training and capacity-building mission that involves several
hundred NATO trainers. The trainers are helping Iraqi forces secure their country and the wider region
against terrorism, and prevent the re-emergence of ISIS. By countering improvised explosive devices
(IEDs), civil-military planning, armored vehicles maintenance and military medicine.

Supporting the African Union: NATO is providing capacity-building support, as well as expert training
support to the African Standby Force (ASF), at the AU's request. The ASF is intended to be deployed in
Africa in times of crisis and is part of the AU's efforts to develop long-term peacekeeping capabilities.
ASF is similar to the NATO Response Force.

Air policing: since Russia’s illegal military intervention in Ukraine in 2014, NATO has been boosting its air
policing missions. Air policing missions are collective peacetime missions, that enable NATO to detect,
track and identify all violations and infringements of its airspace and to take proper action. Allied fighter
jets patrol the airspace of allies who do not have fighter jets of their own.

NATO has deployed additional aircraft to reinforce missions over Albania, Montenegro and
Slovenia, as well as the Baltic region, where NATO F-16s have intercepted Russian aircraft
repeatedly violating Allied airspace.

Three NATO standing forces on active duty that contribute to the alliance’s collective defense
efforts on a permanent basis: air policing capability, maritime forces and integrated air defense
system to protect against air attacks.

NATO’s New Strategic Concept

The security environment: proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and nuclear weapons threaten
global stability and prosperity, terrorism poses a direct threat to the security of citizens in NATO
countries, instability beyond NATO borders can directly threaten the alliance’s security; cyber-attacks
are becoming more frequent, more organized and more costly in the damage they inflict on government
administrations, businesses and economies and potentially also transportation and supply networks and
other critical infrastructure, foreign militaries and intelligence services can be behind these attacks.
-take into account for Russia and election fraud part-.

Defense and Deterrence: as long as nuclear weapons exist, NATO will remain a nuclear alliance. NATO
will maintain an appropriate mix of nuclear and conventional forces, develop deployable and mobile
forces to carry out article 5 responsibilities and the alliances expeditionary operations, including the
NRF. Carry out necessary training, contingency planning and info exchange to assure full range of
defense against emerging security challenges. Develop NATO’s ability to defend against the threat of
chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons of mass destruction. Develop further our ability
to prevent, detect and defend against and recover from cyber-attacks, bringing all NATO bodies under
centralized cyber protection.
Security through crisis management: NATO will -where possible- prevent and act upon crisis and
conflicts beyond its borders that can pose a threat to the alliance as a whole. The alliance will engage
with other international actors to collaborate with the analysis, planning and conduct of activities on the
ground. NATO will monitor and analyze the intl environment to prevent conflicts. If prevention is
unsuccessful, NATO will be ready to take action, including stabilization and reconstruction after conflicts
end.

Effectiveness of crisis management lies on: intelligence enhancement (for prediction of crisis),
doctrine development (for counterinsurgency, stabilization and reconstruction operations), form
civilian crisis management capabilities, developing local forces in crisis zones, broadening
political consultations between allies to deal with the before/during/after of crisis.

Promoting international Security through Cooperation:

Arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation  NATO seeks security through lowest level possible
of forces. Through the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty, it seeks for s world without nuclear weapons
promoting stability. In any further reduction of nuclear weapons post-cold war, we will seek for Russian
agreement to increase their own transparency of possession of those weapons, relocating them away
from NATO members.

*Open door  the door is open to democratic governments to join the alliance, if they are willing to
assume the responsibilities and obligations of the membership. Their inclusion can contribute to overall
stability and security for NATO.

*Partnerships  dialogue and cooperation with partners can also help prepare interested nations for
membership to NATO.

NATO-Russia cooperation is of strategic importance to create a peaceful and stable

international environment. NATO poses no threat to Russia, yet we want to work alongside
them while expecting reciprocity from them. The NATO-Russia relationship is based on the
NATO- Russia Founding Act and the Rome Declaration. Besides differences, partnership based on
mutual confidence, transparency and predictability is believed to best serve the entire alliance’s
security.

The Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council and Partnership for Peace are central to stability and
peace in Europe. This is to be done by continuing to develop partnerships with Ukraine and
Georgia within the NATO-Ukraine and NATO-Georgia commissions.

Reform and transformation: NATO must have sufficient resources (financial, military and human) to
carry out its missions, using them effectively and efficiently. Maximizing the debloyability of forces and
sustainability, ensuring maximum coherence in defense planning. Engage in a process of continuous
renewal/reform, streamlining structures, to maximize efficiency and improving current methods.

“The best way to manage conflicts is to prevent them from happening”

“Our Alliance thrives as a source of hope because it is based on common values of individual liberty,
democracy, human rights and the rule of law”
Redefinition of NATO after the Soviet Union: the changes were often driven more by a desire within the
alliance to solidify itself politically, while at the same time trying to avoid upsetting the global political
balance.

NATO’s role in international politics:

Ever since its creation, NATO’s primary function has always been security and defense. Yet, for many
years it was known more for being an alliance which focused on military action rather than political
agreements for stability of the still fragile post-Soviet Union Europe (considering that their first actual
combat as an organization was in 1994 on behalf of Bosnia and Herzegovina). Evidently, NATO’s biggest
enemy since 1991 has been Russia and consequently occidental communist countries. For this reason in
2002 the NATO Russia council was created, to ameliorate tensions between North America, Western
and Central Europe and Russia; precisely because not only it was -and still is- an enemy, but a state of
strategic importance due to its geopolitics, and the threat that it could pose to the allies of NATO for
Russian supremacy based on geopolitical strategies, which is the topic being discussed in the debate.
Since the establishment of NATO’s 2010 new Strategic Concept its political relations were reinforced by
the strengthening of the NATO-UN and NATO-EU partnership to prevent crises and manage post-
conflicts situations for stability through political means.

In fact, after the 9/11 attacks in the pentagon and the world trade center, NATO began its reinforcement
not only for its military commands but increasing interoperability in the alliance with stronger political
means to prevent, plan and negotiate with non-member states as well for collective security
maintenance. This included the NATO-Ukraine alliance, where membership negotiations have been
troublesome due to Russian pressure on Ukraine, yet NATO maintains political relations stable with
Ukraine due to its compliance with several of the exercises driven within the organization and even
enlisting membership to NATO as strategic goals for Ukraine in its constitution. Overall, the organization
is the most powerful alliance that tackles both military and political aspects, driven by using the latter
first before anything. By being members or aspiring members, the countries engage all in maintaining
peaceful political relations with each other no matter of their differences regarding their own foreign
policy, all of this kept together by the Washington Treaty.

NATO-Russia Council

It’s a mechanism for consultation, consensus-building, cooperation, joint decision and joint action. NATO
member states work individually with Russia to address security issues of common interest. It replaced
the Permanent Joint Council (PJC) to be more flexible for the basis of relations with the organization and
Russia.

How does it regulate relations between western powers and Russia?

There are 25 continuously working groups and committees that work ok cooperation on: terrorism,
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and such, peacekeeping, missile defense, airspace
management, civil emergencies, defense reforms, logistics, and scientific cooperation for peace and
security. They meet occasionally at summit level. The committee serves to take joint decisions and bear
equal responsibility, individually and jointly for implementation.

How reliable are its decisions?

Ideally, they are reliable. Yet due to the long-lasting NATO- Russia confrontations there is a loss of trust
on the Russian side. Many allies don’t see Moscow engaged in some issues within military exercises and
military build-up and overall transparency.

!!!!!!Moscow points the finger at the West, arguing that the latter did not attach sufficient importance
to the NATO-Russia Council as a coordination mechanism, Russia refused to join the Eastern Partnership
program, because it was regarded by Moscow as an inferior partnership and Russia aspired to “equal
status”.

