NIMUNC

2021
南京校际模联 2021

HSC
Background Guide
1
 Contents

1. Introduction to the United Nations Security

Council…………………….………………………………3
1.1. History of the USNC………………………………………..…………………………...3
1.2. The UNSC in the Cold War Landscape…………………...……………………..3
1.3. Working Procedure of the UNSC…………………………………..……………..4
1.4. The Functions of the UNSC………………………………………………………….4

2. History of Falkland Islands before 20th

Century……………………….…………………………..6
2.1. The Discovery of Falkland Islands………………………….…………………...6
2.2. Colonization of the Falklands Islands………………..………………………..6
2.3. The Development of the Falkland Islands……………………………………8
2.4. Controversies of Sovereignty………………………………………………………9

3. Pre-Conflict Situation…………………………….11
3.1. Argentina and Britain before 1982……………………………...……………11
3.2. Argentine-Britain Dispute…………………….………………………………….12

4. Falklands War………………………………..………14
4.1. Conflict Prelude………………………………………………………………..………14
4.2. Course of War……………………………………………………………………………14
4.3. Casualties and Losses.….………………………………………………………..…16
4.4. Peace Settlements and Efforts of International Society……………..17

5. About the Committee………………………………………………18

5.1. Special Rules of Procedure……………………………………………………….18
5.2. Documents……………………………………………………………………………….20
5.3. Other Issues about the Committee……………………………………………21

2
1. Introduction to the United Nations Security
Council
1.1. History of the UNSC
In the century prior to the UN's creation, several international treaty organizations and
conferences had been formed to regulate conflicts between nations, such as the International
Committee of the Red Cross and the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. Following the
catastrophic loss of life in World War I and World War II, the United Nations was founded after
a long process of negotiations.
The main purpose of the Security Council was to save succeeding generations from the
scourge of war. The global powers, at that time, including China, France, the Russian
Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States (called P5)were given seats in this
institution as permanent members with veto power. Next to this, there were non-permanent
members elected by the United Nations General Assembly.
Originally, the Security Council consisted of five permanent and six non-permanent
members. But the Security Council composition was amended in 1963, and the size increased
by adding more non-permanent members to it. Since then, the Security Council has five
permanent and 10 non-permanent members. In selecting the non-permanent members,
special attention should be given to an equitable geographical distribution. Three seats will go
to African countries, two to Latin America, two to Asia, two to Western Europe, and one seat
to Eastern Europe. The implementation of the principle of geographical distribution means
that the members of the Council also need to concern the common interests of their regions
while expressing views of their countries on the Council issues.
In general terms, the Security Council is largely of a reflection of the international power
distribution in 1945. The composition of the Security Council has been a contentious matter,
particularly since the end of the Cold War. Critics have argued that the Security Council and its
five permanent members reflect the power structure that existed at the end of World War II,
when much of the world was under colonial rule.

1.2. The UNSC in the Cold War Landscape

During the Cold War, continual disagreement between the United States and the Soviet
Union made the Security Council an ineffective institution.
The Security Council was to some extent paralyzed in its early decades by the Cold War
between the US and USSR and their allies, and the Council generally was only able to intervene
in unrelated conflicts. (A notable exception was the 1950 Security Council resolution
authorizing a US-led coalition to repel the North Korean invasion of South Korea, passed in the
absence of the USSR.) In 1956, the first UN peacekeeping force was established to end the Suez
Crisis; however, the UN was unable to intervene against the USSR's simultaneous invasion of
Hungary following that country's revolution. Cold War divisions also paralyzed the Security
Council's Military Staff Committee, which had been formed by Articles 45–47 of the UN
Charter to oversee UN forces and create UN military bases. The committee continued to exist
on paper but largely abandoned its work in the mid-1950s.
Between the late 1980s and the early 21st century, the council’s power and prestige grew.

3
Beginning in the late 1980s, there was a surge in the number of peacekeeping operations
(including observer missions) authorized by the Security Council.

1.3. Working Procedure of the UNSC

The Charter of the United Nations – an international treaty – obligates member states to
settle their disputes by peaceful means, in such a manner that international peace and security
and justice are not endangered. They are to refrain from the threat or use of force against any
state and may bring the dispute before the Security Council.
The UN Charter gives the Security Council primary responsibility for maintaining
international peace and security. The Council may convene at any time, whenever peace is
threatened. Among the main bodies, the Security Council is the only one with authority to issue
binding resolutions to member states. Under the Charter of the United Nations, all Member
States are obligated to comply with Council decisions.
It has 15 Members, among them China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom
and the United States are permanent members. The other 10 are elected by the General
Assembly for two-year terms. In particular, at the time of this meeting, in 1982, the ten non -
permanent members of the Council were: Guyana, Japan, Jordan, Ireland, Panama, Poland,
Spain, Togo, Uganda, Zaire. The Security Council is chaired by a rotating presidency, which
holds this function for only one month.
According to Article 27 of the UN Charter, each member of the Security Council has one vote.
Decisions on procedural matters require a minimum of nine ‘yes’ votes. Decisions of the
Security Council on all other matters require a minimum of nine ‘yes’ votes including the
concurring votes of the permanent members. Except for votes on procedural questions which
are determined by a simple majority, action cannot be taken on an issue that is brought before
the Security Council if any one of the permanent members vote ‘no’ on a draft resolution. The
ability of a permanent member to stop a draft resolution from being adopted by voting ‘no’ is
called the “veto power.” Any member that is a party to a dispute must abstain from voting.
Under Chapter VII, the Council can take measures to enforce its decisions and ensure that
mandates are fulfilled. It can impose economic sanctions or order an arms embargo. On rare
occasions, the Council has authorized Member States to use “all necessary means,” including
collective military action, to see that its decisions are carried out.

