UNHRC

BACKGROUND GUIDE
AGENDA
Confronting human rights violations amidst the
ongoing military rule and ethnic cleansing in
Myanmar
Letter From The Executive Board

Dear Delegates,

It is our absolute honor to welcome you all to the United Nations Human Rights Council simulation at
SJPUCMUN 2024. As your Executive Board, we look forward to seeing the energy, passion, and
knowledge you will bring to this committee as we tackle one of the most urgent and intricate human
rights challenges of our time.

This Model UN is not only about learning and debating global issues but also about honing your skills
in diplomacy, negotiation, and public speaking. The agenda before us, Confronting Human Rights
Violations amidst the Ongoing Military Rule and Ethnic Cleansing in Myanmar, demands a nuanced
understanding of geopolitics, international law, and the humanitarian crises that affect millions.

Please note that the background guide provided is meant to be a starting point for your research. It offers
an overview of the topic but should not be your only resource. The depth of your preparation will be
reflected in the quality of the debate, and we encourage each of you to thoroughly research your
assigned country’s stance, foreign policy, and legal perspectives. As this is a multifaceted issue, we urge
you to think critically about the legal, ethical, and diplomatic dimensions of the situation.

Remember, a successful MUN is not about competition but collaboration. You are not only representing
your countries, but also striving to find solutions to real-world issues. Your role in this simulation is to
guide the council’s discussions and propose resolutions that are not only practical but also visionary.
This requires leadership, teamwork, and the ability to think on your feet. We will not dictate the direction
of the debate, so it is up to you to shape the flow and content of the discussions.

We will be following the UNA-USA rules of procedure to ensure a smooth and effective simulation
(you can refer to the guidelines here: UNA-USA Rules of Procedure). Be proactive in building alliances,
lobbying for support, and engaging in meaningful debates.

As you prepare, break down the agenda into smaller subtopics, ask yourself critical questions, and plan
your strategy. Remember that Model UN is as much about learning as it is about leadership. Every
contribution counts, and we will be paying close attention to participation in all its forms—whether
through speeches, lobbying, or working behind the scenes to build consensus.

We are confident that this experience will challenge and inspire you. Let’s work together to create an
enriching and memorable simulation. We look forward to your spirited participation and thoughtful
contributions.

Thanking you,
Yours Sincerely,

V Vijay Harsha (Chairperson): +91 63661 22829

Varshith Sai (Vice-Chairperson): +91 810 537 9867

Shiloh (Rapporteur): +91 82174 89831

 I. Beginner’s Guide to Model UN

Question 1: What is the United Nations?

The United Nations is an international organization founded in 1945 to maintain international peace
and security, developing friendly relations among nations and promoting social progress, better living
standards and human rights by 51 countries. The United Nations has 6 principle organs.
The UN has 4 main purposes

● To keep peace throughout the world;

● To develop friendly relations among nations;
● To help nations work together to improve the lives of poor people, to conquer hunger,
disease and illiteracy, and to encourage respect for each other’s rights and freedoms;
● To be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations to achieve these goals

PRINCIPLE ORGANS OF UNITED NATIONS

Question 2: What is considered to be valid evidence in the Model United Nations?

1. News Sources:
a. REUTERS – Any Reuters article which clearly makes mention of the factor is in contradiction of the
fact being stated by a delegate in council. http://www.reuters.com/
b. State-operated News Agencies – These reports can be used in the 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. BBC (United Kingdom) http://www.bbc.co.uk/
iv. Xinhua News Agency and CCTV (P.R. China) http://cctvnews.cntv.cn/
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.
a. Government Websites like the State Department of the United States of America
(http://www.state.gov/index.htm ) or the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation (
http://www.eng.mil.ru/en/index.htm )
b. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of various nations like India (http://www.mea.gov.in/), People’s Republic
of China (http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/ ),
France (http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/ ),
Russian Federation (http://www.mid.ru/brp_4.nsf/main_eng )

c. Permanent Representatives to the United Nations Reports http://www.un.org/en/members/ (Click on

