UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Introductory Letter
Greetings delegates, I would like to cordially welcome you to the Special Political and
Decolonization (SPECPOL) committee here at UCMUN 2013! My name is John Meyers
and I am thrilled to be directing you all this November. In this committee, there are two
topics up for debate, Kosovo: Culminating Independence, and Human Trafficking in Newly
Independent States. Progress pertaining to these two issues is currently in limbo at the
United Nations. The UN delegations in New York may be diffident in coming up with
resolutions, but I have no doubts that the delegates in this UCMUN committee will have
very many difficulties in introducing and passing one. Please be prepared with your country’s
position on each issue, and be eager to debate come November!
I am currently a 5th semester junior here at UConn, majoring in sociology with a
political science minor. I enjoy studying demographics in “salad bowl” nations like the
United States and I have a special interest in politics in autonomous regions throughout the
world, primarily those in Europe (as you may have realized reading the background guides). I
spent last summer backpacking through Europe, which included a week of talking to
university students and NGOs in Kosovo. Outside of UCMUN, I attempt to be as studious
as possible and stare at computer screens upwards of six hours per day. When I’m not
studying, you can find me playing pickup soccer or watching my beloved Chelsea Blues
dominate the beautiful game. I am also very passionate about modern and contemporary art,
and attempt to view as many avant-garde exhibits I can.
I hope that you learned a little bit about your country and the topics while writing
your position papers and I am eager to help you learn even more about these troubled
regions as we debate. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you run into any difficulties in
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Introductory Letter
your research, or are just generally curious about your country or one of the topics. All the
best, and I look forward to meeting you all at the conference!
John Meyers
UCMUN 2013 SPECPOL Director
John.meyers@uconn.edu
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Committee History
Committee History
The Special Political and Decolonization (SPECPOL) committee was introduced to
the United Nations as the Special Committee on Decolonization, operating as one of the six
subsidiary committees in the United Nations General Assembly, in 1945. The committee’s
original purpose was to administer the “Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting
of Independence of Colonial Countries and Peoples.1”
The role of SPECPOL has changed since its inception, as it was formerly responsible
for trusteeship and decolonization. Due to the reduced number of such matters needing to
be attended to, trusteeship was separated from the committee, and decolonization, the
undoing of colonies and empires produced by colonialism, was merged into the Fourth
Committee during the 1990s.
Throughout the last few decades, the committee has put more emphasis into its
decolonization responsibility. Since its establishment nearly 70 years ago, “80 former
colonies comprising some 750 million people have gained independence.2”
Today, the committee still functions as the Fourth Committee, as a subsidiary of the
General Assembly. At present, the committee claims that 17 Non-Self-Governing Territories
across the globe remain to be decolonized. While its flagship role is still decolonization, it
handles a variety of matters, including: “Palestinian refugees and human rights,
peacekeeping, mine action, outer space, public information, atomic radiation and University
for Peace.”3
1
http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/specialcommittee.shtml
2
http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/index.shtml
3
http://www.un.org/en/ga/fourth/
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Committee Simulation
Committee Simulation
The Role of Delegates
Delegates will be held to certain standards. Researching your respective country’s
position is crucial in confidently representing your nation’s stance on matters presented
during the simulation. You will be expected to resist external influences that aim to
relinquish your country’s position, values, and beliefs.
Blocs within the committee will be an effective way to preserve the interests of your
nation and voice your ideas and concerns that will help contribute to resolutions. As
described in the background guide, blocs are usually formed through geographic location,
similar ideologies, and even ethnic parallels.
Debate
During the UCMUN 2013, the Special and Political Decolonization committee will
follow UCONN Model UN parliamentary procedure, which is comprised of formal debate,
however rules have the ability to be suspended at any given time. Certain features that you
can expect are: a speaker’s list, moderated and un-moderated caucuses, and sets of
acceptable points and motions that can be introduced over the course of debate. Each
delegate will have an equal voice and representation power and is expected to treat fellow
delegates with the utmost respect over the course of the simulation.
Role of the Dias
The Dias is compromised of the Director and Assistant Director(s) who will proctor
SPECPOL and orchestrate the flow of debate. Any questions asked by delegates during
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Committee Simulation
committee will be answered by the Dias. These directors also bear the responsibility of
enforcing all rules set under the parliamentary procedures set forth in UCMUN.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
Introduction
On February 17, 2013, the partially recognized state known as the Republic of
Kosovo celebrated its 5th anniversary of independence from the Republic of Serbia. Despite
the celebrations, ongoing political, religious, economic, and ethnic tensions did not wither,
and conflicts occurring on the Kosovo-Serbia border persisted. Kosovo has struggled to
become fully recognized by the international community since its controversial declaration
of independence in 2008.
Since the emancipation, Serbia has made it illegal to import Kosovar goods, and it
has been enforced by both Serbian troops and KFOR peacekeepers, affecting many Kosovar
jobs that once depended on cross-border trade. Provinces along the border are ethnically
mixed, containing Serbs who remain loyal to their parent country and Kosovars who strive
for complete independence, both of who have engaged in protests often turned violent. As
conflicts persist, will Kosovo be able to loosen tensions along its border and achieve its
position as a fully recognized state, or will progress remain stagnant? In this background
guide, I will provide detailed information and analysis regarding the history behind the rocky
relations between the Kosovars and the Serbians and effects of each peoples’ cultures and
ideals.” I hope that this guide aids you in understanding your country’s views concerning the
unstable situation in Kosovo.
Topic History
Pre 19th Century History
The first known inhabitants of the region of Kosovo were known as the Illyrians, a
people of whom contemporary Albanians claim to be direct descendants. The region was
conquered by Alexander the Great approximately 300 years before Christ and was
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
subsequently annexed by the Roman Empire during the 4th century. The 5th century marked
the beginning of Slavic tribes populating the Balkan region and branching off into Slovenes,
Croats, and Serbs. These Slavic groups and the Byzantine Empire began to refer to the
Illyrian inhabitants of Kosovo as Albanians. The large influx of Slavs caused Albanians to
emigrate. By the 12th century, Kosovo assumed Serbian control and the region developed
into the administrative and cultural center of the medieval Serbian state ruled by the
powerful Nemanjić dynasty. The dynasty lasted two centuries. To this day this province is
known by Serbians as "Old Serbia."
