RYAN-MUN Clubs

Presents

3 RIS-MUN
rd

Conference
Ryan Model United Nations Conference

United Nations
Human Rights Council
(UNHRC)

26th
27th
August
Contents of the
Background Guide

AGENDA: “Plight of refugees amidst the

Russia-Ukraine War with special emphasis on the
principle of non-refoulement”

01
Letter from the
07
Who are
All India refugees?
MUN Head

02
About the
08
Who are “internally
UNHRC displaced people”
and “asylum
seekers”?

03
Mandate of the
09
What is the
UNHRC principle of
non-refoulement?

04
Suggested
10
The Russia-
Pattern for Ukraine War
Researching

05
Proof/Evidence
11
Questions to
in the Council Consider

06
What are
human rights?

3rd RIS-MUN Conference

01
01 Letter from the
All India Mun Head
Greetings!
Respected Delegates,
A warm welcome to all of you to this simulation
of the United Nations Human Rights Council
at the 2022 edition of the Ryan International
School Model United Nations. Finally going
offline, we look forward to two days of excellent
exchange of ideas and problem-solving during
the conference.
All of you would be eagerly looking forward to
arranging your conferences in your schools. Be
your best and have a good and grand conference
at your branch so that you can proudly say that
‘Ours was the best amongst those conducted all
over India.’ Learn continuously and enjoy every
moment of the conference.
We heartily thank Chairman
Sir Dr. A.F. Pinto and Director
Madam Dr. Grace Pinto for
their vision and initiation of
the MUN at our branches.
You will decidedly learn much being a part of
the MUN community which exists worldwide.
Good governance, law, foreign policy, diplomacy,
geopolitics, economic issues and much more is
what you will learn about at these conferences.
Knowledge empowers and it would help you to
become vigilant and informed citizens of the
country and also global citizens valuing empathy
and helping others in distress.
The background guide helps you to start
your research. It gives you an idea about the
functioning of the committee. Of course, you
could add to what is already mentioned therein.
As diplomats, you would be courteous to your
fellow delegates and members of the Executive
Board. You identify the problems within the
agenda’s boundaries and find solutions to it
in accord and in harmony. Logical thinking,
knowledge of foreign policy and in-depth
research would decidedly help you to succeed.
Once again I welcome you all to this edition
of RIS-MUN and wish you all the best in your
endeavour. Hope to see many of you in Delhi this
November for INMUN.
Thank you for all your efforts.
Debjabi Bassu
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
02
02 About the
UNHRC
The UN Human Rights Council is a UN body tasked
with the responsibility of promoting universal respect
for human rights, essentially by addressing situations
where human rights are violated followed by positing
crucial recommendations to the UN member states.
The Council investigates allegations of breaches of
human rights in United Nations member states and
addresses thematic human rights issues like freedom
of association and assembly, freedom of expression,
freedom of belief and religion, women’s rights, LGBT
rights and the rights of racial and ethnic minorities.
The Human Rights Council was established in 2006
following a resolution by the General Assembly,
at the same time when the UN closed the former
Commission on Human Rights.
The Council is composed of 47 Member-States
elected from the UN General Assembly for staggered
three-year terms, with a specified number of seats
going to each major geographic region. General
Assembly Resolution 60/251 provides that Member
States should be elected considering “the contribution
of candidates to the promotion and protection of
human rights”. Elected members are expected to
uphold the highest standards in the promotion and
protection of human rights, special rapporteurs, as
well as the working groups for different countries and
thematic human rights issues.
The UNHRC holds regular sessions three times a
year, in March, June, and September. The UNHRC
can decide at any time to hold a special session to
address human rights violations and emergencies, at
the request of one-third of the member states.
The Council has been granted a wide mandate to
justify the importance of the responsibility it has been
vested with. It works actively to ensure the fulfillment
of its duties and has been one of the most ardent
contributors towards world peace amongst United
Nations bodies.
In 2021 alone, the Council extended the mandates of
17 Special Procedures and investigative bodies and
created seven new mandates:
• An accountability project on Sri Lanka
• A monitoring mission in Belarus
• A Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied
Palestinian Territory and Israel
• A Special Rapporteur for Afghanistan
• A racial justice body addressing systemic racism in
law enforcement around the globe
• A Special Rapporteur on climate change
• An investigative body for Ethiopia
Additional Links
https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/about-council
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/
HRBodies/HRCouncil/AboutHRC.doc
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
03
03 Mandate of the
UNHRC
The Council serves as a forum for dialogue among
States with input from other stakeholders. As a result
of its discussions, the Council may issue resolutions
calling on States to take specific actions or uphold
certain principles or it may create mechanisms to
investigate or monitor questions of concern.
The Human Rights Council has created or renewed
the mandates of various “special procedures.” The
special procedures are experts appointed to monitor
human rights around priority themes or in specific
countries with serious human rights problems. The
special procedures may be individual experts (“special
rapporteurs” or “independent experts”) or working
groups.
The Council also manages the Universal Periodic
Review, a process through which each UN Member
State’s overall human rights record is reviewed.
In addition, the Council receives complaints alleging
patterns of human rights violations which are
considered by the Working Group on Communications
and may be referred to the Working Group on
Situations. The Working Group on Situations reports
substantiated claims of consistent patterns of gross
violations to the Council and makes recommendations
for action.
The UNGA Resolution that established the UNHRC
(A/RES/60/251), adopted on 3 April 2006, lists the
exact powers of the UNHRC in detail. The first link
below leads to that document.
Additional Links
https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/
N05/502/66/PDF/N0550266.pdf?OpenElement
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
04
04 Suggested Pattern
for Researching
The most efficient way to go about researching is to
start with the basics first: understanding the United
Nations and the committee/council which is being
simulated. Start with revising the purposes and
principles of the United Nations and reading through
the most important articles and clauses of the UN
Charter.
Move onto reading about your council/committee
which is the UNHRC in our case. Read about its
background, its establishment, its purpose, its
workings and its mechanisms, and most importantly:
its mandate, all of which can be dug up with a simple
Google search. The mandate is supremely important;
it tells you what the objectives & functions of the
committee are, and most importantly, it tells you what
it can and cannot do.
Do keep in mind that the clauses in your resolutions
and the content of your speeches geared towards
solutions stand invalid if they do not correspond to the
mandate, so it is very important to make sure you are
thorough with it.
Once the background work about the committee
has been done, start with historical work done
on the agenda. Watch YouTube videos, dig up
documentaries and read articles and web pages.
Understand the entire issue as a whole and then
break it down into small segments and sub-topics.
The Background Guide will help you decide what sub-
topics are important and need to be focused on thus
providing you with a hinting at the Moderated Caucus
topics that might be taken up.
Create arguments and 60-90 second statements for
each sub-topic making sure you have enough content
that do not run out of things to say. Make sure the
arguments and speeches you make correspond to
your allotted country. Understand its polity, economy,
military, culture, history, bilateral relations with other
countries, ideological position on various other
relevant issues related to the agenda, etc.
To understand your Foreign Policy, understand the
ideology and principles adopted by the country on
the agenda. It further includes studying past actions
taken by the country on the agenda and other related
issues – specifically analysing their causes and
consequences. Taking a look at your alliances will
also be very useful. See if your country is closer to
the western world (USA, UK, France, EU, NATO) or
if it leans towards the eastern countries like China
and Russia. This will give you the required direction
to pick a side. On most issues, both these sides
are in constant opposition and deciding which side
to choose, lets you know what your country will be
expected to speak in favour of and against. Going
against this can cost you points in the committee.
Make sure you go through the Background Guide
carefully. Research further upon the agenda using the
links given in the guide and from other sources such
as academic papers, institutional reports, national
reports, news articles, etc. Understand policies
adopted by different blocs of countries (example:
NATO, EU etc.) and major countries involved in the
agenda.
Finally, prepare a list of possible solutions and
actions the UNHRC can adopt on the issue as per
your country policies, and even better: keep properly
formatted operative clauses ready beforehand.
Remember, for Points of Order, you are often asked
to prove your statement. Make sure you read the next
section to understand what can qualify as valid proof.
This might sound like a lot of work, but the results you
will achieve will always be proportional to the effort
that you put in, and ultimately, the purpose of MUNs
is to learn and this is the most efficient way of going
about it from what we have experienced.
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
05
05 Proof/Evidence
in the Council