any country to get the website of the Office of its Permanent Representative)
d. Multilateral Organizations like the NATO (http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/index.htm ), ASEAN
(http://www.aseansec.org/ ), OPEC (http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/ ), etc.
3. UN Reports: All UN Reports are considered credible information or evidence for the Executive Board
of the Security Council.
a. UN Bodies: Like the SC (http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/ ), GA (http://www.un.org/en/ga/ ), HRC
(http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/HRCIndex.aspx ) etc.
b. UN Affiliated bodies like the International Atomic Energy Agency
5 (http://www.iaea.org/), World Bank (http://www.worldbank.org/ ), International Monetary Fund
(http://www.imf.org/external/index.htm , International Committee of the Red Cross
(http://www.icrc.org/eng/index.jsp ), etc.
c. Treaty Based Bodies like the Antarctic Treaty System (http://www.ats.aq/e/ats.htm ), the International
Criminal Court
(http://www.icccpi.int/Menus/ICC )

(SOME LINKS MIGHT CAUSE AN ISSUE KINDLY TYPE THEM ON SEARCH ENGINE)

IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS BACKGROUND GUIDE ISN’T A VALID SOURCE FOR

PROOFS. IT IS JUST FOR REFERENCE, DON’T RESTRICT YOUR RESEARCH TO SAME.

Question : How to prepare for the Model United Nations overview?

General Research and Preparation guidelines

There are three consistently significant parts of representative planning. They are: useful; meaningful;
and positional planning. Practical readiness outfits the representatives with essential apparatuses,
including a comprehension of the guidelines important to act in board of trustees. The meaningful
component gives preparation of explicit data on the subject regions. At long last, positional planning
requires the understudies to embrace viewpoints that are not their own. In light of this, the EB gives
three instruments to help you: this Guide to Delegate Preparation, Background Guides, and position
papers. Together, these will guarantee you will be prepared for the gathering. Past perusing and
understanding the material we have given, the more pragmatic experience you can gain through banter,
goal composing, making introductions, and so forth, the more ready you will be.

Meaningful Preparation
The Background Guides are a consequence of broad exploration and exertion with respect to the
Executive Board and are the establishment of considerable groundwork for every advisory group. We
recommend that you read them, talk about them, and read them once more. On the off chance that an
agent has not perused and ingested the data in the Background Guide, the person won't contribute
adequately to the board. An ambitious beginning on the Background Guides will empower you to
completely comprehend the subjects and start to tissue out your own thoughts. Advise yourself that you
should go about as policymakers, dissecting and shaping the data you have gotten into arrangements
and goals. Conversations with different representatives will likewise assist you with fostering your
thoughts. While the Background Guide will give a large portion of your meaningful readiness,
autonomous exploration is valuable, fulfilling and important for a fruitful gathering.
Positional Preparation
We expect representatives to receive the situation of a particular country all through the UN
reproduction. This is a vital component of the "global" experience of a model UN as it powers
representatives to analyze the points of view, issues, and arrangements of one more country at an
exceptionally major level. It is additionally quite possibly the most troublesome parts of MUN on the
grounds that understudies should go up against natural inclinations of their own public viewpoints and
authentic data. The position papers are the focal point of positional planning before the meeting. Albeit
generally short, we request that you invest energy and exertion on investigating and keeping in touch
with them.

Materials arranged by the EB are not intended to fill in for your individual exploration. All things being
equal, they ought to give a beginning stage, motivating you to ask yourself inquiries about the current
issues. The best-arranged agents are those that accept the given materials as the start of their exploration
and dig further into the theme regions. Past these materials are a large group of data administrations,
starting with United Nations sources. UN's assets regularly have ordered measurements, outlines, and
charts which you may discover supportive in understanding the issues. Most UN report communities
convey records of UN gatherings; maybe the most ideal approach to comprehend your nation's position
is to see it iterated by its diplomat.
Explicit assets to research include:

•Yearbook of the United Nations: The Yearbook is a decent beginning stage for your examination.
The Yearbook will furnish you with general data on what has been done on your theme during a specific
year. It likewise gives exceptionally accommodating references to past articles and goals.

•United Nations Chronicle: This magazine gives you general data on the procedures of the UN. Watch
out for exceptional reports on your theme region, which will advise you about the point and countries'
situations on it.
•UN Document Index: This record for all UN reports comes in three distinct renditions: UNDI (1950-
1973), UNDEX (1970-1978), and UNODC (1979-present). Contingent upon which of the three you are
utilizing, you will track down a subject record, a nation file, and an alphanumeric rundown of all reports
distributed (this is helpful in light of the fact that each panel has its own novel alphanumeric prefix and
accordingly you can track down every one of the records put out by a board of trustees during a specific
year paying little heed to the particular theme.

