Mod5ExTeachingNote08R0002.pdf

Module 5

Exercise Cerulean Angel 1

Instructor Notes

INTRODUCTION

This is the second role play exercise set in the mythical region of Cerulea. It should be familiar to most of you as it has been used on previous PASS courses and the former EP.

The context for the exercise is a humanitarian crisis in Denabia following armed conflict between rival ethnic groups. Students are required to draft a UN Security Council Resolution that will authorize and safeguard a humanitarian rescue operation in Garchuk and provide for a continuing cease-fire during which a long term peace process can be negotiated. The exercise is set in 2009.

All the common exercise instructions are included in the Cerulean Angel Problem booklet which is available on the PASS exercises intranet site. Background briefing material on the Cerulean region was already issued with Ex Cold Turkey material.

Cerulean Angel Roles booklets are also available on the exercises’ site. All of these documents should be studied before students are briefed on the exercise.

AIM & OBJECTIVES

The aim of Cerulean Angel is to provide students with insights into international decision making processes involved in seeking agreement on a military intervention in a humanitarian crisis situation. Specific objectives are as follows:

• To understand the difficulties involved in reaching agreement on international military intervention

• To provide insights into UN Security Council processes and decision making

• To provide insights into the practical problems confronting international security policy makers

• To practice discussion, negotiation and problem solving skills.

TIMETABLE

Please note that PASS 06-1 Module 5 is a “short” week with no seminar sessions on Monday or Wednesday.

Fri 17 Feb – expected date for the issue of exercise materials to seminar leaders

Tue 21 Feb – Seminar leaders brief seminars and issue Cerulean Angel Problem booklet.

Thu 23 Feb – assign exercise roles

Fri 24 Feb – Conduct exercise, suggested timings:

• Pre seminar – put out name tents

• 10 min – address any outstanding queries

• 2 hours 10 min – exercise discussion and decision making, production of draft resolution. (to include break)

• 20 min – presentation to seminar leader and debrief

• 20 min – seminar administration, Module 5 schedule, readings etc.

EXERCISE PLAY

Seminar members play delegates at an informal UN session under the chairmanship of the Ukrainian representative, the current Security Council President. The meeting will seek to agree on a course of action in Denabia before a formal Security Council session.

Students are required to produce a draft, outline United Nations’ Security Council Resolution that contains enough detail to resolve the current crisis.

Pre-class preparation is essential. In addition to studying their roles, students must be familiar with the exercise scenario and the UN-specific material in the exercise booklet.

Two sample Security Council Resolutions (1462 and 1483) and UN Charter Chapters VI and VII are included for reference.

The Ukrainian Representative will run the meeting. It is very important that individuals play the roles assigned to them, but some compromise will be necessary to have any prospect of a workable solution. The chair will need to facilitate this by allowing bi-lateral meetings outside of the formal session when necessary. He/she will also need to delegate a couple of people to write up the draft resolution in time to present it to you.

The draft resolution does not have to be as detailed as the samples provided. They are included for guidance only, and are especially useful for “UN speak”. However, the content of the resolution is more important than its form. As a minimum, it should contain the following:

• A mission statement – what is the intervention intended to achieve?

• The nature of the UN mandate – under Chapter VI or VII?

• The lead organization – UN, alliance or “coalition of the willing”

• The tasks of the intervention force – note that a ceasefire and withdrawal of forces from the current line of contact has already been agreed (see Krakow Declaration in the exercise booklet)

A thorough discussion of the issues is more important than the actual production of a draft resolution, although I do not recommend telling students this prior to the exercise!

The reasons for the failure to reach an agreement can provide valuable insights and learning points. Sometimes a student will arrive with a “strawman” draft resolution prepared before the exercise. This can provide a useful focus for discussion, but should not become the only proposal for debate.

ROLES

There are 16 roles. Each representative has specific instructions from his/her government.