1. News Sources: 3. UN Reports: All UN Reports are considered are

a. REUTERS – Any Reuters’ article which clearly
makes mention of the fact stated or is in contradiction
of the fact being stated by another delegate in
Council can be used to substantiate arguments in the
committee. (http://www.reuters.com/)
b. State-Operated News Agencies – These reports
can be used in support of or against the State that
owns the news agency. These reports, if credible
or substantial enough, can be used in support of or
against any country as such but in that situation, they
can be denied by any other country in the Council.
Some examples are,
I. RIA Novosti (Russia) http://en.rian.ru/
II. IRNA (Iran) http://www.irna.ir/ENIndex.htm
III. Xinhua News Agency and CCTV (P.R. China)
http://cctvnews.cntv.cn/
credible information or evidence.
a. UN Bodies like the UNSC (http://www.un.org/Docs/
sc/) or UNGA (http://www.un.org/en/ga/).
b. UN Affiliated bodies like the International Atomic
Energy Agency (http://www.iaea.org/), World Bank
(http://www.worldbank.org/), International Monetary
Fund (http://www.imf.org/external/index.htm), ICRC
(http://www.icrc.org/eng/index.jsp)
c. Treaty Based Bodies like the International Criminal
Court (http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menustances/ICC)
4. Under no circumstances will sources like
Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org/), Amnesty
International (http://www.amnesty.org/), Times of India
(http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/) be accepted in the
Agency.

2. Government Reports: These reports can be

used in a similar way as the state operated news
agencies reports and can, in all circumstances, be
denied by another country. However, a nuance is that
a report that is being denied by a certain country can
still be accepted by the Executive Board as credible
information. Some examples are,

a. Government Websites like the-

State Department of the United States of America -
http://www.state.gov/index.htm
Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
http://www.eng.mil.ru/en/index.htm

b. Multilateral Organizations like the-

NATO (http://www.nato.int/cps/en/atolive/index.htm),
OPEC (http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/)