1.4. The Functions of United Nations Security Council

The Security Council takes the lead in determining the existence of a threat to the peace or
act of aggression. It calls upon the parties to a dispute to settle it by peaceful means and
recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement. It may suggest principles to the
parties for a peaceful settlement, appoint special representatives, ask the Secretary-General
to use his good offices, or undertake investigation and mediation. It has developed and refined
the use of non-military measures including arms embargoes, travel banks, and restrictions to
guard against the exploitation of natural resources to fuel conflicts, as well as taking a lead
role in the coordination of international counter-terrorism efforts. In the event that a dispute
has erupted into armed conflict, the Council tries to secure a ceasefire. It may send a
peacekeeping mission to help the parties maintain the truce and to keep opposing forces apart.
In some cases, the Security Council can resort to imposing sanctions or even authorize the use

4
of force to maintain or restore international peace and security. The use of mandatory
sanctions is intended to apply pressure on a State or entity to comply with the objectives set
by the Security Council without resorting to the use of force. Sanctions thus offer the Security
Council an important instrument to enforce its decisions.
The Council may, in some cases, authorize the utilization of military force by a coalition of
member states or by a regional organization or arrangement. This can only be carried out as
a last resort when all possible peaceful means of settling a dispute have been exhausted, or
after a threat to the peace, a breach of the peace or an act of aggression have been determined
to exist.
Under the United Nations Charter, the functions and powers of the Security Council are:
1. Article 24
Under Article 24, the Security Council is designated to the mission of maintaining peace
and security, it should act in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United
Nations, and it is required to submit annual report to the General Assembly.
2. Article 25
Under the Article 25, members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the
decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter.
3. Article 26
Article 26 requires the Security Council to form a system of the regulation of armaments,
with the assistance of the Military Staff Committee referred to in Article 47.
4. Article 39
Article 39 provides authority for the Security Council to determine the existence of any
threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make
recommendations or decide what action shall be taken.
5. Article 41
Article 41 provides the authority for the Security Council to employ various measures
except the use of armed forces to give effect to its decision。
6. Article 42
Article 42 provides the authority for the Security Council to take military actions if the
measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate. (United Nations, 1945)

5
2. History of Falkland Islands before 20th
Century
The history of the Falkland Islands (Spanish: Islas Malvinas) goes back at least five hundred
years, with active exploration and colonization only taking place in the 18th century.
Nonetheless, the Falkland Islands have been a matter of controversy, as they have been
claimed by the French, British, Spaniards and Argentines at various points.

2.1. The Discovery of Falkland Islands

Based on the existence of an archipelago of the Falkland Islands in a French copy of a
Portuguese map from 1516, an unknown Portuguese expedition may have sighted the islands.
Sightings of the islands are attributed to Ferdinand Magellan, one of the captains in the
expedition (The Guardian, 2012). It is probable that a ship from the Magellan expedition
discovered the islands, considering the difficulty in measuring longitude accurately at that
time.
The English navigator John Davis, a commander in Thomas Cavendish's second expedition
to the New World, was thought to be the first person to sight the Falklands in 1592. He decided
to find Cavendish when he and the crew were separated from Cavendish, then on 9 August
1592, a severe storm let Davis drifted and set up refuges among certain isles never before
discovered, but it turned out they were not the Falklands because of the navigational errors
due to the longitude problems.
In 1594, the islands might have been visited by English commander Richard Hawkins, who
gave a group of islands the name of "Hawkins' Maidenland". However, the latitude given was
not accurate, which casts doubts on his discovery.
In fact, it was actually the Dutchman Sebald de Weerdt who made the first undisputed
sighting of them about 1600. On 24 January 1600, the Dutchman Sebald de Weert visited the
Jason Islands and called them the Sebald Islands. This name remained in use for the entire
Falkland Islands for a long time.
The English captain John Strong made the first recorded landing in the Falklands, in 1690,
and named the sound between the two main islands after Viscount Falkland, a British naval
official. The name was later applied to the whole island group.

2.2. Colonization of the Falklands Islands

2.2.1. Early colonization
The French admiral and explorer Louis-Antoine de Bougainville founded the islands’ first
settlement and established a colony at his own expense on East Falkland in 1764. He named
the islands the Malovines, with the Spanish translation of Islas Malvinas.
The British, in 1765, were the first to settle West Falkland. Captain John Byron, who was
unaware the French had established Port Saint Louis on East Falkland, explored Saunders
Island around West Falkland (Cawkell, 2001). He named the area Port Egmont and claimed
the islands for Britain on the grounds of prior discovery. The next year Captain John MacBride
established a permanent British settlement at Port Egmont.
In 1766 France agreed to leave after the Spanish complained about French presence in

6
territories, they considered their own. Spain agreed to compensate Louis de Bougainville, and
in 1767, the Spanish formally assumed control of Port St. Louis and renamed it Puerto Soledad.
In 1770, a Spanish commander, Don Juan Ignacio de Madariaga, briefly visited Port Egmont.
On 10 June he returned from Argentina with armed ships and soldiers, forcing the British to
leave Port Egmont. This action sparked the Falkland Crisis between 10 July 1770 to 22 January
1771 when Britain and Spain almost went to war over the islands. However, conflict was
averted when the colony was re-established. Egmont quickly became an important port-of-
call for British ships sailing around Cape Horn.
With the growing economic pressures stemming from the upcoming American War of
Independence, the British government decided that it should withdraw its presence from
many overseas settlements in 1774. On 20 May 1776 the British forces formally left Port
Egmont, while leaving a plaque asserting Britain's continuing sovereignty over the islands. For
the next four years, British sealers used Egmont as a base for their activities in the South
Atlantic. This ended in 1780 when they were forced to leave by Spanish authorities who then
ordered that the British colony be destroyed.
Spain, which had a garrison at Puerto Soledad on East Falkland, which was administered
from Montevideo until 1811 when it withdrew due to the military pressures created by the
Peninsular War in Spain and the growing calls for independence by its colonies in South
America. On departure, the Spanish also left a plaque proclaiming Spain's sovereignty over the
islands as the British had done 35 years before.

2.2.2. Inter-colonial period

Following the departure of the Spanish settlers, the Falkland Islands became the domain of
whalers and sealers who used the islands to shelter from the worst of the South Atlantic
weather. Most people using the islands were British and American sealers, where typically
between 40 and 50 ships were engaged in exploiting fur seals. This represents an itinerant
population of up to 1,000 sailors.