In 1389, the Battle of Kosovo Polje resulted in the Ottoman Turks’ defeat of the
Serbs. As a result, Kosovo was annexed into the Ottoman Empire and Albanians initiated
immigration back into the province. After the appropriation and the migration, Serbs and
Albanians lived in reasonable harmony. However, this relationship would change once
Albanians began gradually converting to Islam, while Serbs remained Eastern Orthodox
Christians.
In the 17th century, these religious differences, and several significant military
victories by the Ottomans, caused Serbs living in Kosovo to relocate to present-day Serbia;
this displacement is known to Serbians as “the great migration.”
These pre-19th century events are some of the primary reasons behind the religious
tensions between contemporary Kosovars and Serbians. Albanian Muslims gained
possession of many Eastern Orthodox churches built in Kosovo during the Nemanjić
dynasty. Many Serbians of today desire the churches, a very significant part of their religious
and cultural history, to be a part of their country. Kosovar possession of these churches in
contemporary times only further incites conflicts in the region.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
20th Century History
The late 19th and early 20th centuries saw repeated Serbian attempts to reclaim
Kosovo. After the first Balkan War of 1912, Serbs reoccupied Kosovo after a Slavic and
Greek alliance defeated the declining Ottoman Empire. After the war, the Conference of
Ambassadors in London gave sovereignty of Kosovo to Serbia, which had remained until
2008. At this point, the population of Kosovo was nearly 65% Albanian and 35% Serbian,
and the former began to condemn the rule and occupation of the latter.
Albanian Population vs Serbian Population of Kosovo since 1900
Two years after the Balkan War, Serbian nationalist Gavrilo Princip assassinated
Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Bosnia Herzegovina, which at the time was under the rule of
Austria-Hungary. Soon after, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia with the support of
Germany. Russia came to the allegiance of Serbia and, in a matter of months, World War I
had began. Albanians living in both Kosovo and Albania allied themselves with the axis
opposing Serbia and many joined the Austria-Hungarian army.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
The tides turned against the Austria-Hungarian coalition, and the Serbian army
massacred thousands of Albanian civilians living in Kosovo as revenge for their obstructive
attitudes. After the war, the Treaty of Versailles saw the creation of the creation of
Yugoslavia: Kingdom for Slovenes, Croats and Serbs. Kosovars found themselves to be an
overwhelming minority in the largely Slavic kingdom, which had a population of 12 million
people, only 400,000 being Albanian. Further hostility between Serbs and Kosovars was
generated when the latter requested the League of Nations to unite the territory with
Albania. The League did not take action, and Serbia became furious with the Kosovar’s
constant resistance.
Tensions continued after World War II when Yugoslav Prime Minister Tito
announced himself in favor of Serbian dominance over Kosovo in order to gain support
from Serb populations. The Kosovars responded with rebellion against Tito, but his
communist forces crushed the revolts. Tito later changed his views and declared Kosovo an
autonomous state, and allowed the entity freedom to self-govern itself, although still a part
of Serbia. Meanwhile, Albanian populations in Kosovo began to skyrocket from 67% to
77% during the twenty-year period between 1961 and 1981.
A decade after Tito’s death in 1980, Slobodan Milošević became prime minister of
Yugoslavia. In the midst of his rule, Serbia had established a coalition with the aim of
repealing Kosovo’s status as an autonomous state, and Albanian Kosovars had established
numerous underground organizations in favor of the “National Liberation of Kosovo.” In
1990, Serbia accomplished their goal of repealing Kosovo’s autonomy by changing their
constitution, which defined Kosovo as a “region in Serbia.” The Serbian National Assembly
assumed rule over the province and began aggressively attempting to “de-Albanianize” the
region by modifying its education systems so that they would communicate pro-Serbian
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
sentiments. Albanian Kosovars responded to these actions by drafting a constitution for the
Republic of Kosova.
Late 20th and 21st Century
The 1990s marked the beginning of dissolution of the crumbling Yugoslav state. The
breakdown began with Slovenia declaring independence in 1990, with Croatia and Bosnia
Herzegovina to follow. During this tumultuous time, Kosovo’s parliament aggressively
pursued independence in a society where Serbs were oppressing the Albanian vote and
forcing Serbian culture onto them. As the situation failed to improve, non-violent activism
declined amongst Albanian Kosovars. The Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) rose in
popularity because of their ambitions to gain independence through civil war.
In 1998, the Kosovo War had begun with Serbian military forces squaring off with
KLA. Meanwhile, the United States and Western European powers became increasingly
concerned with the escalating violence. United States Secretary of State, Madeline Albright,
centered the blame for the conflict on Milošević, and his failure to comply with "the
repeated political and humanitarian demands of the UN Security Council in regards to
Kosovo" (Jansen). Later that year, NATO authorized the launch of air strikes on Serbia if
Milošević refused to comply. Shortly after the bombings, he complied with NATO demands
in what is known as the October Agreement, and began to withdraw the bulk of his troops
from Kosovo. The Agreement also allowed UN peacekeepers to patrol the region and aerial
surveillance to prevent air strikes from being issued (37). In the mean time, the KLA sensed
that NATO was on its side, and began to strengthen its military forces along the Kosovo
border. Threatened by the KLA’s actions, Milošević augmented his military presence along
the Serbian Kosovar border consequently, the agreement fell apart and the fighting resumed.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
Growing impatient, NATO was ready to issue military force in order to instill peace
upon the region and end the war. In early 1999, a conference was held in Rambouillet,
France, to try to establish an armistice between the two opposing forces. The Rambouillet
Agreement required that Yugoslavia withdraw its forces from Kosovo, the KLA to ceasefire,
and that UN peacekeepers monitor the area and tackle the political future in three years
time. If an agreement was not settled in two weeks time, bombing would commence on
whomever refused.