3rd RIS-MUN Conference

06
06 Introduction to
the Agenda
Plight of refugees amidst the Russia-Ukraine
War with special emphasis on the principle of
non-refoulement
The war between Russia and Ukraine has shaken
the world and the tremors are felt across continents.
None bear the brunt of the effects more than the
people who are displaced from their homeland. The
history of the war and the events that led up to it
go way back but it is formally accepted that the war
began in 2014 following the Ukrainian Revolution of
Dignity.
It was initially focused on the status of Crimea and
the Donbas, internationally recognised as part of
Ukraine. The first eight years of the conflict included
the Russian annexation of Crimea (2014) and the
war in Donbas (2014–present) between Ukraine
and Russian-backed separatists. It also included
naval incidents, cyber warfare, and political tensions.
Following a Russian military build-up on the Russia–
Ukraine border from late 2021, the conflict expanded
significantly when Russia launched a full-scale
invasion of Ukraine on 24th February 2022.
This has caused a severe refugee crisis in Ukraine.
More than 9.1 million refugees have left Ukraine
since the invasion started, while an estimated 8
million people had been displaced within the country.
Approximately one-quarter of the country’s total
population had left their homes in Ukraine. 90% of
Ukrainian refugees are women and children, largely
because Ukrainian men are banned from leaving the
country. By 24th March, more than half of all children
in Ukraine had left their homes, of whom a quarter had
left the country.
The invasion has caused Europe’s largest refugee
crisis since World War II and its aftermath is the first
of it’s kind in Europe since the Yugoslav Wars in
the 1990s. It is the largest refugee crisis of the 21st
century, with the highest refugee flight rate globally.
With reports of grave human rights violations, the war
has left the country ravaged and its people broken.
What are human rights?
Understanding the crisis and the role that the HRC can
play in easing it, begins with a basic understanding
of human rights. They are universal rights inherent in
us, regardless of nationality, sex, ethnic origin, color,
religion, language, or any other status. They range
from the most fundamental - the right to life - to those
that make life worth living, such as the rights to food,
education, work, health, and liberty.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR),
adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948, was
the first legal document to state that fundamental
human rights were to be universally protected.
The UDHR continues to be the foundation of all
international human rights law. Its 30 articles provide
the principles and building blocks of current and future
human rights conventions, treaties and other legal
instruments.
The UDHR, together with the two covenants - the
International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights
and the International Covenant for Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights - make up the International Bill
of Rights.
Human rights are inalienable and cannot be taken
away, except in specific situations and according to
due process of law. For example, the right to liberty
may be restricted if a person is found guilty of a crime
by a court of law.
Studying these documents or the major principles they
highlight, will be greatly helpful for building up a basic
idea about the purpose behind the creation of the
UNHRC. More information can be found at the
link below.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/what-are-human-rights
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
07
07 Who are refugees?
The definition of a refugee is given in the 1951
Refugee Convention. According to Article 1(A)(2) of
the 1951 Convention, the term refugee applies to any
person who, as a result of events occurring before 1st
January 1951 and owing to well-founded fear of being
persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality,
membership of a particular social group or political
opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and
is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail
himself of the protection of that country; or who, not
having a nationality and being outside the country
of his former habitual residence as a result of such
events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling
to return to it. However, this definition consisted of
a geographic limitation as it recognized a person as
refugee only in relation to events that occurred in
Europe before 1st January 1951. To overcome this
limitation the 1967 Addition Protocol Relating to the
Status of Refugees was adopted.
Problems with the definition
It is both outdated and ambiguous.
The first problem with this definition is the lack of the
definition of the term persecution used in the definition.
There is no definition of this term which increases
the ambiguity surrounding it. The only definition
of persecution is given in the 1979 Handbook and
Guidelines on Procedures and Criteria for Determining
Refugee Status published by the UNHCR. The
definition of persecution according to this handbook
is - Any threat to life or freedom, whose existence
must be assessed on the basis of both objective and
subjective criteria. This definition is extremely broad
and thus it is difficult to implement, and the Handbook
published by the UNHCR is not a legally binding
agreement thus making this definition non-binding.
In recent years, there has been a massive increase
in the number of refugees who leave their country
due to civil wars, ethnic and communal conflicts or