●UN Resolutions: This arrangement is both significant and extremely simple to utilize. The record is
aggregate from 1946, which implies that you need just check the most current list to track down every
one of the goals on your point that the UN has at any point passed.

•Other UN Sources: Depending on the subject, there may be extra pertinent UN sources. Check for
books and exceptional reports put out by the WHO. Past United Nations sources, notwithstanding, are
general wellsprings of data. Explore your school and nearby libraries. Look at diaries, periodicals, and
papers for more current sources. Remember to ask the curators for help.
•Books: Up-to-date books are probably going to give you a profundity and exactness that is hopeless
from UN sources or periodicals. Try to check library postings for bound materials. Book research, in
any case, can take a decent arrangement of time, so use prudence when choosing books.

•Periodicals: Periodicals are valuable for straightforward, current data on points (the Reader's Guide to
Periodical Literature and InfoTrack fill in as a record for these materials). Try not to anticipate that they
should supply you with the profundity of data you will require for the Conference.

•People: A regularly ignored source; individuals can help you extraordinarily in your exploration. A
few groups to remember are: bookkeepers, individual agents, personnel counselors, and your board of
trustees' Director, Moderator, and Assistant Directors. Not exclusively can these individuals help you
discover what you are searching for, yet they may likewise suggest new sources that you had not thought
of. Try not to spare a moment to call or email your advisory group Director.

•Embassies and Consular Offices: Contact the government office or consular office of the country
that you are addressing. These spots are happy to help you in your exploration via mailing factual
information and other unclassified data.
RESEARCH AID
(This is just a suggested pattern, you can research your way, individual differences makes us all special
but these suggestions may aid you in understanding where to start)

1. Start from knowing

a. United Nations
b. Your committee
c. Mandate of the committee (functions and power)
d. Bodies it works with
e. Final result of your committee
f. Funding channels

2. Know your Agenda

a. Historical background
b. Current trends
c. Future aims
d. International legal instruments

3. Within the agenda cover the following areas

a. Political
b. Economic
c. Social
d. Technology and its role
e. Arms and army strength
f. Legalities
g. Impacts and implications of (a-f) on historical background, current trends, future
aims and international legal instruments.

Note: International legal instruments are applicable on Nations for them to reach individuals they
should be incorporated in domestic law as individuals are subjects of it i.e. domestic law is applicable
on citizens. So it is crucial to understand the relationship between the two and bridge and the gap for
effective implementation.
 4. Know your country
a. Historical background, Current trends, Future aims of the agenda from your
country’s perspective.
b. Political, Economic, Social, Technology and its role, Arms and army strength and
Legal aspect related situation in your nation. (emphasis on High value resources,
crisis, support services, governance, political system and administrative
conditions)
c. Membership and participation in regional organizations
d. International organizations other than UN
e. Allies and non allies (friends and enemies) of your nations

NOTE: Research alone is not enough, as it would be simply reading out from the internet what is
needed is to“Analyze” i.e. to present your understanding of the research.
Addendum 1: Nature and Proof of Evidence

Documents from the following sources will be considered as credible proof for any allegations made in
committee or statements that require verification:

Reuters: Appropriate Documents and articles from the Reuters News agency will be used to corroborate
or refute controversial statements made in committee.

UN Documents: Documents by all UN agencies will be considered sufficient proof. Reports from all
UN bodies including treaty-based bodies will also be accepted.

National Government Reports: Government Reports of a given country used to corroborate an

allegation on the same aforementioned country will be accepted as proof. The documents stated above
will hold a binding nature of establishment.

Other sources like Wikipedia, Amnesty International, or newspapers like the Guardian, and so on and
so forth will not be accepted as credible proof; but may be used for a better understanding of any issue
and even be brought up in debate, if the information given in such sources is in line with the beliefs of
a government or a delegate.
II. Overview of the Committee

A. Introduction to the Human Rights Council

Human rights are inalienable entitlements established not by law, but by human birthright, and the
history of human rights has been shaped by all major world events and by the struggle for dignity,
freedom, and equality everywhere. However, human rights gained formal recognition only after the
inception of the United Nations (UN) and the establishment of the UN Charter. In its subsequent
attempt to “promote and encourage respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all”, the
UN established specific Charter-based and Treaty-based mechanisms. Charter-based mechanisms
derive from provisions of the charter whereas treaty-based mechanisms include the international
conventions and covenants, along with their respective treaty bodies, that aim to promote, protect, and
safeguard the human rights of all individuals. The Human Rights Council (HRC) is a UN subsidiary
body established under the UN Charter. It is the main organ of the United Nations (UN) responsible
for strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights around the globe.