Yugoslavian representatives found that the agreement required surrender of its
national sovereignty to NATO and in three years time, peacekeepers would determine that
Kosovo was fit to gain independence, Milošević would not accept either outcome and
refused to sign.
As foretold, NATO began bombing Yugoslavia two days after the agreement failed.
Instead of complying with NATO in order to end the bombings, Yugoslavia increased its
military presence in Kosovo to fight the KLA and to remove Albanians from the region,
either by displacement or ethnic cleansing. After months of bombardment, the Yugoslavian
infrastructure and economy were crumbling and pressure to create an armistice to end the
war at the upcoming G-8 conference was greater than ever. The fragile states of both
Yugoslavia and Kosovo caused them to sign an agreement on June 5, 1999.
Yugoslavia agreed to the following under Security Council Resolution 1244:
Substantial’ autonomy for Kosovo, withdrawal of all Serb military, police and
paramilitary forces, return of all the refugees, and an international armed security
presence in Kosovo with ‘substantial’ NATO participation… to respect of the
territorial integrity of Yugoslavia, Kosovo remains in Yugoslavia, the agreement is
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
under the authority of the Security Council of the United Nations not NATO, and
calls for involvement of Russian troops in the peacekeeping forces.
The agreement brought an end to the war and Kosovo was given back its status as
an autonomous state, although it still remained a part of Serbia and what is left of
Yugoslavia; a situation similar to their status under Tito’s rule. Milošević and Yugoslavians
considered the outcome a success, as they retained Kosovo and kept the national sovereignty
and integrity of Yugoslavia. However, Milošević was indicted by the UN's International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia for crimes against humanity, including
genocide whilst fighting the Kosovo War. The KLA and Kosovar population was not
pleased with the outcome, as their goal of independence was not achieved. Yet, the
agreement to end the conflict was the best possible result for either side.
However, in years that followed, the situation would prove to be unstable and
require constant peacekeeping forces including significant numbers of U. S. troops.
peacekeeping forces including significant numbers of U. S. troops. In the eight-year period
between the end of the war and Kosovo’s independence in 2008, Yugoslavia dissolved
completely and Kosovo was under the United Nations interim leadership as designated by
SC Resolution 1244. During these years, the Albanian population in the state peaked at 92%.
In 2007, The United States proposed a three-part plan to stabilize the state and eventually
establish an independent Kosovo, elaborating on what was originally mentioned in Security
Council Resolution 1244. “1. All high government posts will be distributed based on
religion and ethnicity 2. A new Constitution must specifically safeguard the rights of the
Serbian minority 3. A substantial peacekeeping force must be in place to protect the Serbs
and other minorities.” On February 17, 2008, the Assembly of Kosovo declared
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
independence from Serbia. Western countries such as the United States immediately
supported the decision, while Serbia and Russia claimed the independence violated
international law. In the same year, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the
declaration of Kosovar independence was, in fact, legal.
Current Status
Tensions between Serbia and Kosovo have lingered since the ICJ’s ruling, ranging
from violent riots to peaceful protests, many of which being concentrated the northern most
Kosovska Mitrovica District, along the Serbian border. Demographically speaking,
Leposavić, Zubin Potok, and Zvečan in particular are predominantly ethnic Serbs, whereas
Srbica, Vučitrn, and Mitrovica are predominately ethnic Albanians.
The municipalities within the Kosovska Mitrovica district have been the sites of
violent protests due to the opposing positions of the ethnically mixed population. The Serbs
living in the former municipalities do not recognize the authority of Kosovo and want to
establish themselves as an autonomous nation, supported by Serbia proper, whereas Srbica,
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
Vučitrn, and Mitrovica fear that the unrest in the district will lead to a worse political and
economic situation.
Kosovar Serbs began to protest in the form of blocking roads crossing the Kosovo
border into Serbia, limiting the mobility of NATO Kosovo Force (KFOR) troops, who were
issued to maintain law and order.
In 2011, KFOR troops attempted to dissemble the roadblocks peacefully, informing
the protesters that it was illegal to block public roads, and gave the Serbs until October 17th
of that year to remove themselves and their obstructions. The protestors defied the
ultimatum and were met with KFOR troops ready to forcibly remove the obstructions. The
conflict turned violent as several skirmishes erupted along roads that cross the border. The
KFOR was met with resistance from the Serbs, who threw rocks and debris at the troops.
The KFOR responded with crowd control methods such as deploying tear gas and firing
rubber bullets at the protestors, which led to armed protestors shooting guns at the troops.
The casualties include three Serbian protestors dead, 162 wounded, and 65 KFOR soldiers
injured.
Albanian Kosovars in the district took to protesting the opposite stance of the Serbs
and dismantled roadblocks assembled by them. Their unrest stems from the effect the
roadblocks have on Kosovar jobs that rely on international trade between Kosovo and
Serbia, and the belief that Serb protestors are impeding progress to Kosovo’s independence.
There have been recent incidences where both sides have gotten into brawls, which has
further escalated ethnic conflicts between the two sides.
Significant progress in finding a solution to the standoff along the Serbian Kosovo
border emerged on April 19, 2013, when lengthy sessions of normalization talks came to a
consensus. The normalization between the two countries, known as the Brussels Agreement,
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
means that Serbia will recognize the authority that the Kosovar government based in Pristina
has over Kosovo and, in exchange, Kosovo will grant autonomy, including the ability to
have a locally organized government, to the Serb dominated municipalities in Northern
Kosovo.
Accord between the two sides depended on the amount of autonomy Kosovo was
willing to give, the predominantly Serb, municipalities of Leposavić, Zubin Potok, and
Zvečan. The compromise was reached with the stipulation that both nations would be
eligible to become members of the European Union (EU), which is a goal that both nations
wanted to achieve. However, Serbia states that the normalization agreement does not
recognize Kosovo’s independence.