natural disasters. In such cases, only a few people
are actually able to prove a “well-founded fear of
persecution”, as per the demands of the Convention. It
does not cover a mass of people and focuses only on
the individual. There is no proper requirement given as
to how to decide on the same which is why countries
take case by case assessments which prove to be
an extremely laborious task when there are millions
of people in groups seeking refuge. Countries decide
to create their own set of rules for what is considered
as persecution and what is not, thus adding on to the
subjectivity and ambiguity of the term persecution.
Another issue is that according to this definition, a
person becomes refugee only after he/she has left
his/her country of origin. Thus, an individual who
has to cross an international border or is crossing an
international border is still not considered a refugee
and doesn’t have the right to be protected while
undertaking risky journeys to cross international
borders.
One more aspect of this issue is the fact that it is not
binding on any state to provide the status of refugee
who has fled due to fears of persecution. The state
is not bound to provide refugee status to individuals,
only the states which have ratified the Convention are
bound by it and even then, it isn’t legally binding. This
allows states to refuse the status of refugee to people
and since those people are not technically given the
status of refugee the principle of non-refoulement
doesn’t apply to them.
The delegates will be expected to address this
definitional problem and try and work towards a
solution that can deal with the issues outlined above,
both in the short-term and in the long-term.
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
08
08 Who are IDPs (Internally Displaced
People) and Asylum Seekers?
Refugees and internally displaced people are different
terms used for people who have been displaced
from their homes and create a distinction between an
individual who has left the country where they are in
fear of persecution and an individual who is displaced
inside their own country due to the same fears but
has not crossed the international border to move into
another country.
Internally displaced people (IDPs) have not crossed a
border to find safety. Unlike refugees, they are on the
run at home. IDPs stay within their own country and
remain under the protection of its government, even if
that government is the reason for their displacement.
They often move to areas where it is difficult for us to
deliver humanitarian aid and as a result, these people
are among the most vulnerable in the world. At the
end of 2020, some 53.2 million people were internally
displaced due to armed conflict, generalized violence
or human rights violations, according to Internal
Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC).
Some 7 million people have been displaced
internally within Ukraine and some 13 million people
are estimated to be stranded in affected areas or
unable to leave due to heightened security risks,
destruction of bridges and roads, as well as lack of
resources or information on where to find safety and
accommodation.
Attacks on civilian populated areas and civilian
infrastructure continue in eastern and southern parts
of Ukraine, endangering people’s lives and access to
basic services. In addition to new displacements and
secondary movements, return to places of habitual
residence where the military hostilities have ceased
have been observed.
Why is the distinction important?
Refugee status entitles individuals to certain rights
and international protection while being an IDP is
not a legal status because IDPs are still under the
jurisdiction of their own government and may not
claim any rights additional to those shared by their
compatriots.
When people cross an international border to find
safety during a crisis, they come under the protection
of the UNHCR. That means they are able to access
funding and resources of the UN. This gives them
access to camps built to provide shelter, and with food.
Schools are set up for young children and programs
are established to help process trauma. Most of all,
the legal benefits that come with the proven status of a
refugee is extremely important in itself. IDPs enjoy no
such benefits and are often left to their own devices,
stranded in their own war-torn countries without any
hope for aid or relief.
People forced to flee or leave their homes –
particularly in situations of armed conflict – are
generally subject to heightened vulnerability in
a number of areas. Displaced persons suffer
significantly higher rates of mortality than the
general population. They also remain at high risk of
physical attack, sexual assault and abduction and
are frequently deprived of adequate shelter, food and
health services.
The overwhelming majority of internally displaced
persons are women and children who are especially
at risk of abuse of their basic rights. More often than
refugees, the internally displaced tend to remain close
to or become trapped in zones of conflict, caught in
the cross-fire and at risk of being used as pawns,
targets or human shields by the belligerents.
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
09
08
Who are IDPs (Internally Displaced
People) and Asylum Seekers?
Delegates should read up on how support and aid
can be provided to IDPs and whether it is even legally
possible to do so without infringing on concerns of
state authority. Further research will provide more
insight.
Who are Asylum-Seekers?
An asylum-seeker is a person who has left his/her
country and is seeking protection from persecution