The HRC is mandated to respond to urgent human rights crises and make pertinent recommendations
for the cessation of human rights violations prevalent around the world. It has a global scope and
works to promote all human rights and uphold the integrity of International Conventions and
Covenants on Human Rights. As a part of the treaty-based mechanisms, the Universal Declaration for
Human Rights (UDHR)1 was adopted by the General Assembly as a “common standard of
achievement” for all peoples and countries to pursue the protection and promotion of human rights.
After decades of standing alone as the only landmark document on human rights, it was joined by the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) 2, and the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)3 and its two Optional Protocols to comprise the
International Bill of Rights.
To further facilitate the implementation of the UDHR, the UN Secretariat established a UN
department responsible for overseeing its human rights program. This department, known as the
Centre for Human Rights, expanded its reach in the 1980s and moved from New York to Geneva. In
1993, at the World Conference on Human Rights, Member States created the Office of the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)4 with the responsibility of coordinating the human rights
agenda across all intergovernmental agencies and departments within the UN. OHCHR is responsible
for the substantive, logistical, and administrative needs of all UN human rights mechanisms, including
core treaty-based bodies, thematic working groups, and the HRC.

1 https://www.ohchr.org/en/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
2https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-economic-social-and-
cultural-rights
3
https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-civil-and-political-
rights
4 https://www.ohchr.org/en/ohchr_homepage
 Source: https://www.minorityrightscourse.org/mod/page/view.php?id=1626

B. Partnerships

The HRC continues to spearhead global efforts in upholding human rights by forging partnerships and

providing assistance to non-governmental organizations (NGOs), National Human Rights Institutions

(NHRIs) of member nations, and other civil society actors playing a role in safeguarding and promoting

human rights. These partnerships facilitate many of the HRC’s major initiatives, including providing

humanitarian assistance and aid through programs or frameworks targeting groups deprived of their

access to fundamental human rights and freedoms. NGOs that have received Economic and Social

Council (ECOSOC) consultative status and NHRIs can directly address HRC during discussions and

debates and inform it of situations occurring in their home states. Groups and NGOs that have not

achieved ECOSOC consultative status can also provide written documents on a Member State as part

of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) which serves to assess the human rights situations in all United

Nations Member States.

 C. Mandate and Functions

The HRC possesses a unique and comprehensive mandate outlined in General Assembly resolution

60/251 of 2006 on the “Human Rights Council” and guided by the principles of “universality,

impartiality, objectivity and non-selectivity, constructive international dialogue, and cooperation.” The

General Assembly mandates the HRC to promote universal respect for human rights and fundamental

freedoms; to address and provide recommendations on all, particularly grave and systematic violations

of human rights, and to promote an effective system of coordination within the UN system with respect

to human rights issues.

In 2007, the HRC adopted resolution 5/1 on “institution-building,” which established mechanisms and

structures to guide its program of work, rules of procedure, and other operational functions. The

resolution also established the format for the Special Procedures, the UPR, and the Complaint

Procedure, which comprise the main powers of the HRC.

Special Procedures5 are mechanisms that enable independent parties to report, monitor, and advise on

country-specific or thematic situations for the HRC. Each investigation has a mandate and a mandate

holder, who is typically a Special Rapporteur, an independent expert, or a working group, to carry out

the investigation. Special Procedures are empowered to undertake country or field visits, with the

support of OHCHR, and to bring specific cases and concerns to the attention of Member States. They

can send communications detailing accusations of violations or abuses of human rights, engage in

advocacy efforts, and offer technical assistance when possible.