Furthermore, Prime Minister Dačić of Serbia, and Prime Minister Thaçi of Kosovo,
have both claimed that “we don’t have to love each other,” despite the successful
negotiations.
As of May 2013, there are 99 United Nations member countries that recognize the
independence of Kosovo.
Twenty-two out of the
twenty-seven European
Union member states have
recognized their
independence.
Countries who have recognized Kosovo’s independence (in green)
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
Bloc Positions
The bloc positions are divided into three camps: those who recognize the
independence of Kosovo, those who don’t, and those who are yet to recognize it for
individual reasons, but may do so in the future. A particular country’s alliances may dictate
its stance on the issue. Also, countries that have a similar situation of a succeeding territory
will more likely to be against the recognition of Kosovo.
NATO Bloc
This bloc consists of European nations that recognize the independence of Kosovo
and the United States. They condemn the violent protests occurring on the Serbia-Kosovo
border and are committed to establishing peace in the region. These countries are NATO
members; therefore their troops have participated in the KFOR peacekeeping force. They
are in favor of the Brussels Agreement and believe that both Serbia and Kosovo can resolve
their problems and join the EU. Several major countries in this bloc include France, United
Kingdom, United States, Germany, Netherlands, Poland, Switzerland, Slovenia, Italy, and
Croatia.
Serbia-Russia Bloc
This bloc contains the major opponents of the recognition of Kosovo’s
independence. Countries in this block back the political, economic, and social interests of
Serbia based on longstanding relationships originating from alliances based on similar
Orthodox Christian religion and Slavic ethnicity. In this case, they stand by Serbia by
refusing to acknowledge the independence and help Serbia maintain its sovereignty and
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
territorial integrity over Kosovo. Many of these countries claim that the independence is a
violation of international law. This bloc is comprised of Serbia, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus.
Nations with Autonomous Entities Bloc
This bloc features counties that do not recognize the independence of Kosovo in
order to avoid hostilities from the autonomous entities within their country. Spain does not
recognize the independence due to their desire to keep autonomous Catalonia and Basque
Country within the Spanish domain. These communities would be infuriated if the Spanish
government recognized the independence of an autonomous nation in Eastern Europe, but
failed to recognize the independent movements of the communities within its borders.
Spain, Israel, Russia, China, and India are members of this bloc.
Committee Mission
I, this year’s chair, hope that you, the delegates in the Special Political and
Decolonization Committee, will complete the following goal: pass a resolution that paves
way for a peaceful solution that results in adaptive compromise between countries with
opposing stances. This will be a challenging task, but with teamwork and communication
amongst your fellow delegates, it will be possible to solve the issue.
By participating in debate, I am optimistic that you will become familiar with the
troublesome region of Eastern Europe and have a better understanding of its contemporary
problems. I am hopeful that you will come to recognize the position of nations based on
political and economic reasons and religious and ethnic ties. And finally, I believe you will
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
become accustomed to using debate, cooperative communication, and teamwork in order to
tackle one of the United Nation’s relatively stagnant problems.
The chair also wishes that all delegates represent their countries in the most realistic
fashion throughout the course of debate, and not compromise with a nation with an
opposing view for the sake of compromise. In order to prevent this, I request that each of
you conduct research prior to the conference and thereby assume the accurate position of
their country and its relationships with other countries.
Research Questions
-How do you think the independence of Kosovo impacts the world? How does it impact
your country?
-What relationships does your country have with nations who are strongly in favor or against
the independence of Kosovo? Does this affect your country’s stance on the issue?
-Does your country think Kosovo is not yet fit for independence due to the instability of the
country?
-Does your country have any autonomous communities/separatist movements of its own? --Does it suppress them? Does this affect its stance on the position of Kosovo?
-Are there any historical incidents that show how your country resolves conflicts stemming
from ethnic violence?
-What is the predominant religion and ethnicity in your country? Does this have any
implication related to their stance on the Kosovo?
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic A: Kosovo: Culminating Independence
Works Cited
Bilefsky, Dan. "Serbia and Kosovo Reach Agreement on Power-Sharing." New York
Times, 19 Apr. 2013. Web.
Jansen, G. Richard. "Albanians and Serbs in Kosovo: An Abbreviated History An
Opening for the The Islamic Jihad in Europe." Colorado State University, 08 July
2008. Web.
"NATO: Situation in Kosovo Improves, Problems in North." B92. B92, 31 Jan. 2013.
Web. 16 Feb. 2013.
Radojcic, Maja. "North Kosovo Serbs Refuse To Accept Brussels Agreement." In Serbia,
22 Apr. 2013. Web.
U.N. Security Council, 4011th Meeting. "Resolution 1244 (1999) on the Situation
relating Kosovo" (S/RES/1244). 10 June 1999.
"TOP UN ENVOY SAYS SERBIA, KOSOVO TALKS AT ‘CRITICAL STAGE’;
URGES STRONG SECURITY COUNCIL SUPPORT, SO ‘HISTORIC’ NEW
CHAPTER NOT DERAILED BY ONGOING TENSIONS." United Nations
Security Council, 22 Mar. 2013. Web
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
Introduction
In the past 25 years, over two-dozen states have proclaimed sovereignty and formed
countries by means of separation, unification, or declaring independence from another
entity. Many of these new nations are concentrated in regions. They are found
predominantly in Southeast Asia, Northeast Africa, the Balkan region, and the former Soviet
Union. A large percentage of these nations were created in light of resolution to violent
conflicts. The combination of the difficulties of founding an economy, demilitarization, and
establishing a sense of national identity became apparent. Even after their independence,
these states have faced lingering economic, political, and military impediments and these
factors often create a perfect catalyst for instances of human trafficking to occur. Due to the
chaotic state of affairs of these countries, organized crime circuits often go unnoticed as they
operate trafficking rings within nations’ borders. Traffickers will often use the country as a
source, transit, or destination for trafficked persons. Victims of trafficking include men,
women, and children; they are enslaved for the purposes of forced labor, prostitution, and
military service.