2.2.3. Argentine colonization attempts

In 1820.3, American Colonel David Jewett, set sail looking to capture Spanish ships as prizes.
A storm resulted in severe damage to Heroína, forcing Jewett to put into Puerto Soledad for
repairs in October 1820. His ship received assistance in obtaining anchorage off Port Louis. On
6 November 1820, Jewett raised the flag of the United Provinces of the River Plate (a
predecessor of modern-day Argentina) and claimed possession of the islands and departed
from the Falkland Islands in 1821.4.
In 1823, the United Provinces of the River Plate granted fishing rights to Jorge Pacheco and
Luis Vernet. Attempts in 1824 and 1826, trying to travel to the islands, both failed. Vernet was
by now aware of conflicting British claims to the islands and sought permission from the
British consulate before departing for the islands. In 1828, the United Provinces government
granted Vernet all of East Falkland including all its resources and exempted him from taxation
if a colony could be established within three years. He took settlers, and again sought
permission from the British Consulate. On 10 June 1829, Vernet was designated as 'civil and
military commandant' of the islands and granted a monopoly on seal hunting rights. Therefore,
a protest was lodged by the British Consulate. In 1831, Vernet attempted to assert his

7
monopoly on seal hunting rights. This led him to capture 3 American ships. The United States
consul in Buenos Aires sent Captain Silas Duncan of USS Lexington to recover the confiscated
property, and he took seven prisoners aboard Lexington and charged them with piracy.
Towards the end of his life, Luis Vernet authorized his sons to claim on his behalf for his losses.
Lodging against the US Government for compensation, the case was rejected by the President
of the US Grover Cleveland in 1885.
In the aftermath of the Lexington incident, Major Esteban Mestivier was commissioned by
the Buenos Aires government to set up a penal colony. He arrived at his destination on 15
November 1832, but his soldiers mutinied and killed him.
On 3 January 1833, Captain James Onslow, of the brig-sloop HMS Clio, arrived at Vernet's
settlement at Port Louis to request that the flag of the United Provinces of the River Plate be
replaced with the British one, and for the administration to leave the islands. While Major Jose
María Pinedo, commander of the schooner Sarandí, wanted to resist, as such he protested
verbally, but departed without a fight on 5 January. Argentina claims that Vernet's colony was
also expelled at this time.
Initial British plans for the Islands were based upon the continuation of Vernet's settlement
at Port Louis. An Argentine immigrant of Irish origin, William Dickson, was appointed as the
British representative and provided with a flagpole and flag to be flown whenever ships were
in harbor. In March 1833, Vernet's Deputy, Matthew Brisbane returned and presented his
papers to Captain Robert Fitzroy of HMS Beagle, which coincidentally happened to be in
harbor at the time. Fitzroy encouraged Brisbane to continue with Vernet's enterprise with the
proviso that whilst private enterprise was encouraged, Argentine assertions of sovereignty
would not be welcome.
Brisbane reasserted his authority over Vernet's settlement and recommenced the practice
of paying employees in promissory notes. Due to Vernet's reduced status, the promissory
notes were devalued, which meant that the employees received fewer goods at Vernet's stores
for their wages. After months of freedom following the Lexington raid this accentuated
dissatisfaction with the leadership of the settlement. In August 1833, under the leadership of
Antonio Rivero, a gang of Creole and Indian gauchos ran amok in the settlement. Armed with
muskets obtained from American sealers, the gang killed five members of Vernet's settlement
including both Dickson and Brisbane. Shortly afterward the survivors fled Port Louis, seeking
refuge on Turf Island in Berkeley Sound until rescued by the British sealer Hopeful in October
1833.

2.3. The Development of the Falkland Islands

2.3.1. Development of agriculture and the Camp
A few years after the British had established themselves in the islands, a number of new
British settlements were started. In 1846 feral cattle was allotted to new settlers. Cattle were
concentrated in the southern part of East Falkland, an area that became known as Lafonia. In
1849, the Boca wall was built across the isthmus at Darwin to control the movement of cattle.
In 1852, sheep farming became the dominant form of agriculture on the Islands.

2.3.2. Exploitation of maritime resources

The Falkland Islands were used as a base for whaling ships hunting the southern right whale

8
and sperm whale from the 1770s until British authority was established over the islands and
surrounding seas.
Fur seals were exploited for their pelts and elephant seals were exploited for oil, but the
number of the two species had been declining drastically from the mid-1850s. As a result, seal
hunting died off, although continuing at a low level. A ban on the hunting of fur seals during
summers months was enacted in 1881, but it was not until 1921 that hunting was banned
entirely. Later, sealers instead turned their attention to the South American sea lion, making
sealing uneconomic. Attempts to revive the trade turned out to be unsuccessful.

2.3.3. Telephony
Though the first telephone lines were installed by the Falkland Islands Company in the
1880s, the Falkland Islands Government was slow to embrace telephony. In 1897, a telephone
line was installed, and the isolation of the islands was broken in 1911 when a wireless
telegraphy station was installed and enabled telegrams to be sent to the mainland Uruguay.

2.4. Controversies of Sovereignty

As the history of Falkland Islands has been addressed above, a brief conclusion can be draw
from it, the determination of belonging of the Islands is complicated while controversial. Since
both disputants, Britain and Argentina, argued for their ownership over the Falklands, an
analysis to their arguments would then be necessary.
To begin with, the definition of sovereignty and territory shall be stated. Territory, in a
relatively simpler way, can be understanded in geographical sense as a specific area within a
sovereign state. Then, sovereignty would be understanded as the supreme authority of a state
within a territory (Law, 2018). So, in the practice of sovereignty, the actor, state, is required
while there is also delimitation to area of practice, which is the territory of state. In the
scenario of Falkland Islands as an example, Britain and Argentina can both be recognized as
the state undoubtedly and the islands is then the territory. Thus, the issue here would be to
what extent that Britain or Argentina can exercise one’s sovereignty on the islands.
Normally, states have six ways to acquire territorial sovereignty:
1. Conquest, where territory is annexed by the threat or use of armed force;
2. (Effective) Occupation of terra nullius, or uninhabited land belonging to no one;
3. Prescription, by which doubtful title is legitimized by long-continued, uninterrupted
and peaceful possession where another state has neglected to assert its rights or has
been unable to do so;
4. Cession, or voluntary transfer by treaty;
5. Accretion, where a gradual deposit of soil changes the contours of land;
6. Arbitral award by bodies as the International Court of Justice regarding boundary
disputes. (Triggs, 2010)
From the above means, effective occupation and prescription are two which have been
constantly mentioned in the contemporary territorial disputes. For effective occupation, it
emphasizes on the initial establishment of administrative control over the territory that has
yet formed such effective possession. In other words, the one who is managed to establish the
reign in a land firstly would be the one who can be recognized with the right to exercise
sovereignty over this land. However, this recognition would be changed due to prescription. If