Geopolitics of Russia

Russia cannot count on natural features to protect it. The Pripet marshes (near Ukraine) can be avoided,
no one would want to attack from the arctic and etcetera. Its ultimate defense mechanisms are buffers.
Controlling the territories separating them from enemies. Establishment and maintenance of these
buffers makes Russia appear as aggressive to outsiders, but it sees itself forced to repress its own
institutions to maintain the empire.

Root problem of the Russian economy: it can grow the food it needs, but not transport it to every place
needed without it spoiling, and if possible, the costs of transport make it unaffordable. Geopolitical
issues with Russia: holding the empire together and maintaining internal security. They are
codependent.

Currently Russia lost its western buffers: Ukraine (except Crimea) and the Baltics. Russia is essentially
geopolitically unstable, no matter how much national will it has, Russia’s insufficient infrastructure for
the aforementioned constantly weakens its internal cohesion. Its economic weakness and social
instability cannot support its ambitions.

Role of each NATO member and their relations with Russia

Cultural Economic Political

Albania
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark Against the completion
of Russian north stream
2 to make Europe
dependent on Russian
energy through
Germany (gas)
Estonia Against the completion Feared of being the next
of Russian north stream Ukraine because of
2 to make Europe Narva, an Estonian town
dependent on Russian could be the next crimea
energy through for the same reasons.
Germany (gas) heavily involved in
 helping Ukrainian
authorities set up a
secure electoral IT
system.
France
Germany Due to the sanctions, Supports decision of EU
40% of trade losses imposing trade
affect Germany. sanctions on Russia.
Disregards complaints
and disapproval for the
use of the north stream
2.
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania Against the completion Barely has had any
of Russian nord stream 2 political contact with
to make Europe Russia since 2014
dependent on Russian ukraine crisis.
energy through "We provided them with
Germany (gas). political support, we've
Distanced itself from supported Ukraine in
Russia to become less providing guns and
dependent on its energy ammo," says Kerza.
resources. "Now we're moving to
cyber."
Luxembourg
Montenegro
Netherlands Backs nord stream 2
Norway
Poland Against the completion At a low point with
of Russian nord stream 2 Russia. Support strongly
to make Europe EU sanctions against
dependent on Russian Russia.
energy through
Germany (gas)
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
United States Against the completion
of Russian nord stream 2
to make Europe
 dependent on Russian
energy through
Germany (gas)

Interests of the Russian federation

Political, territorial, military, economical, moral.

This is done by territorial disputes, treaty violations and manipulation of its articles to such extents as to
blame other countries of the violations, cyber attacks (including the creation of trolls to serve as a more
indirect influence to the targeted population), and the use of the URSS’s supremacy over all of Europe’s
security to further claims.

Preservation of current Relentless quest for Gain an equal status Maintaining powerful
political regime and respect, Russia vis-à-vis other major military forces in other
minimizing chances of considers itself as an international players. states, including arms
Western interference eternal great power trade, weapon storage
in Russia’s domestic and traditional and manufacturing.
affairs. Nationalist and understanding of great Given that Russia itself
historical rhetoric. power status involves does not have threats
dominance in one’s posed on its territory
neighborhood/region. for its vastness of land
and few possible points
of attack, it has to
secure the territory of
the states bordering it
and the ones where it
has important assets.
Venezuela Crimea Syria Venezuela (oil imports
Gas exports through Georgia (south Ossetia Venezuela relation)
pipeline to Germany. and Abkhazia) Black sea “dominance” Ukraine with the gas
North Macedonia pipeline and export
issue.