and serious human rights violations in another country
but who hasn’t yet been legally recognized as a
refugee and is waiting to receive a decision on their
asylum claim.
Seeking asylum is a human right. This means
everyone should be allowed to enter another country
09 What is the Principle
of Non-Refoulement?
Non-refoulement is a concept which prohibits States
from returning a refugee or asylum seeker to territories
where there is a risk to his/her life or the individual’s
freedom would be threatened on account of race,
religion, nationality, membership of a particular
social group or political opinion. The principle of
non-refoulement is the cornerstone of asylum and of
international refugee law.
Following from the right to seek and to enjoy in other
countries asylum from persecution, as set forth in
Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, this principle reflects the commitment of the
international community to ensure to all persons the
enjoyment of human rights, including the rights to life,
to freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading
to seek asylum. Every individual who is considered
a refugee was an asylum-seeker at one point, and
was only considered a refugee in proper legal terms
when their request for an asylum was recognized and
granted.
Asylum seekers often face challenges similar to IDPs
due to their lack of the legal refugee status. Owing
to the nature of the process of granting asylum and
recognizing refugees and the time that it takes, often
those who do actually fit the requirements of being a
refugee aren’t able to avail the benefits and aid that
comes with the status and are left hanging in a legal
limbo. Delegates would be expected to find a solution
to this problem as well.
treatment or punishment and to liberty and security of
person. These and other rights are threatened when a
refugee is returned to persecution or danger.
Non-refoulement has been defined in a number of
international refugee instruments, both at the universal
and regional levels. At the universal level, the most
important provision in this respect is Article 33 (1)
of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of
Refugees, which states that: “No Contracting State
shall expel or return (‘refouler’) a refugee in any
manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where
his life or freedom would be threatened on account
of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a
particular social group or political opinion.”
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
10
09 What is the Principle
of Non-Refoulement?
Also at the universal level, mention should be made of
Article 3 (1) of the UN Declaration on Territorial Asylum
unanimously adopted by the General Assembly in
1967 [res. 2312 (XXII)]. “No person referred to in
Article 1, paragraph 1, shall be subjected to measures
such as rejection at the frontier or, if he has already
entered the territory in which he seeks asylum,
expulsion or compulsory return to any State where he
may be subjected to persecution.”
Since the purpose of the principle of non-refoulement
is to ensure that refugees are protected against
forcible return to situations of danger it applies both
within a State’s territory and to rejection at its borders.
It also applies outside the territory of States. In
essence, it is applicable wherever States act. It has
been argued that the principle of non-refoulement
is not binding on a State outside its own national
territory, so that a government may return refugees
directly to persecution provided they have not yet
reached or crossed its borders. This claim is clearly
inconsistent with the purpose, and is contrary to the
spirit, of the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol,
as well as of international refugee law generally.
In order to ensure that a person is not returned to a
place where he or she would be in danger of violations
of certain fundamental rights, essential procedural
safeguards are required. Under international and
regional human rights law, persons with an arguable
claim that they would be returned in violation of the
non-refoulement principle have the right to an effective
remedy. This would at least require that the individual
needs to be informed of the transfer or return decision
in a timely manner and be able to challenge the
decision before an independent and impartial body.
Given the seriousness of the danger at stake, returns
must be suspended pending a decision. Importantly,
these safeguards need to apply in all cases, including
where a State purports to return people to an allegedly
safe country or has obtained diplomatic assurances
for the treatment of the person.
As States, particularly in the industrialised world,
intensify and coordinate their efforts to curb irregular
immigration, there is concern that the legal and
administrative measures adopted, including measures
to expedite asylum procedures and to shift the
responsibility for considering asylum requests to other
countries, may have the unintended result of placing
refugees in situations that could ultimately lead to
refoulement to their country of origin or other territories
where their life or freedom would be threatened. When
it comes to the establishment and implementation of
national procedures for the determination of refugee
status, measures are therefore required to ensure that
respect for the principle of non-refoulement remains
the guiding principle and ultimate objective of any
refugee protection regime.
The main question to be answered then is how
to develop, implement and overlook the essential
procedural safeguards to ensure that the principle of