9
a state is able to exercise its authority, in the same mean as sovereign right, over the territory
that is de jure belongs to another state with the condition mentioned above, this state would
become the de facto and even de jure controller over this territory. However, the description
of the prescription in the existing international law system remains ambiguous since it is
difficult to determine the length of “long-continued possession” and existence of
“uninterrupted possession”. A commonly comprehended idea for prescription is that the
status of possession of the territory by a foreign state should go beyond the old memory of
previous authority, a process that would last for decades in order to gain the international
recognition.
For the history of Falkland Islands, the complexity arises from the perception of prescription.
In 1774, as the right of possession shifted from Britain to Spain, the later colonial power
started its ownership over the islands for the next decades. However, due to the military
pressure, Spain withdrew from the islands, leaving the Falklands without any effective
administrative control that can be considered as abandoning its sovereignty. Following the
independence of the Provinces of the River Plate, this new regime soon became the controller
of the islands after 1820 as the so called “successor” of Spain in the region. However, at the
time, neither the idea of succession of colonial territory nor the recognition to independent
colonial state had any internationally committed legal framework. Thus, this new claim to the
Falklands was thought to be controversial. Nevertheless, after the crisis of 1833, Britain again
became the actual possessor of the islands until these days.
Although Argentina continued to protest for its sovereign right over the Falklands since
1833, no effective action had been taken until the formation of the new international
institution in 20th century, especially the United Nations and the modern international law
system. However, until this point, Britain was able to argue for its sovereign right over the
Falkland Islands for its possession lasted for almost a century under the idea of prescription.
For Argentina, based on the sense of a legitimate heir of territory from Spanish colony form
historical perspective, it also argued for its sovereign right widely after the formation of the
system of the UN, ultimately forming the irredentism idea domestically. In 1994, a decade after
the Falklands War, Argentina passed the amendment to constitution by adding several
temporary provisions including the very first clause:

“The Argentine Nation ratifies its legitimate and non-prescribing sovereignty over the Malvinas,
Georgias del Sur and Sandwich del Sur Islands and over the corresponding maritime and insular zones,
as they are an integral part of the National territory” (Constitution of the Argentine Nation, 1994)

But, before moving to 1994, it is now the point to shift the focus to the actual situation of
Britain and Argentina, as well as their bilateral conflict of 1982.

3. Pre-Conflict Situation
3.1. Argentina and Britain before 1982
10
 By the 1980s, the United Kingdom, despite its decline after World War II, was arguably a
has-been global power, whereas Argentina, achieving its independence from Spain for only
100 years, was trying to be a regional power.
Both the United Kingdom and Argentina had strong territorial linkages to the islands dating
back hundreds of years. Tracing back to 1833 when Britain claimed the islands, Argentina has
ever since disputed that claim of sovereignty, and was unlikely to give up its position.
The primary problems of this conflict were the Argentine Junta’s anticipation to gain
support and legitimacy from citizens by claiming a territory that held a strong emotional tie
to the country, and Britain’s firm response to the territorial aggression of Argentina under
Margaret Thatcher’s inflexible policy on diplomats.

3.1.1. Argentina
In the period leading up to the war, Argentina suffered a shift in political power. The
Argentine military seized political power during the March 1976 coup against President Isabel
Peron, opening an era of state terrorism against civilians. The period, with the new dictators
taking full advantage of torture, extrajudicial murder and systematic forced disappearances to
control civilians was labeled as “a Dirty War”. (Blakeley, 2009)
Following the transfer of power between military dictators General Jorge Rafael Videla and
General Roberto Eduardo Viola in March 1981, Argentina was amid devastating economic
crisis and large-scale civil strife against the military junta that had been ruling the country
since 1976.
A further change in the Argentine military regime occurred when General Leopoldo Galtieri
took office as the head of the junta, bringing to office a new junta with his companies, the
bellicose navy admiral Jorge Isaac Anaya, and the circumspect air force brigadier Basilio Lami
Dozo. Anaya was a main architect and supporter of military solutions for the long-standing
claim over the islands. Dictatorship continued, the new regime failed to improve situations
within the country, and even worse. Before Argentina started the Falklands War, it experienced
inflation climbing to over 600%, while GDP fell by 11.4%, manufacturing output by 22.9% and
real wages by 19.2%. (Boughton, 2001) Under the brutal but inept ruling of the junta which
led to serious ongoing human rights violations and enormous economic troubles, the ruling
group was losing political legitimacy. The Galtieri government was subject to rapidly growing
opposition from the people. They were forced to respond.
By opting for military actions, the Galtieri government believed the retrieve of the islands
would reunite Argentines due to patriotic fever. The Falkland Islands was believed to be a
homeland and was a whole with the Argentina continent. There existed a historical belief of
sovereignty claim in the heart of many Argentines. Thus, the issue of territorial sovereignty
was negligible and essential, predictably supportive to maintain the current government if the
Galtieri government won the fight.
Once the war of recovery started, a long-established nationalistic feeling of Argentines
toward the islands would mobilize public attitude and temporarily divert public attention
from domestic economic and human rights problems. Retrieve of Falklands Island would
supposedly bolster the dwindling legitimacy of the Junta.