CRIMEA

Ukraine on the issue: they stand to lose a lot. Including the city of Sevastopol which served as a main
maritime port for the entire country. Ukrainians were forced to obtain Russian passports in the entire
peninsula due to the almost immediate take over. Military aggression is just one element of the Russian
hybrid warfare against Ukraine. Other elements encompass: (1) propaganda based on lies and
falsifications; (2) trade and economic pressure; (3) energy blockade; (4) terror and intimidation of
Ukrainian citizens; (5) cyber-attacks; (6) a strong denial of the very fact of war against Ukraine despite
large scope of irrefutable evidence; (7) use of pro-Russian forces and satellite states in its own interests;
(8) blaming the other side for its own crimes.

Crimea presented a warm water port and access into Western markets for the Russian Empire, and
acted as the reason behind Catherine the great’s incursions into the area.
In 1997, Russia was allowed to keep naval bases in Crimea, and Sevastopol’s naval base was leased until
2042 to the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Many nations in both eastern Europe and Eurasian are bound to the
influence of Russia because of its power as a gas provider.

MINSK II (failed) Belarus, France, Germany, Russia, and Ukraine met in order to set up a ceasefire that
would last, and that would, with a comprehensive, yet, slightly ominous, 13 point-plan fill in the holes
from the preceding one. The ceasefire was violated up to 350 times a day. Ukraine promises to
implement constitutional changes to provide for ‘decentralization’; In exchange, all ‘foreign armed
formations’ will be withdrawn and Ukraine will regain control of its state borders.” In February 2015, the
International Monetary Fund gave Ukraine a bailout of US $17.5 billion, along with austerity measures.
Ukraine raised prices for natural gas for households, while Ukraine’s currency, the hryvnia deteriorated.
In April of 2017, the IMF pledged another US $1 billion to Ukraine for improved economic reforms, with
17% of the funds coming from the United States.

Russia’s tactics have been described as a “hybrid war,” because of the war of information as well as the
physical war. However, we can see that the results of this so-called hybrid war are also hybrid—in the
sense that they have affected every aspect of Ukrainian society as well as the worldwide community,
while unearthing issues that were already present in Ukraine.

SYRIA

Ukraine on the issue: further conflict in Ukraine will determine whether the US and Russia will work
together for the chemical weapons disarmament deal in Syria.

Motives: 1. Russia has naval facilities in Tartus, Syria, this being its only Mediterranean naval facility,
being Bashar al Assad’s ally would ensure the maintenance of the base. 2. Maintaining Syria as an al ally
would ensure that they would keep on purchasing Russian weapons.

OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION AND EXPORT

Ukraine on the issue: "Russia needs to remove transit from Ukraine for a very simple reason: because
transit makes full-scale military aggression against Ukraine a very costly exercise," Andriy Kobolyev, the
chief executive of the Ukrainian state oil and gas company, Naftogaz. Beyond helping Ukraine develop
its natural gas basins, American liquefied natural gas could potentially get exported to Europe and thus
become a competitor to Russian-piped gas. Ukraine's cash-strapped economy currently benefits by
about $2bn - three percent of its gross domestic product - from transit fees. This is the equivalent of the
country's entire defense budget.

Due to the crimea invasion, sanctions were inflicted upon Russia, including oil and gas related sanctions.
Technology sanctions that target key areas por que development of new oil production in frontier
regions, stopping cooperation between international oil companies and Gazprom. Also, due to the
sanctions on specific companies it has become way more costly to produce oil in east Siberia. Oil prices
went down, and Russia still upgraded their military capabilities. This makes Russia a powerful actor at
least in the military sector, which is what countries are facing now.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is in this sense that the West has its own important choice to make. It could choose
to respond in kind to Russian remilitarization by enhancing its own military capabilities in the NATO
theatre. This might involve a mix of changes to military posture, deployment of forces, and expenditures
on forces in the region. In geopolitical terms, if not ideological ones, this scenario might be called a new
Cold War. But such a response might produce the very thing the West wishes to avoid: a pricklier and
well-armed neighbor that perceives a rising threat from its Western borders. This could prove costly for
both protagonists. It would be costly from an economic point of view (Europe’s economies are not
performing much better than Russia’s) and would also drastically increase the probability of conflict
between NATO and Russia.