Much of the information and data regarding history and the current status of human
trafficking in these four troubled regions will be taken from the “Trafficking in Persons”
(TIP) Report. This annual report publishes summaries that highlight country-based human
trafficking issues. Countries are ranked into tiers depending on how well the government
addresses the trafficking, and whether or not it meets the Trafficking Victims Protection Act
(TVPA)’s minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking.
Tier 1 is reserved for countries whose governments have met and fully comply with
the TVPA’s minimum standards.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
Tier 2 is for countries whose governments do not fully comply with the TVPA’s
minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to do so.
Tier 2 Watch List is for countries whose governments do not fully comply
with the TVPA’s minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to
do so. However;
a) the absolute number of victims of severe trafficking is very significant
or significantly increasing
b) there is a failure to provide evidence of increasing efforts to combat
trafficking in persons since the previous year
c) the determination that a country is making significant efforts to
bring itself into compliance with minimum standards was based on
commitments by the country to take additional steps over the next
year
Tier 3 is reserved for countries whose governments do not fully comply with the
TVPA’s minimum standards and are not making significant efforts to do so.
Topic History
Broad Introduction to Human Trafficking in Transitioning States
The four primary regions that have been the location of newly independent states
each had unique circumstances that led to their creation, and conditions that worsened
existing economic and political issues. The combination of these two historical factors vastly
contributed to the regions’ respective human trafficking issues over the last 25 years.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
The international community’s outmoded understanding of the rapidly growing
trafficking problems in transitional states has further exacerbated worldwide human
trafficking, due to the resulting inaction. Vladimir Makei, author of a report on human
trafficking in the post-Cold War period, stated; “Trafficking was primarily viewed as, and
often confused with, illegal migration” (Makei). Furthermore,
The 1990s can be regarded as a period when the international community
began feeling the impact of trafficking in persons that was flourishing as
result of the relatively open post-Cold War globalization and the global
environment. Nonetheless, there was no clear understanding of the challenge
at the time. It is its complex nature—which closely linked it with other
problems like illegal migration, contemporary slavery, and violence against
women—that made it difficult to grasp relevant the nuances. Consequently,
trafficking in persons was not treated as a distinct form of crime. As a result,
throughout the 1990s there was neither any specific legislation against
trafficking in persons in most countries, nor tangible international
cooperation or coordination among their law enforcement and other relevant
agencies (Makei).
History of Dissolution of the Soviet Union
Since its formation in 1922, the pluralistic Soviet Union struggled to unify, due to the
reluctance of non-Russian ethnic groups to conform to a centralized state led by Russia and
its socialist ideology. Approximately 60 years later, in 1985, Russian control over the Soviet
Union had withered, as severe economic depression and early nationalist movements in the
Baltic and South Caucasus regions led to the opening of Pandora’s Box, where nationalist
political movements erupted in Central Asia and the Eastern Europe. Pressure created by the
massive demonstrations held by the non-Russian states in the year 1991 proved too much
for the weakened Soviet Union, and, by January 1992, the United Soviet Socialist Republics
(USSR) officially disbanded.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
Within a matter of months, fifteen new states emerged from the rubble of the
collapsed empire. These former Soviet entities became sovereign states overnight. It soon
became apparent that certain states were more prepared for life independent from Soviet
rule than others. The original rebels in the Baltic region had a far easier time adjusting to
post-Soviet rule, and were able to develop their economies, reorganize their political systems
and settle any territorial disputes due to their proximity to influential Western European
democracies. Other states, especially those in Central Asia and Europe’s far eastern
countries, were not as fortunate and recessed economies, corrupt governments, and violent
borders would become commonplace issues in these brand new states. As a result, their
transition over the next 25 years would be plagued with trafficking abuses.
It should be
noted that the trafficking
in persons existed in the
USSR before the
independence of states in
the Baltic region, Eastern
Europe, and Central
Asia. However, the
worsening conditions of the states in the latter two regions throughout the course of their
respective independences imply that preexisting trafficking problems were exacerbated under
these circumstance, easily allowing organized crime circuits to operate human trafficking
rings within the nation’s borders, whether it be a source, transit, or destination for trafficked
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
persons. “In less than a year after the collapse of the Soviet Union, human trafficking
became the fastest growing organized criminal activity in the world” (Transchel).
Historically, the troubled regions have primarily trafficked men for cheap/free labor, women
for sexual exploitation and forced prostitution, and children for forced begging syndicates
and the archetypical trafficking victims of the late 1980s and early 90s are paralleled to
profiles of victims that exist in 2013 (Orlova, 14-17).
Due to the international community’s initial lack of understanding towards the
complex nature of human trafficking, sufficient data of victims in the was not collected until
the United States Department of State launched the now-annual Trafficking in Persons
Report, debuting in 2001.
The report provided profiles on the trafficking situations in the majority of the
former Soviet states. Not a single nation was placed in Tier 1, meaning the state’s
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
government fully complied with the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, while five
were placed in Tier 2 (Georgia, Kyrgystan, Lithuania, Moldova, Ukraine) and three in Tier 3
(Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia) meaning the governments were doing little to nothing to
combat trafficking within their borders. Regarding the Tier 3 governments, the report cited
that a “lack of resources, training and adequate legislation” and “corruption of higher and
lower level officials” (Dep. Of State, 84-98) determined the placement of these countries on
the lowest tier. Many of the post-Soviet countries profiled in the 2001 report were, at the
time, only in the process of investigating less than a dozen cases of human trafficking
violations within their borders.