non-refoulement is not violated. What is the scope of
the principle? How can the UNHRC contribute towards
ensuring compliance with the principle? These are the
key questions that must be answered.
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
11
10 The Russia-Ukraine War
A brief background
Historically, Russia and Ukraine were both integral
parts of the Soviet Union. After the dissolution of the
Soviet Union (USSR) in 1991, Ukraine and Russia
maintained close ties. In 1994, Ukraine agreed to
accede to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons as a non-nuclear-weapon state.
Former Soviet nuclear weapons in Ukraine were
removed and dismantled. In return, Russia, the
United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US)
agreed to uphold the territorial integrity and political
independence of Ukraine through the Budapest
Memorandum on Security Assurances.
In 1999, Russia was one of the signatories of the
Charter for European Security, which “reaffirmed the
inherent right of each and every participating State to
be free to choose or change its security arrangements,
including treaties of alliance, as they evolve.” In the
years after the dissolution of the USSR however,
several former Eastern Bloc countries joined NATO,
partly in response to regional security threats involving
Russia such as the 1993 Russian constitutional
crisis, the War in Abkhazia (1992–1993) and the
First Chechen War (1994–1996). Russian leaders
described this expansion as a violation of Western
powers’ informal assurances that NATO would not
expand eastward.
At the 2008 Bucharest summit, Ukraine and Georgia
sought to join NATO. The response among NATO
members was divided; Western European countries
opposed offering Membership Action Plans (MAP) in
order to avoid antagonizing Russia while US President
George W. Bush pushed for their admission. NATO
ultimately refused to offer Ukraine and Georgia MAPs
but also issued a statement agreeing that “these
countries will become members of NATO”. Putin
voiced strong opposition to Georgia and Ukraine’s
NATO membership bids.
In November 2013, a wave of large, pro-European
Union (EU) protests erupted in response to a sudden
decision made by Viktor Yanukovych, the then Prime
Minister of Ukraine, to not sign the EU–Ukraine
Association Agreement, instead choosing closer ties
to Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union. The
Ukrainian parliament had overwhelmingly approved of
finalizing the agreement with the EU and Russia had
put pressure on Ukraine to reject it.
Following months of protests as part of the
Euromaidan movement, on 21st February 2014
Yanukovych and the leaders of the parliamentary
opposition signed a settlement agreement that called
for early elections. The following day,Yanukovych fled
from the capital ahead of an impeachment vote that
stripped him of his powers as President.
On 23rd February, the parliament adopted a bill to
repeal the 2012 law which gave Russian language an
official status. The bill was not enacted. However, the
proposal provoked negative reactions in the Russian-
speaking regions of Ukraine, intensified by Russian
media saying that the ethnic Russian population was
in imminent danger.
On 27th February, an interim government was
established and early presidential elections were
scheduled. The following day,Yanukovych resurfaced
in Russia and in a press conference declared that
he remained the acting president of Ukraine, just as
Russia was beginning its overt military campaign in
Crimea. Leaders of Russian-speaking eastern regions
of Ukraine declared continuing loyalty to Yanukovych
causing the 2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine.
The Russian campaign for Crimea had already
started. On 20th February 2014 Russia began the
annexation of Crimea. On 22nd and 23rd February,
Russian troops and special forces began moving
into Crimea through Novorossiysk. On 27th February
Russian forces without insignias began their advance
into the Crimean Peninsula. They took strategic
positions and captured the Crimean Parliament raising
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
12
10 The Russia-Ukraine War
the Russian flag. Security checkpoints isolated the
Crimean Peninsula from the rest of Ukraine and
restricted movement within the territory.
In the following days, Russian soldiers secured key
airports and a communications center. Russian cyber
attacks shut down websites associated with the
Ukrainian government, news media, and social media.
Cyber attacks also enabled Russian access to the
mobile phones of Ukrainian officials and members of
parliament, further disrupting communications.
On 1st March, the Russian legislature approved the
use of armed forces leading to an influx of Russian
troops and military hardware into the peninsula. In
the following days, all remaining Ukrainian military
bases and installations were surrounded and besieged
including the Southern Naval Base. After Russia
formally annexed the peninsula on 18th March,
Ukrainian military bases and ships were stormed by
Russian forces. On 24th March, Ukraine ordered
troops to withdraw.By 30th March all Ukrainian forces
had left the peninsula.
On 15th April, the Ukrainian parliament declared
Crimea a territory temporarily occupied by Russia.
After the annexation, the Russian government
increased its military presence in the region and made
nuclear threats. Russia has maintained an iron grip on
Crimea ever since calling it Russian territory. Multiple
other clashes have been occurring since in Donetsk
and Luhansk with Russia backing separatists from the
side-lines.
The Russian Side and the Recent Conflicts