III. Introduction to the Agenda

Confronting human rights violations amidst the ongoing military rule and ethnic cleansing in
Myanmar.
Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, has been grappling with deep-rooted ethnic and political
conflicts for decades, but the situation deteriorated drastically following the military coup on February
1, 2021. The coup not only overthrew the democratically elected government led by Aung San Suu

5 https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/other-sub-bodies
Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) but also ushered in an era of intensified repression,
mass arrests, and violent crackdowns on dissent.
At the center of these developments is the Myanmar military, known as the Tatmadaw, which has a
long history of authoritarian rule. However, the military's hold on power has also exacerbated an
ongoing humanitarian crisis, particularly with respect to the ethnic Rohingya Muslim minority. The
Rohingya, a predominantly Muslim ethnic group in a majority-Buddhist country, have faced systemic
persecution for decades, but the crisis escalated into what many international observers, including the
United Nations, have called a genocide.
The current situation in Myanmar is not only a domestic crisis but also a pressing international
concern. Widespread human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings, mass detentions, sexual
violence, and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of people, have drawn condemnation from
global institutions. The military's oppressive rule and its refusal to hand over power to a civilian
government have stalled democratic processes and left Myanmar isolated from much of the
international community.
The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) faces the daunting task of addressing this
complex situation. The council must navigate the challenges posed by the military junta’s
intransigence, the ongoing ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya, and the broader issue of Myanmar's
deteriorating human rights situation. This includes confronting both the immediate impacts on the
Rohingya as well as the long-term implications for Myanmar’s many other ethnic minorities who are
similarly subjected to violence and discrimination.
This agenda thus demands a multifaceted response: addressing the military junta’s responsibility for
human rights violations, creating pathways for accountability, and crafting mechanisms for
international intervention and support for Myanmar’s oppressed communities. The humanitarian crisis
extends beyond Myanmar’s borders, affecting neighboring countries that host large numbers of
refugees, especially Bangladesh, which bears the brunt of the Rohingya exodus.
This background guide will explore the historical roots, current dynamics, and international responses
to the military rule and ethnic cleansing in Myanmar, offering a framework for delegates to develop
solutions grounded in the protection of human rights and the pursuit of justice

IV. Historical Context

1. Colonial Legacy and Ethnic Tensions
Myanmar, known as Burma until 1989, was a British colony from 1885 to 1948. British rule deepened
existing ethnic divisions, as the colonial administration favored certain ethnic minorities like the
Karen and Kachin, while marginalizing the majority Bamar population. The British also employed a
divide-and-rule strategy, creating long-standing animosities among the country's various ethnic
groups.
The Rohingya Muslims, an ethnic group with centuries-old roots in Myanmar's western Rakhine
State, found themselves particularly marginalized during and after the colonial era. The British
encouraged immigration from British India, particularly present-day Bangladesh, to Myanmar, which
led to increased tensions between the predominantly Buddhist Rakhine population and the growing
Rohingya Muslim community.

2. Post-Independence Struggles and Military Rule

Myanmar gained independence in 1948, and its early years were marked by ethnic insurgencies and
political instability. While the new government recognized the citizenship rights of the Rohingya
under the 1948 Union Citizenship Act, subsequent governments grew increasingly hostile towards the
community. Ethnic minorities, including the Rohingya, sought greater autonomy, which often put
them at odds with the central government in Yangon (formerly Rangoon).
In 1962, General Ne Win staged a military coup, ending parliamentary democracy and initiating
decades of authoritarian military rule. Ne Win’s regime pursued an isolationist policy, nationalizing
industries and suppressing ethnic and political dissent. His government also introduced the 1982
Citizenship Law, which stripped the Rohingya of their legal status, denying them recognition as one
of Myanmar’s official ethnic groups. This effectively rendered the Rohingya stateless, despite their
centuries-old presence in Rakhine State.

3. The Rise of the Rohingya Crisis

The Rohingya Muslims’ status further deteriorated during Myanmar’s military dictatorship. Violence
between the Rohingya and other ethnic groups flared sporadically throughout the late 20th century,
leading to military crackdowns and displacement of the Rohingya population. However, the situation
reached a new level of severity in 2012, when deadly communal violence erupted in Rakhine State
between the Rohingya and the Buddhist Rakhine population. Thousands of Rohingya were killed, and
many more were displaced.
Despite Myanmar’s transition to partial civilian rule in 2011, when the military began to cede some
control to a quasi-democratic government, the situation for the Rohingya remained dire. In 2017, the
Tatmadaw (Myanmar’s military) launched a large-scale military operation in Rakhine State in
response to attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), a militant Rohingya group. The
operation led to mass killings, widespread sexual violence, and the destruction of hundreds of
Rohingya villages. More than 700,000 Rohingya fled to Bangladesh, triggering one of the largest
refugee crises in recent history.
The United Nations, human rights organizations, and multiple governments around the world have
described these events as ethnic cleansing and genocide. Despite widespread condemnation,
Myanmar's government, then led by Aung San Suu Kyi, defended the military’s actions, insisting it
was combating terrorism. The international community’s inability to hold Myanmar accountable, in
part due to China and Russia’s support for the military at the United Nations Security Council, has left
the Rohingya crisis unresolved.