Russia is building the nord stream 2, which will stop passing gas through Ukraine, and directly to
Germany. “We are an important transit route and at the same time we used to be their biggest
customer, but now we are not buying from them at all. The last supplies stopped in 2016. We are buying
all the gas we need from Europe,” Vitrenko says.

Energy also played a key role in Russia’s determination to take the Crimea by military means. By
annexing that region, Russia virtually doubled the offshore territory it controls in the Black Sea, which is
thought to house billions of barrels of oil and vast reserves of natural gas. Prior to the crisis, several
Western oil firms, including ExxonMobil, were negotiating with Ukraine for access to those reserves.
Now, they will be negotiating with Moscow. “It’s a big deal,” said Carol Saivetz, a Eurasian expert at MIT.
“It deprives Ukraine of the possibility of developing these resources and gives them to Russia.”

Russia has become a major player in the world energy sector and has used oil as a weapon to achieve its
foreign policy objectives through energy pipelines.

2016 US ELECTION HACK

Ukraine on the issue: The collusion narrative is based around the summer 2016 publication of a "black
ledger" in Ukraine which showed off-the-book payments to Paul Manafort. The surprise ruling that
Ukraine interfered in the 2016 US election came from Kiev's District Administrative Court. It is supposed
to rule only on public matters but is infamous for controversial judgements. Ruling on alleged
interference in a foreign election is far beyond the court's jurisdiction. The release of documents by a
Ukrainian anti-corruption agency cannot reasonably be equated with a massive illegal email hack.

Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton,
and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian
Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. “Russia, China, other countries,
outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our
governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat(ic) National
Committee.”

The expert added that Putin’s “multifaceted campaign of cyber-attacks and espionage, propaganda,
financial leverage, fake news and traditional espionage” had expanded in the United States since the
election, “and it will be a shock if it does not escalate in France, Germany and elsewhere this year.”

VENEZUELA

Ukraine on the issue: The narrative goes that Washington should give Moscow a free hand in Ukraine —
in return for Moscow supposedly giving Washington a free hand to unseat Venezuela’s venal and
criminal Maduro regime.
Russia would lose one of its most vocal supporters if the regime falls, hence, its involvement in the
Venezuelan crisis. Yet, Cuba plays a big role here because of Raúl Castro, unless most of the military in
Venezuela are in favor of transitioning, there is a lot of power on Cuba’s behalf on the country. He built
these relationships in the early 200’s to counteract US influence in south America and enhance Russia’s
great power status in the world. Venezuela is Russia’s last asset in Latin America.

The Kremlin views Venezuela as the backyard of the US - in Washington's

sphere of political influence - in the same way that Ukraine is in Russia's
backyard - or what the Kremlin calls - "the near-abroad".
It has invested up to 17 billion since 2005, based on oil deals with Rosneft (oil company) and PDVSA in
pre-payment form of oil deliveries, and arms sales in Chavez’s rule. Which makes practically no sense
since further US sanctions to Rosneft would make life more difficult for them as well as its assets on
Citgo (oil refiner) in the US. Geopolitical implications of regime change are secondary for Russia.
Venezuela has limited strategic significance, in contrast with Syria.

GEORGIA

Russia backed the self-proclaimed Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent republics apart from Georgia.
When Russia invaded Georgia, these republic’s separatist groups used its armies alongside Russia. The
Transcaucasia region is a buffering zone for Russia between Europe and the middle east, hence why it is
so important for Russia to defend it. “Now they totally rely on funding from Russia, but because of
corruption, Russia’s money doesn’t trickle down to the population.” The conflict also turned Georgia
away from Russia and towards the European Union, with whom it signed an association agreement in
2014.