3.1.2. Britain

11
 Meanwhile, Britain's first female prime minster, Margaret Thatcher, was also facing sharp
criticism from both her Conservative Party and the British public. After being elected as prime
minister in 1979, she introduced a series of economic policies aimed at reversing Britain’s high
inflation and pulling the country out of recession struggle. In her first years, her deflationary
economic policy showed no signs of recovery for Britain, but instead were savage government
spending cuts, decline in the manufacturing industry and rising unemployment, which waned
her popularity, pointing to an early exit for the leader.
The Falkland Islands, a long-disputed region where occupied considerable percent of British
citizens, would be a perfect choice for Thatcher to demonstrate national power and save her
image.
To Britain, its claims over the territory were both intangible and tangible. Intangible factors
included sovereignty and identity value, through the presence of islands which were
emotionally tied to the British population. Tangible claims were values of possible resources
(e.g., water resources) and inhabitants demonstrated on the site. For either way, the issue of
territorial sovereignty claims deemed important, as would be looked upon with greatest care.
(Hensel and Mitchell, 2005)
Margaret Thatcher could show her indomitable will in fighting for the Falkland Islands in
the name of morality: to save the Falkland Islanders from rampaging Argentines
Thus, for both countries, sovereignty of the Falkland Islands is linked to the survival of
rulers and symbol for nation’s identity, a crucial factor which eventually led to conflict and
revenge. Neither Britain nor Argentina admits the other’s claim of sovereignty and had left
little room for compromise. (Levy and Vakili, 1992) Both governments would lose support and
credit of their people, thereby threatening the legitimacy of the regime if they make
concessions. Therefore, there was no retreat.

3.2. Argentine-Britain Dispute

The dispute of sovereignty of the Falkland Islands started several centuries ago and was
again raised in the 1960s.
In 1965, the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 2065, recognizing the
existence of a dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom concerning sovereignty
over the Malvinas/Falkland Islands. Also acknowledged that the case of Falkland Island is
covered in United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514, which is framed in a colonial
situation. It requested the two governments to proceed with negotiations to find a peaceful
solution with the consideration of the interests of inhabitants of the islands and the provisions
and objectives expressed in Resolution 1514 (XV), which aimed at terminating all forms of
colonialism. (UN Resolution 1514 XV, 1960)
Starting in 1966, Argentina and Britain opened their diplomatic channels and started
negotiations due to UN Assembly pressure. In 1968, the Falkland Islands Emergency
Committee was set up in response to secret lobby between the UK and Argentine Governments
on behalf of islanders’ rights. Negotiations encompassed the possibility of a transfer of
sovereignty. In April, the Foreign Secretary of the UK assured the House of Commons that the
interests of the population of the island were paramount in any discussions with Argentina.
In 1971, the Communication Agreement was signed by the British and Argentine
government whereby external forces would be provided to the Island by Argentina. LADE, a

12
state-owned airline operated by the Argentine Air Force, was established to link the islands.
Britain promised to provide vessel from Montevideo but subsequently reneged. (Gompert,
Binnendijk, and Lin, 2014) Under peaceful communication there were minimal smokeless
conflicts. Islanders required to travel through Argentina were forced to carry Argentine
Identity Cards instead of British passports. The Argentine Government attempted to win the
support of islanders by agreeing to end the struggle for sovereignty claims while doing so.
In the late 1970s, the attitudes of the two governments appeared to shift. The new Argentina
government decided to make the islands central to their national goals to gain support from
nationalists within the country. The Argentine government’s position became increasingly
fragile as their economy faltered to a peak. Rapid inflation resulted in a need for the
government to divert public attention to national security. Meanwhile, Britain demonstrated
a lack of commitment and interest to the region’s material resources, as can be reflected
through its policy towards the Falkland Islands. From 1976 to 1980, the United Kingdom
declined its aid to the islands. Due to economic conditions that were greatly affecting the
nation, Britain devised a variety of formulas to accomplish its withdrawal from the South
Atlantic. It became a widely held policy that Britain’s overseas commitments must be reduced
in light of burdensome economic debt during recession.
From 1981, the conflict rapidly progressed to the genesis of war. In 1981, Britain
significantly amended its nationality code, bringing the British Nationality Act 1981 to stripe
the citizenship of many British Islanders. (Gompert, Binnendijk, and Lin, 2014) Britain’s
withdrawal of HMS Endurance gave the Argentine government yet another false token that
indicated a willingness for Britain to give up its sovereignty on the Falkland Islands. HMS
Endurance was an ice patrol vessel in the Royal Navy. Starting its service in 1967, it maintained
a UK presence in the Antarctic region and Falkland Islands. The withdrawal of Endurance from
Antarctic patrol further encouraged Argentina to gain control over the islands.
Due to the evening-increasing delicate economic instability and massive social unrest, the
Junta in Argentina decided to accelerate invasion plans from October to April. Argentina
exerted continuous pressure at the United Nations, raising hints of a possible invasion, but the
British government did not react, whether it might have missed or ignored this threat. The
Argentines assumed that the British would not use force if the islands were invaded. On April
2nd, 1982, the Argentine government invaded the Falklands.

4. Falklands War
13
4.1. Conflict Prelude
4.1.1. Argentina’s invasion of South Georgia
In face of severe economic turmoil and people’s long-term hatred of military government,
General Leopoldo Galtieri (de facto president) hoped to arouse patriotic feelings of Argentines
and solidify domestic dominance by carrying on military actions on Falklands. On 19 March, a
group of Argentine scrap metal merchants (which had been infiltrated by Argentine Marines)
raised the Argentine flag at South Georgia Island, which would later be deemed as an act of
invasion in the war.

4.1.2. British response

Due to Argentina’s sudden landing, the Royal ice patrol vessel HMS (Her Majesty’s Ship,
which means British Royal Navy) Endurance was dispatched from Port Stanley (capital of
Falkland Islands) to South Georgia. For the Argentine side, with the suspects that the UK would
strengthen the forces at South Georgia, the total invasion of Falklands was brought forward to
2 April.
For the British side, multiple actions are taken in response to invasive events happening at
South Georgia. On 29 March, ministers decided to deploy the Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) Fort
Austin south from the Mediterranean to reinforce HMS Endurance, and the submarine HMS
Spartan from Gibraltar (UK marine base), with HMS Splendid ordered south from Scotland the
following day. Coincidentally, on 26 March, the submarine HMS Superb left Gibraltar and it was
assumed by the press that it was heading south. These reports were speculated to panic
Argentine junta into invading Falklands before nuclear submarines could be deployed.

4.2. Course of War

4.2.1. Argentine invasion
4.2.1.1. Operation Rosario (Argentina’s invasion of Falkland Islands)
On 2 April 1982, Argentine forces carried on amphibious landings known as Operation
Rosario, on the Falklands Islands, which was met with small-scale defense organized by UK
forces at Falklands. After the surrender of UK forces, Argentine landing troops took full control
of the islands.