4. The 2021 Military Coup and Its Aftermath

On February 1, 2021, Myanmar’s military staged another coup, detaining civilian leaders, including
Aung San Suu Kyi, and nullifying the results of the 2020 general election, which had been won by the
National League for Democracy (NLD). The coup has plunged Myanmar into further political chaos,
with the military resorting to increasingly violent crackdowns on pro-democracy protests and dissent.
The coup has also reignited fears of further ethnic violence, especially in Rakhine State, where the
Rohingya remain one of the most vulnerable communities. The military junta, now fully in control,
has made no effort to address the ongoing humanitarian crisis. Instead, the Rohingya continue to face
persecution, restricted movement, and denial of basic human rights, all while living under the constant
threat of military violence.

V. Global Impact and International Response

1. Impact on Regional Stability
The crisis in Myanmar, particularly the persecution of the Rohingya, has had far-reaching implications
beyond its borders, destabilizing the region and straining relations with neighboring countries. The
largest impact has been on Bangladesh, which hosts more than 900,000 Rohingya refugees in
sprawling camps in the Cox’s Bazar district. These camps, initially intended as temporary shelters,
have become semi-permanent due to Myanmar’s reluctance to create conditions for safe and voluntary
repatriation. The influx has overwhelmed Bangladesh’s resources, raising concerns about security,
economic strain, and the potential for radicalization among the displaced population.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), of which Myanmar is a member, has faced
criticism for its tepid response to the situation. The principle of non-interference in internal affairs, a
cornerstone of ASEAN diplomacy, has limited the organization’s ability to take meaningful action.
However, under increasing international pressure, ASEAN did adopt a “Five-Point Consensus” in
2021, calling for an end to violence and dialogue between all parties in Myanmar. Despite this, the
military junta has largely ignored ASEAN’s efforts, further undermining the group’s credibility as a
regional mediator.
Countries like India and Thailand have also felt the effects of the crisis, with both experiencing
inflows of refugees and cross-border violence. While India initially offered asylum to some Rohingya,
it has grown increasingly hostile towards them, citing security concerns and the risk of communal
tensions. Similarly, Thailand has adopted a more cautious approach, providing temporary shelter to
Myanmar refugees but avoiding direct criticism of the junta.

2. Global Response and Diplomatic Efforts

a. United Nations and International Organizations
The United Nations (UN) has been at the forefront of condemning human rights violations in
Myanmar, particularly in relation to the Rohingya crisis. The UN’s Independent International Fact-
Finding Mission on Myanmar concluded in 2018 that Myanmar’s military had committed acts of
genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity against the Rohingya. However, UN actions have
been hampered by vetoes in the UN Security Council from permanent members such as China and
Russia, both of which have economic and strategic interests in Myanmar.
The UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), where this issue is being debated, has passed several
resolutions condemning the actions of the Myanmar military. However, the lack of enforcement
mechanisms limits the impact of these resolutions. The UN's International Court of Justice (ICJ) is
currently reviewing a case brought by The Gambia against Myanmar for alleged genocide against the
Rohingya under the Genocide Convention. This legal route represents one of the few potential
avenues for holding Myanmar accountable on the international stage.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has also launched investigations into crimes committed
against the Rohingya, focusing on the forced deportations to Bangladesh. However, as Myanmar is
not a signatory to the ICC, jurisdictional challenges have delayed significant progress in these
investigations.