“Russia showed that it can break international law, invade other countries and get away with it,
something it repeated in Ukraine with much greater consequences,”

What does Russia gain from this? They wanted to destabilize the region as to prevent expansion of
NATO there, same as with Ukraine. U.S. proposed Georgia joins NATO, which the European members
rejected. They did not want any frozen conflicts. Russia got what it wanted. They had shown the danger
of future NATO expansion. They had permanently frozen the conflict. If Georgia wants NATO, they have
to remove their claims on South Ossetia and Abkhazia. If they claim the regions, No NATO. Win win for
Russia.

The same tactic Russia used in Ukraine as during annexation of Crimea Russia moved its troops to
Ukraine border and gave powers to Putin for invasion. But in Ukrainian case Russia didn't got the pretext
and was faced with sanctions that are “crippling” Russian economy.

NORTH MACEDONIA

There was good reason to expect Russia would not care about North Macedonia joining NATO at all –
much like their reaction to Croatia’s and Albania’s accession to the alliance back in 2009.

NATO is not a threat to Russia’s limited investment in the Macedonian energy sector, the country’s small
and cash-strapped army is located far from its borders and hardly able to bolster NATO’s military
capabilities, moreover, Russia lacks the historical affinity with North Macedonia in the same manner that
ties it to either Serbia or Greece. The kremlin, however, fears of the expansion of post soviet states and
them joining to NATO, which makes north Macedonia a somewhat key player since by playing there, it
challenges the west. For this reason, Russia took advantage of a weak spot of Macedonia’s foreign
policy, Greece and the name dispute. In the end, they decided to set the name to North Macedonia, but
during the conflict Russia was insisting on mediating in the dispute through the security council, given
that it holds a lot of power there. This was unsuccessful. Russia got closer to radicals in the area.

BLACK SEA

Russia blocks five zones in the black sea, which serve as shipping routes for Bulgaria, Georgia, Romania
and Ukraine for “combat training” and “danger to navigation.” This was considered as an act of
aggression at sea, not only to Ukraine but other countries in the black sea region.

Points:

After how many speakers will you accept a mod or unmod?

What are the simple and qualified majorities?

Are you accepting approaches only during unmoderated caucuses or how are they going to be handled?

How many working papers are you accepting?

How many drafts are you accepting?

What is the limit of pages for the working paper/draft?

How many people are going to stand in the qa for each draft?

How much time is there to speak in the qa?

How many questions are going to be entertained?

Given that motion x and motion y are similar, would you consider merging them and accepting one
more motion?

Would you consider opening a consultation of the hall?

Could you remind us the order for the speakers list?

Could you remind us of all the topics of the mods before proceeding to vote?

Are we allowed to go outside of the committee if we are not on an unmoderated caucus?

Questions:

Given that there is no motion for questions, what is the correct way to either yield the remaining time
for questions or ask to make them to a delegate?

Recommendations from the dais:

BLACK SEA Delegates are recommended to find a safe path for consensus to achieve an effective, fast,
and most importantly, realistic solution on the matter, taking into account that time is key for the
effective mitigation of the issue.

BALTIC SEA Delegates should consider this subject, when and if debating it, as a measure to prevent
hostile incursions and assure protective measures of NATO over the members of the organization.

INF Treaty Compliance Delegates when, and if addressing this topic, should discuss the impact
generated from the withdrawals from the INF treaty,

- considering further measures that would incentivize the destruction of Russian nuclear
armament
- Delegates will need to debate and reach consensus on how to approach Russia regarding this
topic, as assuring Russia ‘s compliance in these new control measures would be key for their
success.

Cyber Attacks from Russia Delegates will have to discuss the effectiveness of the already existing organs
created to prevent these attacks, in order to implement possible modifications, while also designing
other mechanisms that would support the work that has already been done.

Expansionist threats of Russia The proper categorization and standardized responses must be
established by NATO to deal with these threats and put in place prevention mechanisms.