History of the Formation of New States in the Greater Horn of Africa
Within the last 25 years, a region known as the “Greater Horn of Africa” , which is
known for violent political, ethnic, and border conflicts, has been the birthplace of two
newly- independent states. Both Eritrea,
declaring independence from Ethiopia in 1993,
and South Sudan, from Sudan in 2011,
separated from their parent countries after
armed conflicts against them. Both Eritrean and
South Sudanese governments face an absence
of sufficient resources to fight trafficking within
their countries, which is a common issue in
recently-established states.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
The history of the independence movement in Eritrea began with Ethiopia’s
annexation of the country in 1962. Subsequently, rebel groups resisting the Ethiopian
occupation started conflicts and pushed for revolution, and a war that spanned 30 years,
began. The Ethiopians eventually found their resources were depleted and withdrew from
the war, leaving Eritrea to unanimously pass a referendum for independence in 1993.
In the aftermath of the war, a second border dispute in the late 1990s, between
Ethiopia and Eritrea, diminished already scarce Eritrean resources and caused the death of
100,000 combined soldiers and civilians. The Eritrean government has since neglected to
address, and has committed, human rights violations, Amnesty International reports
“arbitrary arrests and detentions…for dissent of any kind as a result of which thousands of
political prisoners are languishing in terrible conditions” (Amnesty International).
Basic rights for its citizens such as freedom of speech, press, religion, and assembly are very
limited and under constant regulation by the government. Eritrea has been identified as a
source of human trafficking, however, due to the government’s failure to operate
transparently and present data of traffickers prosecuted and victims rescued, the historical
extent of the nation’s trafficking issue is unknown.
The history of South Sudan’s fight for independence is one of similar circumstances.
Within the last 60 years, the country has experienced two civil wars with its former parent
nation, the Republic of Sudan. The Second Sudanese Civil War, lasted from 1983 to 2005.
After foreign intervention brought the conflict between the Republic of Sudan and the
Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) of South Sudan to stagnation, a comprehensive
peace agreement was reached on January 9, 2005. One clause of the peace agreement granted
autonomy to South Sudan for six years. It also allowed for an independence referendum to
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
be introduced after the period of autonomy elapsed. In 2011, the referendum was cast, and
results were universally in favor of independence from the Republic of Sudan.
Human trafficking and general human rights abuses were rampant throughout the
Second Sudanese Civil War. The 2001 Trafficking in Persons Report illustrated that 12 years
ago, before significant foreign intervention, the government of the Republic of Sudan used
human trafficking as a tactic in the war against the SPLA. “The Government tolerates, and
sometimes encourages, [human trafficking] because they are seen as contributing to the
Government’s war effort by providing compensation to raiders and militias for protecting
troops and by disrupting and terrorizing southern communities” (Department of State, 98).
The report goes on to say that the government of the Republic of Sudan supported the
Ugandan Lord’s Resistance Army, led by Joseph Kony, and their operations of kidnapping
and trafficking children for the purpose of soldiers and sex slaves.
History of the Breakup of Yugoslavia
Much like the Soviet Union, all aspects of the Socialist Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia began to crumble during the early 1990s. The primary reasons attributed to the
collapse include: economic recession, existing ethnic tensions, and a political ideology based
around Serbian nationalism that had replaced the federation’s original Socialist principles.
These factors contributed to influential Yugoslav powers, Slovenia and Croatia, declaring
independence in 1991, in favor of decentralizion and democracy. Macedonia and Bosnia and
Herzegovina declared independence shortly after, the latter resulting in the brutal Bosnian
War, which, in turn, further fragmented the Yugoslav federation. Ongoing ethnic conflicts
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
between Albanian-majority Kosovo and Serbians caused the Kosovo War in the late 1990s,
leading to the remaining Yugoslav republics, Kosovo and Montenegro, to further distance
themselves from Serbia. In 2006, Montenegro elected to declare independence from the
remains of Yugoslavia, then called Serbia and Montenegro. Kosovo controversially declared
independence in 2008, leaving questions of whether or not the declaration was constitutional
(Bilefsky). In a period of less than 20 years, a once large and influential empire disintegrated
into seven4 separate states.
Human trafficking has been
apparent in former Yugoslavia since
before their separation. However, the
dissolution of the federation proved to be
a perfect environment for traffickers,
giving them ideal opportunities to exploit
the transitioning of the governments of
newly independent former Yugoslav
states. The rise of globalization has also
been attributed to the rise of trafficking operations. The change in the distribution of wealth
among social classes has caused movement of populations in search of economic
opportunity. H. Richard Friman and Simon Reich illustrate this by saying: “Formal and
informal safety nets have been overwhelmed by the process [of globalization], leading to the
displacement of marginalized populations, and in turn, increased incentives for migration
4
Kosovo is only recognized by 105 out of 193 United Nations member states
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
and the rise of transnational criminal networks” (Friman and Reich, 3). The reconstruction
efforts, however, “devoted less attention to dimensions of human security securing freedom
from want and freedom from fear and establishing and strengthening the rule of law that
enhance protections for the region’s most vulnerable populations in their daily lives”
(Friman and Reich, 1). The new states became a source for persons trafficked into Western
Europe, mainly women for sexual exploitation, and a transit and destination of victims
originating from the states formed out of the collapsed Soviet Union.
In the 2001 “Trafficking in Persons Report”, Slovenia and Macedonia were placed in
Tier 2, while the remaining Yugoslav Republics (Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo) and Bosnia
Herzegovina were placed in Tier 3. It was reported that the former Tier 3 nation that: “no
specific law prohibits trafficking… there were no reports of individuals prosecuted for
trafficking… the Government provides for no prevention or protection measures… a very
small number of NGO’s deal with trafficking… public awareness of the problem is low”
(Department of State 101). However, the report ended with a positive note, stating that,
despite former President Slobodan Milošević showing little interest in addressing the
trafficking problem, the Yugoslav and Serbian Republic authorities began to cooperate to
reform border policies in order to fight trafficking.