b. Response from Major Powers

United States: The U.S. has been a vocal critic of Myanmar’s military junta and has implemented
targeted sanctions against senior military officials, including freezing assets and restricting travel.
Following the 2021 military coup, the Biden administration escalated sanctions, calling for a
restoration of democracy and condemning human rights violations. The U.S. has also provided
substantial humanitarian aid to Rohingya refugees, focusing on shelter, healthcare, and education in
refugee camps.
European Union: The European Union (EU) has taken a similarly strong stance against Myanmar’s
military regime. The EU has imposed an arms embargo, targeted sanctions on military leaders, and
suspended trade privileges under its “Everything But Arms” (EBA) scheme, which had previously
granted Myanmar tariff-free access to the European market. In addition to diplomatic efforts, the EU
has also contributed financially to refugee aid, primarily in Bangladesh. However, despite these
efforts, EU sanctions have not been able to force Myanmar’s military into concessions.
China: China’s role in the Myanmar crisis is complex and shaped by its strategic interests. China has
historically supported Myanmar's military and remains one of its key allies, offering diplomatic
protection at the United Nations by vetoing stronger actions against the junta. China has significant
investments in Myanmar, especially through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which includes
infrastructure projects and access to Myanmar’s ports, resources, and markets. As a result, China has
called for stability in Myanmar but avoided direct condemnation of the military's actions. China also
fears instability could spill over into its southwestern border regions, complicating its position further.
Russia: Russia has similarly maintained close ties with Myanmar’s military, primarily through arms
sales. Russia sees Myanmar as a key customer for its defense industry and has opposed international
efforts to punish the junta. Russian officials have met with military leaders even after the coup,
signaling continued support, which undermines global attempts to isolate the regime.

c. Response from South and Southeast Asian Countries

Bangladesh: Bangladesh has borne the brunt of the Rohingya crisis, hosting the world’s largest
refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar. Despite repeated attempts to engage with Myanmar on repatriation
agreements, Bangladesh has seen little progress. Dhaka has urged the international community to
pressure Myanmar into ensuring safe and voluntary repatriation, but such efforts have so far been
unsuccessful. Bangladesh has also faced challenges in providing for the vast number of refugees, with
many Rohingya living in overcrowded, under-resourced camps, where they face risks of disease,
trafficking, and violence.
India: India’s response to the Rohingya crisis has been ambivalent. As a neighbor and regional power,
India has strategic interests in maintaining stable relations with Myanmar. Although India initially
allowed some Rohingya refugees to cross its borders, the government has since hardened its stance,
citing concerns about terrorism and illegal immigration. India has engaged with the military junta,
particularly through development projects in Myanmar’s border regions, while simultaneously
condemning the violence to some extent.
ASEAN’s Role: As Myanmar is a member of ASEAN, the crisis has put the organization in a difficult
position. The Five-Point Consensus agreed upon in April 2021 called for an immediate end to
violence, dialogue among all parties, and the appointment of a special envoy. However,
implementation of the consensus has been slow, with the junta showing little willingness to cooperate.
ASEAN’s non-interference policy has largely limited the extent to which its members can intervene
directly in Myanmar’s internal affairs.

d. Ongoing Humanitarian and Diplomatic Challenges

The global response to the crisis in Myanmar has highlighted the challenges of confronting a military
regime with powerful international allies. Humanitarian assistance has been vital in alleviating some
suffering, but the lack of coordinated diplomatic pressure and geopolitical divisions in the UN
Security Council have limited efforts to end the violence or hold the military accountable. In the
absence of strong, unified global action, the Rohingya and other oppressed communities in Myanmar
continue to suffer, trapped in a cycle of violence, displacement, and statelessness.
This complex web of geopolitical interests, refugee crises, and humanitarian concerns makes
resolving the crisis in Myanmar a critical test for the international community’s commitment to
human rights and justice.

VI. Legal Frameworks

The international community has several legal frameworks aimed at addressing human rights
violations, ethnic cleansing, and mass atrocities such as those occurring in Myanmar. These
frameworks form the basis for holding Myanmar accountable for the persecution of the Rohingya and
other abuses under military rule. Here are some key international legal mechanisms relevant to the
situation:

1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)

The UDHR is a foundational document that establishes the basic human rights everyone is entitled to,
including freedom from persecution, the right to life, liberty, and equality before the law. Myanmar's
ongoing human rights violations, including the disenfranchisement and forced displacement of the
Rohingya, are clear violations of these universal principles.