Russia’s Military Interventions It is NATO‘s responsibility to assess the extent to which Russia is willing to
defend strategic alliances and with what motivations. Is Russia ‘s involvement for the defense of Syrian
sovereignty or for the indirect war with western coalitions?

Regarding conflicts in Ukraine  the organization has been criticized for not accomplishing
positive results and not being effective in the implementation of feasible solutions.

priority of the committee to determine the specifics to handle Russia in particular, and from these
solutions determine the approach for further actions.

Facts regarding international law in the scope of the topic involving Ukraine.

After annexing Crimea, Russian authorities expedited the issuance of Russian passports for the residents
of the peninsula. As several authors noted, individuals who refused to take Russian nationality were
allegedly subject to discrimination, while those who opposed the annexation, and certain minority
groups, were subject to persecution

!!!!!!!!!!!! International Criminal Court Prosecutor’s Preliminary Examination 2017 Report contains
allegations of disappearances, killings, ill-treatment, forced conscription, deprivation of fair trial rights,
transfer of population from the Russian Federation into Crimea, seizure of property and alleged
harassment of the Crimean Tatar population.

In Eastern Ukraine, the struggle between government and anti-government forces (allegedly supported
by the Russian Federation) has already resulted in more than 10,000 deaths and 25,000 injuries,
including thousands of civilians, and the alleged commission of war crimes including illegal detentions,
torture and ill-treatment, sexual and gender-based violence, and disappearances. This conflict continues
today and threatens Ukraine as well as its neighbors.
the Russian Federation is using ‘hybrid’ or ‘asymmetric warfare’ to achieve its ends in Ukraine, thereby
blurring the space between war and peace.

!!!!!!!!!!!! Military aggression is just one element of the Russian hybrid warfare against Ukraine. Other
elements encompass: (1) propaganda based on lies and falsifications; (2) trade and economic pressure;
(3) energy blockade; (4) terror and intimidation of Ukrainian citizens; (5) cyber-attacks; (6) a strong
denial of the very fact of war against Ukraine despite large scope of irrefutable evidence; (7) use of pro-
Russian forces and satellite states in its own interests; (8) blaming the other side for its own crimes.

Hybrid conflicts involve multilayered efforts designed to destabilise a functioning State and polarise its
society.

Ukraine's cash-strapped economy currently benefits by about $2bn - three percent of its gross domestic
product - from transit fees. This is the equivalent of the country's entire defence budget.

NotPetya "was when everybody realized how vulnerable we are when Ukraine gets hit," says Maigre,
the former head of NATO’s cyberdefense center. "It easily blows over to Europe and beyond."

Facts:

On 28 February 1994, Alliance aircraft shot down four warplanes that violated the No-Fly Zone over
Bosnia and Herzegovina. This was the first time that NATO forces ever engaged in combat.

Brookings article excerpt NATO membership for Ukraine is unlikely in the near term. For the foreseeable
future, Ukraine should continue to deepen its practical cooperation with the alliance. Much, if not all, of
a MAP can be put into Kyiv’s annual action plans. Moscow’s principal objection appears to be to the
name of the plan, not the content. The focus then should be on implementation. Ukraine should seek to
prepare itself as much as possible—not just in terms of defense and security reforms, but also in
solidifying its embrace of the democratic and market economy values of the alliance. That will put
Ukraine in position to take advantage if/when an opportunity emerges and NATO is ready to consider
membership.

The first NRC meeting in 2019 took place on 25th January, with the INF Treaty crisis high on its agenda.
While there was no progress on resolving the crisis, the meeting illustrated the need to discuss issues of
mutual importance in a timely and efficient manner.

"At present, Nato does not define cyber-attacks as a clear military action. This means that the provisions
of Article V of the North Atlantic Treaty, or, in other words collective self-defence, will not automatically
be extended to the attacked country," said the Estonian defence minister, Jaak Aaviksoo.

"Not a single Nato defence minister would define a cyber-attack as a clear military action at present.
However, this matter needs to be resolved in the near future."