• Ambassador for the Ukraine

• Ambassador for the UK

• Ambassador for France

• Ambassador for China – played by seminar leader

• Ambassador for the Russian Federation

• Ambassador for Denabia

• Representative for the Kammarjan Peoples

• Ambassador for the United States of America

• Ambassador for Syria

• Ambassador for Mexico

• Ambassador for Bulgaria

• Ambassador for Cameroon

• Ambassador for Guinea

• Ambassador for the Federal Republic of Germany

• Ambassador for Spain

• Special Assistant to the Ukrainian Ambassador

The Seminar Leader normally plays a slightly inattentive Ambassador for China. In this role, you can veto unworkable proposals but should do little else. You should pick a capable student as the Ukrainian Representative, as he/she will be the President of the Security Council and will run this informal meeting. The other roles are representatives from the Permanent 5 members and current Security Council members Germany, Spain, Bulgaria, Syria, Guinea, Cameroon, Mexico, plus a Denabian ambassador and a Kammarjan people’s representative. The latter two delegates are attending the meeting by invitation only and have no voting rights on proposals. If you are short of seminar participants, you can delete the Special Assistant to the Ukrainian Ambassador and/or assign one participant to two roles eg: Cameroon & Guinea.

ROLE SUMMARIES

China: Played by Seminar Leader; UN and definitely not NATO. Cameroon and Guinea and other reps should be asking you if you would use your VETO. Keep them guessing.

Ukrainian: leads meeting. Coalition of the Willing (CotW) or NATO would be all right.

Doesn’t have to be European only solution.

US: Don’t antagonize Russians; For UK’s Mandate but not a UN led Force (rather NATO or OSCE, CotW) but not US lead UK: Support Germans but not French; canvas US for support France: European but not NATO; possibly support Russian’s OSCE; consider UN approved CotW Russian Federation: OSCE but not UN, prominent place in CotW; use France to break up US-UK-France deals Germany: CotW with Strong UN Resolution; meet with UK, Russia, US but don’t let Germany get the lead Denabia: PM wants NATO lead & Chapter VII. Canvas US & UK; no RUS or CIS lead Kammerjan Peoples Rep: Want UN led or OSCE, but Chapter VI (weak) instead of Chapter VII; no NATO; any ceasefire linked to long term Kammer Independence; Seek Russian support; perhaps France’s OSCE proposal Syria: Support Kammerjan rep. Consider other approaches, cooperate to achieve best solution Mexico: Work with Denab, UK, US. Consider and Coop. Quick answer to avoid more suffering.

Bulgaria: Propose a Coalition of the Willing with UN backing; work with UK, Russia, US

Cameroon: work with France, Russia. Ensure China won’t VETO. Quick answer to avoid more suffering.

Guinea: Work with France, Russia. Ensure China won’t VETO.

Spain: Be diplomatic. Strongly object to OSCE. CotW OK. Check with Permanent 5 for possible Vetoes.

Special Assistant to the Ukrainian Ambassador: Politically neutral. Timekeeper. Task organizer. Remind your boss to check offline with Permanent 5 for possible Vetoes.

SOME POSSIBLE LEARNING POINTS

• As always, there is no one solution to the exercise. The process is more important than the product

• What is the actual mission for the intervention force? Sometimes students will discuss the UN mandate without first deciding on the mission!

• Which Chapter of the United Nations Chapter did they use as a basis to act upon, VI or VII? (Should be VII, since the protection forces will likely require the threat or use of force for the mission).

• Do your mandated forces have enough authority to conduct their mission?

• Why was a particular security institution chosen (OSCE, UN, NATO, coalition of the willing) as the enabling agency?

• Ask for some examples of compromise and cooperation that helped to reach a solution. Did the participants realize that most of what is discussed in the Security Council is actually agreed to in informal meetings such as this?

• Do your participants understand the role of the Security Council President? Do they understand the Advisory Role of the U.N. Secretary General?

• Talk to students about the use of appropriate diplomatic language during the discussion. For example, veto wielding powers do not go around threatening to use their veto except in extremis.

• If a student has prepared a “strawman” (On Text Procedure in negotiation jargon), talk about the role of such documents in international and conflict resolution negotiations