4.2.1.2. British Task Forces and imposition of Total Exclusion Zone

When the message of invasion reached London, the UK was intensely surprised by
Argentine attacks. After an emergency meeting of the cabinet, the proposal to dispatch a task
force for retaking Falklands was given consent to, which was also approved in an emergency
session of the House of Commons the following day. British military operations were given the
codename Operation Corporate and commanded by Admiral Sir John Fieldhouse. On 6 April,
War Cabinet was established, providing up-to-date battlefield intelligence and analysis, until
dissolved on 12 August.
Since, the UK government had no contingency plans for the sudden outbreak of total war,
the task force was composed of whatever vessels were ready for departure and were sent to
battle from UK naval bases of different places. The nuclear-powered submarine Conqueror set
sail from France on 4 April, while the main force of British fleet, two aircraft carriers HMS
Invincible and Hermes, in company of escort vessels, left Portsmouth under people’s

14
expectations. Plenty of civil vessels were requisitioned by the UK government and missioned
to carry landing troops and supplies. The whole task force eventually comprised: 43 Royal
Navy vessels, 22 Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships and merchant ships.
The first obstacle lying in front of British task force is the extreme lack of deployable air
force units to establish air dominance over the battlefield, as 42 Sea Harriers held responsible
of all their air combat operations. What they confronted was a modern air force in possession
of experienced pilots and advanced fighters and attackers including Mirage Three and Super
Etendard imported from France. More importantly, the British lacked airborne early warning
aircraft which provided long-range detection of enemy aircraft.
By mid-April, British Air Force stationed at Ascension Island with strategic bombers Vulcan
and oil tankers. The main British naval task force arrived at Ascension to prepare for active
service with merely a small force missioned to recapture South Georgia. Also, Total Exclusion
Zone was declared by the UK, which covers the area of two hundred nautical miles from
Falklands Islands.

4.2.1.3. United Nations Security Council Resolution 502

On 31 March 1982, based on impartial intelligence, the Argentine ambassador to the UN,
Eduardo Roca, tried garnering support for Argentine military actions, while ended up in vain.
On 1 April, UK ambassador to the UN, Sir Anthony Parsons, was informed that an invasion was
imminent, and he should call an urgent meeting of the Security Council to get a favorable
resolution against Argentina. United Nations Security Council Resolution 502[5] was adopted
by 10 to 1 (with Panama voting against) and 4 abstentions. Significantly, the Soviet Union and
China both abstained. The resolution includes:
- Demands an immediate cessation of hostilities;
- Demands an immediate withdrawal of all Argentine forces from the Falkland Islands;
- Calls on Argentina and the United Kingdom to seek a diplomatic solution to their
differences and to respect fully the purposes and principles of UN Charter.
This was a significant win for the UK, giving it huge advantage diplomatically. The resolution
had avoided any reference to the sovereignty dispute (which might have worked against the
UK): instead it focused on Argentina's violation of Chapter VII of the UN Charter which forbids
the threat or use of force to settle disputes. The resolution called for the removal only of
Argentine forces, which justified Britain’s recapture of Falklands.

4.2.2. British counterattack

4.2.2.1. Recapture of South Georgia and attack on ARA Santa Fe
The first landings occurred on 21 April but were stopped by bad weather and alerts of ARA
(De la Armada Argentina, which means Argentine Navy) submarine Santa Fe. On 25 April,
Santa Fe was spotted and sunk by Wessex helicopter carried by British fleet. Eventually, South
Georgia Island was retrieved by the UK, which greatly boosted the morale of the British.

4.2.2.2. Black buck raids

On 1 May, Black Buck (a series of five in total) began, which launched attacks on airports
and radar equipment at Falklands, using Vulcan positioned at Ascension after several times of
air refueling. Black Buck successfully wiped out Argentine air forces and radar stations at

15
Falklands, while there were still opposing views that these operations made little
achievements but consumed a great deal of resources. It truly moved some Argentine units to
protect the capital, relieving the pressure of Sea Harriers.

4.2.2.3. Sinking of ARA General Belgrano

On 2 May, ARA General Belgrano was sunk by nuclear-powered submarine HMS Conqueror
on its way returning to port outside Total Exclusion Zone. Despite controversy over the
legitimacy of this attack. it factually eliminated all threats of Argentine navy which, except one
submarine, didn’t leave the port until the end of war, and freed up British units for landing.

4.2.2.4. Large-scale air attacks from Argentina

As airports at Falklands were not capable of supporting landing of jets, Argentine force was
forced to take off in the mainland and only could stay at battlefield for several minutes
considering fuel factors. Although suffered from large losses and running out of weapon
reserves, especially Exocet missiles, it sunk and heavily damaged plenty of British vessels and
surprised the world, among which the sinking of HMS Sheffield stood out. On 4 May, HMS
Sheffield, the most advanced missile-guided destroy of Britain equipped with air defense
system, was ordered forward to provide long-range radar detection for carriers yet set to fire
by an Exocet missile and finally sinking on 10 May. The destruction of Sheffield had a profound
impact on the British public and also to some extent stopped some potential buyers of this
type of destroyer. Afterwards, a large number of British vessels were sunk or crippled under
Argentine massive air attacks.

4.2.2.5. Land battles and surrender of Argentine forces

During the night of 21 May, the British Amphibious task groups with 4000 men from three
brigades landed on beaches around San Carlos Water, on the northwestern coast of East
Falkland. After the battle of Goose Green, Mount Kent, Bluff Cove, they took control of Stanley
with Argentine troops surrendering on 14 June. The retake of South Sandwich Islands on 20
June marked the end of Falklands War and also the restoration of British de facto control of
Falklands.

4.3. Casualties and Losses

4.3.1. Britain
Casualties: 255 killed, 775 wounded, 115 captured
Losses: 2 destroyers, 2 frigates, 1 landing ship, 1 landing craft, 1 container ship, 24
helicopters, 10 fighters, 1 bomber

4.3.2. Argentina
Casualties: 649 killed, 1657 wounded, 11313 captured
Losses: 1 cruiser, 1 submarine, 4 cargo vessels, 2 patrol boats, 1 naval trawler, 25 helicopters,
35 fighters, 2 bombers, 4 cargo aircraft, 25 COIN aircraft, 9 armed trainers.