A similar situation existed in Bosnia Herzegovina, highlighted in the same report. It
claimed that the Bosnian government was impaired to fight trafficking due to “budgetary
constraints, minimal border controls, inadequate criminal laws, and corruption… [Including]
police and judicial authorities tacitly accepting or actively facilitating trafficking”
(Department of State, 82). The government had also routinely charged trafficked victims
with criminal offenses that eventually led to deportation.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
Current Status
Much has been done over the last 10 years by the international community, and
entities such as the United Nations, to curb human trafficking in newly-independent states.
Annual reports have assisted both international bodies and non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) in identifying problem regions. These groups have helped the governments of
struggling countries increase police presence to preside over unregulated borders, introduce
and pass influential legislation to give harsh punishments to convicted traffickers, and
educate police and the general public that trafficked persons are victims, and should not be
seen as criminals because they were forced to engage in unlawful activities.
For the most part, the efforts to reduce human trafficking have been successful
throughout the world, and many of the world’s hotspots for sourcing, transit, and
destination are now making significant efforts to meet the TVPA’s minimum standard. The
table below shows that there has been a gradual increase in the number of traffickers
prosecuted and convicted, as well as an upturn of the number of victims identified since
2005. There is also a steady rate of anti-trafficking legislation being passed every year.
Year
Prosecutions
Convictions
4,379
Victims
Identified
--
New/Modified
Legislation
40
2005
6,178
2006
5,808
3,160
--
21
2007
5,682 (490)
3,427 (326)
--
28
2008
5,212 (312)
2,983 (104)
30,961
26
2009
5,606 (432)
4,166 (335)
49,105
33
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
2010
6,017 (607)
3619 (237)
33,113
17
2011
7,206 (508)
4,239 (320)
41,210
15
2012
7,705 (1,153)
4,746 (518)
46,570
21
Post-Soviet Current Status
As mentioned previously, many of the post-Soviet countries profiled in the 2001
report were, at the time, only in the process of investigating less than a dozen cases of
human trafficking violations within their borders. The 2013 report includes data that shows
an increase of the number of prosecuted and convicted traffickers.
The most recent findings in the 2013 Trafficking in Persons Report show that, of
the five new states that emerged from the Soviet Union in Central Asia, and the three in
Eastern Europe, none of the eight total met the TVPA’s minimum standards, and received a
either a Tier 2, Tier 2 Watch List, or Tier 3 ranking. The only two nations listed in Tier 3 in
the former USSR are Russia and Uzbekistan, mainly due to the governments’ complacency
in dealing with a recent influx of impoverished Uzbekistani migrant workers trafficked to
Russia in order to perform forced work on large-scale construction projects for long hours
and hazardous environments.
The other 13 former Soviet states have improved their trafficking problems since
2000, with Armenia being the first and only state to be placed in Tier 1. The rest of the states
are making significant efforts to meet the TVPA’s minimum standard, with only Belarus,
Ukraine, and Turkmenistan placed on the Tier 2 Watch List.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
Current Status of Trafficking in the Greater Horn of Africa
The aftermath of war proved an enormous burden for the governments of the two
newly independent states of the Greater Horn because of the devastating ramifications it had
on the respective nations’ economies and daily life. Both nations were in a dismantled state
due to the 100,000 casualties after the Eritrean-Ethiopian conflicts, and the estimated 1-2
million after the Second Sudanese Civil War.
New states crafted under desolate conditions often experiences trafficking problems,
as seen with the former states of the Soviet Union. However, both Eritrea and South Sudan
currently have trafficking issues that stem from reasons other than the ones stated above.
Eritrea was placed in Tier 3 in the 2013 Trafficking in Persons Report. It is listed as a
source country for men, women, and children to be subjected to forced labor. The report
cites that the Eritrean government’s failure to “operate transparently, nor publish data or
statistics regarding efforts to combat human trafficking” (Department of State, 162)
contributed to the ranking. The government of Eritrea did not publish any data regarding
the prosecution or conviction of any trafficking suspects.
Currently, most Eritrean trafficking victims are used as forced laborers and domestic
servants in neighboring countries, as well as other nations in Greater Horn and the Middle
East. Namely, Egypt, Israel, and Yemen. The majority of Eritrean victims are those who
were displaced after the conflicts with Ethiopia and the tens of thousands of people who
fled the nation to escape “conditions that amounted to forced labor through exploitative
circumstances in the government’s mandatory national service” (Department of State 162).
The education of Eritrean citizens on the subject of trafficking has been limited due to the
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
government’s heavy restrictions on freedom of speech, press, and assembly, and a law that
prohibits NGOs to operate within the country’s borders.
However, a beacon of progress emerged when the government “acknowledged the
problem of its citizens becoming victims of ‘human trafficking’ and began issuing warnings
about the hazards they sometimes faced when attempting to migrate abroad” (Department
of State, 164). Furthermore,
Warnings issued by government-sponsored organizations such as the Youth
Association, Women’s Association, and Workers’ Federation incorporated
information about the dangers of “trafficking” into their regular programming. In
February 2013, the president of Eritrea asked the UN Secretary-General for UN
assistance “to launch an independent and transparent investigation” into human
trafficking as it affects Eritrea (Department of State, 162).
South Sudan was placed in Tier 2 Watch List, meaning that it has made significant efforts to
meet the TPVA’s minimum standards and curb their trafficking problem. For example, the
government has worked with the UN to hold awareness-raising sessions on the UN-backed
action plan addressing trafficked child soldiers. However, the government has, at times, been
negligible. For example, it failed to take steps to proactively identify victims of sex or labor
trafficking among vulnerable populations (Department of State,337-38) Another problem
lies in the limited presence and effectiveness of lower-level law enforcement, including
corruption, assisting traffickers across borders, and bartering with traffickers. Insufficient
resources have also contributed negatively to the cause against trafficking, such as
nonfunctioning courts. Those that are functioning are subject to corruption and lack
adequate human and physical resources to investigate and prosecute traffickers.
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
The government has, and is continuously willing to work with the United Nations
and NGOs. Together, they recently passed legislation that punishes military officials
suspected of recruiting anyone under the legal conscription age of 18 (337). However, major
issues such as South Sudanese people trafficked into forced labor or sexual services
(domestically or abroad) and the ease of entry for trafficked persons from neighboring
countries still remain unaddressed.