From March to April 2021, Russia commenced a
major military build-up near the border followed by a
second build-up between October 2021 to February
2022 in Russia and Belarus. Throughout, the Russian
government repeatedly denied it had plans to attack
Ukraine.
In early December 2021, following Russian denials,
the US released intelligence of Russian invasion
plans including satellite photographs showing
Russian troops and equipment near the border. The
intelligence reported a Russian list of key sites and
individuals to be killed or neutralized.The US release
multiple reports that accurately predicted the invasion
plans.
In the months preceding the invasion, Russian officials
accused Ukraine of inciting tensions, Russophobia,
and repressing Russian speakers. They made multiple
security demands of Ukraine, NATO and other EU
countries. On 9th December 2021 Putin said that
“Russophobia is a first step towards genocide”. Putin’s
claims were dismissed by the international community
and Russian claims of genocide were rejected as
baseless.
In a 21st February speech, Putin questioned the
legitimacy of the Ukrainian state, repeating claim that
“Ukraine never had a tradition of genuine statehood”.
He stated that Vladimir Lenin had created Ukraine, by
carving a separate Soviet Republic out of what Putin
said was Russian land, that Joseph Stalin extended
Ukrainian territory with lands from other eastern
European countries following the Second World War
and that Nikita Khrushchev unjustly took Crimea away
from Russia and gave it to Ukraine in 1954.
Putin has also claimed that Ukrainian society and
government are dominated by neo-Nazism, invoking
the history of collaboration in German-occupied
Ukraine during World War I, and echoing an anti-
semitic conspiracy theory that cast Russian Christians,
rather than Jews, as the true victims of Nazi Germany.
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
13
10 The Russia-Ukraine War
During the second build-up, Russia issued demands
to the US and NATO, insisting on a legally binding
arrangement preventing Ukraine from ever joining
NATO and the removal of multinational forces
stationed in NATO’s Eastern European member
states. Russia threatened an unspecified military
response if NATO continued to follow an “aggressive
line”. These demands were rejected by the US and
NATO.
The escalation
On 21st February at 22:35 (UTC+3), Putin announced
that the Russian government would diplomatically
recognize the Donetsk and Luhansk people’s
republics. The same evening, Putin directed that
Russian troops deploy into Donbas in what Russia
referred to as a “peacekeeping mission”. On 22nd
February, the Federation Council unanimously
authorised Putin to use military force outside Russia.
In response, Ukraine requested an urgent UN Security
Council meeting which convened at 21:30 (UTC−5)
on February 23. Half an hour into the emergency
meeting, Putin announced the start of military
operations in Ukraine. Sergiy Kyslytsya, the Ukrainian
representative, subsequently called on the Russian
representative, Vasily Nebenzya, to “do everything
possible to stop the war” or relinquish his position
as president of the UN Security Council. Nebenzya
refused.
The war and the humanitarian situation
The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine began on the
morning of 24th February when Putin announced
a “special military operation” to “demilitarise and
denazify” Ukraine. Minutes later, missiles and
airstrikes hit across Ukraine, including Kyiv, shortly
followed by a large ground invasion along multiple
fronts. Zelenskyy declared martial law and a general
mobilisation of all male Ukrainian citizens between 18
and 60, who were banned from leaving the country.
Russian attacks were launched on a northern front
from Belarus towards Kyiv, a northeastern front
towards Kharkiv, a southern front from Crimea, and
a southeastern front from the cities of Luhansk and
Donetsk. During March, Ukraine stopped the Russian
advance towards Kyiv. Amidst heavy losses and
strong resistance, Russian troops retreated from Kyiv
Oblast by 3rd April.
On 19th April, Russia launched a renewed attack
across a 500 kilometers long front extending from
Kharkiv to Donetsk and Luhansk. By 13th May, a
Ukraine counter-offensive had driven back Russian
forces near Kharkiv. By 20th May, Mariupol fell to
Russian troops following a prolonged siege of the
Azovstal steel works.
The invasion was internationally condemned as a war
of aggression. A United Nations General Assembly
resolution demanded a full withdrawal of Russian
forces, the International Court of Justice ordered
Russia to suspend military operations and the Council
of Europe expelled Russia. Many countries imposed
new sanctions, which affected the economies of
Russia and the world and provided humanitarian and
military aid to Ukraine.
The war has been accompanied by serious violations
of human rights. From 2014 to 2021, there were more
than 3,000 civilian casualties. The right of movement
was impeded for the inhabitants of the conflict zone.
Arbitrary detention was practiced by both sides in the
first years of the conflict. It decreased after 2016 in
government-held areas while in the separatist-held
ones it continued.
A report based on findings by the UN Human Rights
Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU) which covers
the period from 24th February until 15th May 2022,
shows a grave deterioration of the human rights
situation in the country with thousands of civilians
killed and injured, massive destruction to civilian
infrastructure and housing, arbitrary detention and
3rd RIS-MUN Conference
14
10 The Russia-Ukraine War