2. Genocide Convention
Myanmar is a signatory to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide, which prohibits genocide and obliges states to prevent and punish such acts. Reports from
the UN and international bodies suggest that Myanmar's military actions, including mass killings and
systematic efforts to destroy the Rohingya community, may amount to genocide under this
convention. Legal proceedings, such as The Gambia’s case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ),
are based on these allegations.

3. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)

Although Myanmar has not ratified the ICCPR, its principles represent customary international law.
The covenant protects fundamental human rights, such as freedom of movement and the right to life.
The Myanmar government’s systemic restrictions on the Rohingya’s mobility, as well as military
atrocities, clearly violate these protections.
4. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD)
Myanmar ratified the ICERD, which mandates the elimination of racial discrimination and the
protection of minority groups. The systematic targeting of the Rohingya based on their ethnicity and
religion violates this convention. Their exclusion from citizenship and continuous persecution
exemplify institutional racial discrimination.
5. International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
IHL, also known as the laws of war, applies to both international and internal conflicts. It prohibits
targeting civilians and collective punishment. Myanmar’s military campaigns against the Rohingya
and other ethnic minorities, including the widespread destruction of villages and civilian casualties,
violate these principles. While Myanmar’s situation is classified as an internal conflict, the state is still
bound by humanitarian law in its treatment of civilian populations.
6. Responsibility to Protect (R2P)
The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is a global political commitment to prevent genocide, war
crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. It emphasizes that a state has a duty to protect
its population from such atrocities. In cases where the state fails or is complicit, the international
community has a responsibility to intervene through diplomatic or, if necessary, coercive measures.
Myanmar’s failure to protect the Rohingya and its active role in their persecution have invoked
discussions about international intervention under R2P.
7. International Criminal Court (ICC)
Though Myanmar is not a party to the Rome Statute, the ICC has launched an investigation into the
forced deportation of Rohingya into Bangladesh, which is a party to the Statute. This investigation
allows the court to address potential crimes against humanity, such as mass displacement, even though
Myanmar itself is outside the ICC's jurisdiction. The investigation into the mass exodus and potential
war crimes has garnered international attention and could set a precedent for accountability.
8. International Court of Justice (ICJ)
The ICJ is currently addressing a case brought by The Gambia against Myanmar, accusing the
country of violating the Genocide Convention through its actions against the Rohingya. The court has
issued provisional measures, requiring Myanmar to take steps to prevent genocide and report on its
efforts. This case represents a significant international legal response to the crisis and may lead to
further legal actions if Myanmar fails to comply.
9. UN Human Rights Mechanisms
Various UN Human Rights Council mechanisms have been deployed to address Myanmar’s
violations, including:
• Special Rapporteurs: Investigating and reporting on human rights conditions in Myanmar,
despite the state’s lack of cooperation.
• Independent Fact-Finding Mission: Established to investigate the 2017 atrocities, the
mission concluded that Myanmar’s military actions could constitute genocide, crimes against
humanity, and war crimes. These findings have served as a basis for international legal
actions.

10. Regional Legal Frameworks (ASEAN)

As a member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Myanmar is subject to
regional diplomatic and legal pressures, though ASEAN’s non-interference principle has limited its
intervention capacity. However, ASEAN has attempted to address the crisis through diplomatic
channels, most notably by issuing a Five-Point Consensus in 2021 aimed at restoring peace after the
military coup. While ASEAN’s legal mechanisms for human rights enforcement are limited, its
diplomatic role is significant in shaping regional responses.

VII. QARMA (Questions A Resolution Must Answer)

1. What strategies should the international community adopt to protect vulnerable
populations in Myanmar, and what forms of intervention would be most effective and
appropriate in the current context?
2. How can accountability for human rights violations be ensured, and what mechanisms
might be used to promote justice while considering the political, legal, and diplomatic
challenges involved?
3. What conditions need to be met for the safe and sustainable return of displaced
populations, and how can their rights and security be guaranteed in the process of
reintegration?
4. In what ways can regional and global actors contribute to stabilizing Myanmar, and how
can international cooperation be strengthened to balance humanitarian concerns with
geopolitical realities?
5. What forms of support and assistance are most crucial in addressing the immediate and
long-term needs of affected communities, and how can international aid be delivered
without exacerbating internal tensions or undermining sovereignty?
6. How can the underlying social, political, and economic factors contributing to the crisis
be addressed to create a lasting solution, and what role should both domestic reforms
and international influence play in shaping Myanmar’s future?