4.4. Peace Settlements and Efforts of International Society

During the whole conflict, the formal diplomatic relations were suspended ， but two

16
countries remained in touch through shuttle diplomacy, which means third parties spoke on
behalf of one with the other belligerent. Though Peru(which represented Argentina) and
Switzerland (which represented the UK) went to great lengths to avoid war, all their efforts
went futile. A peace plan proposed by Peruvian president on 1 May was rejected by Argentina
after the sinking of the cruiser ARA Belgrano on 2 May.
4.4.1. Peace Settlements between Argentina and Britain
Diplomatic relations between the UK and Argentina were restored in 1989 after a meeting
in Madrid, where two countries signed a joint statement, no change in either country’s
position regarding the sovereignty of Falklands was made explicit.

4.4.2. Efforts of international society and position of third-party countries

4.4.2.1. Western countries
The UK earned political support from Commonwealth nations, among which the New
Zealand government expelled the Argentine ambassador.
France also fell to the British side by providing massive military support. The French
president declared an embargo on French arms sales and assistance to Argentina[7]. In
addition, France allowed UK aircraft and warships use of its port and airfield facilities at Dakar
in Senegal and provided aircraft training so that Harrier pilots could train against the French
aircraft used by Argentina.
Fearing that a protracted war would draw the Soviet Union to the Argentine side, US
President Ronald Reagan initially tried to mediate through “Shuttle Diplomacy”. However,
when Argentina refused the peace overtures, the US prohibited arms sales to Argentina and
provided military support for the UK including using satellites for detection.

4.4.2.2. OAS (Organization of American States) members

Argentina was backed up by most countries in Latin America except Chile which had
territory disputes with Argentina at the outbreak of Falklands War. As a consequence, Chile
stood on the British side in form of giving early warning intelligence about Argentine air
movements. It also managed to tighten up some of the best mountain regime in Argentina.

17
5. About the Committee
5.1. Special Rules of Procedure
In this committee, the Rules of Procedure in the most part of debate will follow the
Provisional ROP of the UNSC. However, several specific amendments would be added as the
table below:

Permanent Non-P Non-Council Special

Formal Debate Y Y Y N
Motion Y Y Y N
Point Y Y Y Y
Sponsor Y Y N N
(WP/DR/DD)
Signatory Y Y N N
(DR/DD)
Voting Y Y N N
(DR/DD)
Declaration N N N Y
Personal N N N Y
Statement
Motion for Y Y Y N
Negotiation
Negotiation N N N Y
Motion for War Y Y Y N
War Y Y Y Y
Directive Y Y Y Y

All delegation presented in the committee can be categorized as four types, Permanent
Members of the UNSC, Non-Permanent Members of the UNSC, Observer States (or the Non-
Council Members), and Special Delegates, which can be viewed in Academic Assignment.
For the first three types of delegation, all of them will participate in the conference as their
states’ representatives in the United Nations Security Council. Every delegation is assigned by
the respective leaders from each state and has been authorized to negotiate with any
presented delegation for international cooperation, in ways such as political, military, and so
on. However, the ratification of all proposals still needs to be conducted by their leaders and
(or) the legislative branch prior to putting into acts. Since the communication during the
sessions will be restricted, all delegations should send their directives to the dais in order to
contact their state leaders or any other department and individual. Once the dais received
replies of the directives from any individual or group outside the committee, the dais will
inform the delegates as soon as possible.
For special delegates, they will participate in the conference with the titles possessed priorly,
like the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. As the most powerful individuals in their own
governments or parties, these delegates would have the greatest power in issuing any orders
to the fellow department. Nevertheless, due to the restricted communication, all special
18
delegates still need to send directives to the dais for contacting personals outside the
committee room.
Although the special delegates’ positions empower them the freedom in critical decisions,
their actions inside the committee room of the UNSC are limited. Unlike the formal
representatives from each country in the United Nations who actively take part in the
discussion of specific committees, special delegates are invited by the dais to observe the
situation during the sessions directly. Therefore, special delegates are not granted to join
either the formal debate or the motions in informal debate of the meeting. However, the dais
will always acknowledge the right of speech for these delegates in the following ways.

1) Personal statement
In the informal debate when most delegations would frequently raise motions for
moderated or unmoderated caucus, special delegates can request for personal statement by
point when dais is asking for motions or points. Once the point is recognized, the dais will
grant the delegate 90 seconds to deliver a speech in front of the committee. During the caucus,
special delegates can also send pages to dais to request for personal statement. Once the
caucus ends, the dais will grant the personal statement immediately, before asking for motions.
Nevertheless, the dais will not recognize more than two requests of personal statement in
between motions (more specifically, passed motions) and each delegation can only raise one
request in each round while cannot yield speaking time with any other individual delegates,
including those in the same delegation.

2) Negotiation
In addition to the personal statement which only allow a single delegate to speak, special
delegates can appeal for negotiation with at least another one delegation to the committee.
Subsequently, formal delegates of the committee would choose to raise the motion for
negotiation and assign the participants of this negotiation as well as the time limits (the total
time limit will be divided up among each participating delegation). This motion will then be
voted and can only be passed with 2/3 majority. Once the motion is passed, multiple special
delegates from two different groups can be sent to the front stage to start the negotiation for
rounds with the given delegation speaking time. There will be no restriction in the amount of
rounds of speech as well as the time for each round of speech. However, once the overall
speaking time for a single group is expired, none of the members in this group may continue
the speech. Also, in each round of speech, only one delegate may address the statement, the
end of one’s statement also marks the end of one group’s round.

Apart from the personal statement and negotiation, the dais also adds another rule for the
committee to help all the delegates to understand the general situation of the front lines, which
is the motion for war:

3) Motion for war

Motion for war does not equal to motion for launching a war but the motion for focusing on
the current warfare. Since the conflicts in Falklands are still ongoing so that the relevant
delegations are allowed to carry on with the existing warfare as a method in maximizing their

19
interests. Meanwhile, it is also the obligation for the UNSC as the entire committee to ensure
the international peace and security by comprehending the situation and appeals from
different interest groups in order to push forward peacekeeping proposals.