enforced disappearance, torture and ill-treatment and

conflict-related sexual violence.

The report documents that many of the means

and methods of warfare have been in breach of
international humanitarian law (IHL) rules governing
the conduct of hostilities. In particular, the principles
of distinction, proportionality and precaution, which
are aimed at avoiding, or at the very least, minimizing
civilian casualties and damage to civilian objects,
were not respected in numerous instances by Russian
armed forces and on a lower scale by Ukrainian
armed forces.

The report documents unlawful killings, including

summary executions of civilians that occurred in
more than 30 settlements in Kyiv, Chernihiv, Kharkiv
and Sumy regions that were committed by Russian
armed forces while they controlled these areas in
late February and March. As of 15th May, HRMMU
had received information about more than 300 such
killings. This figure may increase as new evidence
becomes available. In Bucha alone, HRMMU
documented that at least 50 civilians were killed by
Russian armed forces while it was under their control.
Cases of torture and ill-treatment of civilians are also
highlighted in the report.

It is these aspects the delegates must focus on. The

mandate and the purpose of the UNHRC should be
kept in mind while making arguments and points. The
primary concern shouldn’t be of the legality of the war
or the validity of the Russian claims. The UNHRC
only concerns itself with solutions on how to avert the
humanitarian crisis and help the innocent individuals
who face the worst effects of the war.

3rd RIS-MUN Conference

15
11 Questions To Consider

1) How can the definitional problem related to refugees Additional Links

be dealt with? How should persecution be defined? Can
the definition be made legally binding?
2) Can states be legally bound to provide the refugee
status to individuals?
3) How can Ukrainian IDPs and asylum seekers be
provided with aid and relief? How can the benefits of a
refugee status be delivered to them?
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/7/13/russia-
ukraine-war-list-of-key-events-day-140
https://edition.cnn.com/europe/live-news/russia-ukraine-
war-news-07-13-22/index.html
https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-war-ukraine-identi-
ty-history-and-conflict

4) What can be done to make the process of granting https://reliefweb.int/report/ukraine/new-report-un-human-

asylum to seekers faster and more efficient? rights-shows-shocking-toll-war-ukraine-enruuk

5) What is the scope of the principle of non-refoulement? https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/04/03/ukraine-apparent-

In what situations and to what extent can it apply? Can war-crimes-russia-controlled-areas
it be invoked in cases of rejection at the borders of the https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine
state?

6) How can the necessary procedural safeguards be

developed in nations that receive Ukrainian refugees?
How will such safeguards be designed and implemented?
What can the UNHRC do to hasten this process?

7) What can be done to reduce the number of human

rights violations occurring in Ukraine? Is it possible for the
UNHRC to find ways to ease the ongoing humanitarian
crisis?

8) How can compliance with international humanitarian

law (IHL) be ensured, given the current status of the
war? Can the principles of distinction, proportionality and
precaution still be observed? What can be done to ensure
that they are?

3rd RIS-MUN Conference

16