Therefore, in the motion for war, the motioning and voting procedures are similar to the
motion for negotiation, requesting formal delegates to state the total time span of this phase
while also the rounds of war (eg. 20 mins in total and 4 rounds – 5 mins/round). This motion
also requires 2/3 majority to pass. Once the motion is passed, the dais will present the map of
current situation in Falklands on screen and start the countdown of the first round. During
each round, all delegates should remain in their seats to prepare for the further discussion or
for the directives. When each round is ended, the dais will show the situation updates through
the map and oral explanation and will announce the start of next round after the end of
presentation or asking any further motions or points after the final round. Normally, the dais
will only publish the situation updates at the beginning of each session or any urgent point so
the motion for war would provide the committee with the view on intensely updated
information.
Remember! This committee has a timeline which will start at 20:00 on 1982.4.5 (EST,
GMT-5, New York local time) once the first formal session of this committee begins. However,
the proceeding of timeline will depend on intensity of discussion and directives, which
ultimately decided by the dais. The dais will inform the committee about the exact date at the
beginning of each session when the situation update is issued. Delegates can also raise point
to ask for date at any time of the session.

5.2. Documents
For the directives from delegates, delegates must address the receiver of the directive. For
instance, the directive that suggesting for military actions shall be sent to a country’s leader
or the chief commander of the armed forces. The format of main content in the directives does
not have limit. But all delegates should remember that every action must be considered after
been taking place. Furthermore, the results of the directives will be announced only by the
dais when the receiver of the directives take action. Any information regarding the directives
that is not acknowledged by the dais will be considered as invalid. During the start of each
session, the dais will present the situation update regularly and delegates are able to raise
motion to discuss the update. For the emergency or important information, the dais may
inform the committee through situation update at any time in the session.
In each session, at least one working paper should be submitted to the dais. The content of
a working paper should be the conclusion of the statements that have been mentioned during
the conference or the expectation and idea for the future sessions. Although the observer
states are not allowed to be either the sponsors or signatories of any formal documents during
the meeting, the dais still strongly recommend all delegates to participate in the paper works.
For special delegates, declaration can be drafted as their statement or the expectation for
this conference. Special delegates must submit a declaration in the end of the conference to
address their groups’ preference in the draft resolution. The final declaration must be
submitted and will be presented by the dais before the end of debate. There will be no limit of
declaration in amount but should be submitted at least one per day by each group. The dais

20
strongly suggests delegates to form a declaration after the negotiation. Also, one declaration
can be sponsored by more than one group of delegates.
Throughout the conference, there will be no crisis time since whether the situation is
emergency that the entire committee needs to act will be determined by the delegates while
the dais only provide suggestion. When the delegates wish to act, the draft directive for the
Security Council is required. Once a draft directive for the committee is submitted, the dais
will make it public and suggest the immediate discussion as well as the voting procedure for
the draft directive.

5.3. Other Issues About the Committee

In all the formal sessions of the conference, electronic devices are prohibited in the
committee room. Documents and notes can be written on the paper during the session and
then typed into electronic version after the session. Also, delegates may raise point for
personal privilege to leave the room to write documents. Since most delegation would be
single delegation, please always remind the cost of leaving the committee room so you shall
ensure other delegates would help you with the record of the session.
During the sessions, the seat allocation will be decided by the dais. Normally, the special
delegates will be set in the back of the room and separated from each delegation.
Any updates to the Rules of Procedure may be announced by the dais at any points of the
conference in order to proceed this meeting effectively and efficiently. Be reminded!

21
Reference
Kochler, Hans (2001). The Concept of Humanitarian Intervention in the Context of Modern
Power: Is the Revival of the Doctrine of "Just War" Compatible with the International Rule of
Law?. Studies in International Relations. 26. Vienna: International Progress Organization.

Meisler, Stanley (1995). United Nations: The First Fifty Years. New York: Atlantic Monthly
Press.

United Nations. (2012) "Milestones in United Nations History". Department of Public

Information, United Nations.

United Nations. (1945). "Charter of the United Nations: Chapter VII: Action with Respect to
Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression". United Nations.

BBC News. (2013) "Falkland Islands profile". BBC News.

RAF. (n.d.) "Falkland Islands History Roll of Honor". RAF online survey.

Policy and Economic Development Unit, Falkland Islands Government. (2017). 2016 Census
Report. Falkland Islands Government.

Cawkell, M. (2001). The History of the Falkland Islands. Anthony Nelson.

The Guardian. (2012, February 2). Who first owned the Falkland Islands? Retrieved from:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/blog/2012/feb/02/who-first-owned-falkland-islands?

Law, J. (2018). A Dictionary of Law. Oxford University Press.

Triggs, G. (2010). International Law: Contemporary Principles and Practices. 2nd Edition.
LexisNexis.

Constitution of the Argentine Nation. (1994).

Blakeley, Ruth (2009). State Terrorism and Neoliberalism: The North in the South. Routledge.
pp. 96–97. ISBN 978-0-415-68617-4.118-146.

Boughton, J. (2001). "Silent Revolution: The IMF 1979–1989". IMF. pp. 328–329.

Gibran, D. (1998). The Falklands War: Britain versus the past in the South Atlantic. Jefferson:
McFaraland & Company, Inc.

Gompert, D., Binnendijk ,H., and Lin B. (2014). Blinders, Blunders, and Wars: What America

22
and China Can Learn, “CHAPTER THIRTEEN Argentina’s Invasion of the Falklands (Malvinas),
1982”

Hensel, P., and Mitchell, S. (2005). ‘Issue indivisibility and territorial claims.’ GeoJournal 64:
275-285.

Levy, J., and Lily, V. (1992). “Diversionary Action by Authoritarian Regimes: Argentina in the
Falklands/Malvinas Case.” in The Internationalization of Communal Strife.

Global Security. (2011). "The Falkland Islands Conflict, 1982". Global Security. Retrieved 25
December 2011.

Gold, Peter (2005). Gibraltar, British or Spanish?. Routledge. p. 39. ISBN 978-0-415-34795-2.

United Nations. (1945). "CHAPTER VII: ACTION WITH RESPECT TO THREATS TO THE PEACE,
BREACHES OF THE PEACE, AND ACTS OF AGGRESSION". CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS.
United Nations.

NZ History. (2013). "Falklands War cartoon". Ministry for Culture and Heritage.
Fremont-Barnes, G. (2018). "An A-Z of the Falklands War". The History Press.

23