Current Status of Former Yugoslavia
Increasing government stability and more anti-trafficking resources in the states
succeeded from the Yugoslav Federation since the first Trafficking in Persons Report was
published have contributed to more prosecutions and convictions of traffickers and more
victims identified and rescued. There has been an increase in governments providing grants
and working with NGOs and special anti-trafficking police forces are beginning to be
deployed around unstable borders and protection to trafficking victims. For example, in
Bosnia Herzegovina: “The government allocated the equivalent of $100,000 to implement
the national strategy and action plan in 2013: equivalent to approximately $69,000 for
assistance to foreign trafficking victims, and the equivalent to approximately $46,000 for
assistance to domestic trafficking victims, making the anti-trafficking budget a regular budget
line item, and providing more assistance to NGOs” (Department of State, 101).
Two out of the seven states have been placed in Tier 1, fully complying with the
TVPA’s minimum standards. Efforts to fight trafficking in Slovenia and Macedonia have
been praised in the report. Government initiatives, such as an “outreach campaign, releasing
an action plan and an annual report, leading a regional forum to coordinate trafficking
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
investigations, and training government employees who encounter vulnerable populations
on victim identification” (Department of State, 331) have proven to be successful in curbing
trafficking and protecting the livelihood of its victims.
However, problems still linger in the states placed in Tier 2: Serbia, Bosnia
Herzegovina, Kosovo, Croatia, and Montenegro. The report has cited the governments’
delays to “amend sub-national laws to criminalize all forms of trafficking consistent with
national and international law.” It also regards police complicity and a lack of sensitivity to
child victims of sex trafficking as counterproductive to combat human trafficking.
Bloc Positions
The bloc positions are primarily divided regionally due to a combination of relative
cultural parallels, similar trafficking situations, and the regularity of movement of trafficked
persons within the region. The states rising from fallen empires, namely the Soviet Union
and Yugoslavia, will form a bloc with the former states in their respective former union. The
states in the Greater Horn of Africa will also form a bloc. Also, blocs are created from two
camps; states with serious trafficking problems, and states with stability that have managed
to effectively curb their trafficking issues.
Post-Soviet States
The states that rose out of the rubble of the Soviet Union form a bloc for a number
of reasons. First, they each were governed by the same single-party communist regime for 70
years, and were emancipated from it once the union dissolved. Each region of the empire;
Baltic States, Caucasus, Central Asia, Far-East Europe, and Russia itself were transitioning
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
away from communism simultaneously. Therefore, they each faced many similar obstacles;
these include poor economies, lack of resources, and government corruption, conditions in
which traffickers operate to full capacity. These countries collectively are one of the world’s
main sources, transit locations, and destinations for trafficked persons. Countries in this bloc
include: Russia, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia,
and Lithuania.
Great Horn of Africa Bloc
These countries share very severe problems of government corruption and a lack of
resources to combat trafficking. The two newly independent nations, Eritrea and South
Sudan are located in a region of countries with historically violent, dis-functioning and
complacent governments. Many of the governments in this region show little initiative to
combat trafficking and are regularly placed in the two lowest Tiers in the Trafficking in
Persons Report. The hesitancy of these governments to work with foreign NGOs and their
totalitarian approach to freedom of speech, press, and assembly represents their desire to
only work with the United Nations, however the international community perceives their
actions as hostile and complacent. Countries in this bloc include: Eritrea, South Sudan,
Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia and Djibouti.
Former Yugoslavia Bloc
Many parallels can be drawn to the states evolving out of the collapsed Yugoslav
Federation with the Soviet Union. Each new state out of Yugoslavia were transitioning from
a single-party, communism-inspired confederation into Western-style democracies around
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
the same time. There is a consistency in the type of trafficking in the region. Namely, of the
persons sourced and transited, which are chiefly women for sexual exploitation and minority
Roma populations for forced begging. Both victim groups are often sourced from the
former-Soviet states, with former-Yugoslav states as their destinations, while it is just as
common for the same groups to be sourced in the former-Yugoslav states themselves and
sent to Western Europe for the same purposes. Many of these states’ governments have
shown initiative and have began educating their populations and working with NGOs in
attempts to reduce trafficking. Countries in this bloc include: Croatia, Slovenia, Serbia,
Bosnia Herzegovina, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Kosovo.
Western Europe and “Nation Builders” Bloc
This bloc mainly encompasses nations that have substantial international power.
Most of the agencies that collect data and report on trafficking in troubled countries and
NGOs are based in the states that encompass this bloc, and are mainly located in Western
Europe and North America. Many of the developed countries in Western Europe face the
issue of being a destination for trafficked persons and it is within their own interests to help
eradicate the trafficking happening at the source. Countries in this bloc include: United
States of America, France, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Germany, Spain, and Italy.
Committee Mission
For this topic in the Special Political and Decolonization Committee, I hope that the
you, the delegates will achieve the following goal: pass a resolution that provides a
comprehensive solution to curbing human trafficking in the world’s newly independent
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
states. This of course, will be a toilsome assignment, but with teamwork and communication
amongst your fellow delegates, it will be possible to reach a consensus.
By enacting this debate as your assigned countries, I am hopeful that you will begin
to understand two important subjects. First, the difficulties many of the new countries that
exist today faced whilst transitioning from a dependent state, to an independent one and
how these states of turmoil contributed to their respective trafficking issues. And second,
how far these states have come along in their efforts to curb trafficking since they declared
their sovereignty. I aim to give you a window to peer into the daily life and problems of
regions that may be “gray areas” when you visualize a map of the world.
I also request that all delegates conduct research prior to the conference and thereby
assume the position of their country and its relationships with others in a realistic fashion.
Research Questions:
-What Tier is your country placed under in the 2013 Trafficking in Persons Report? Where is
it placed in earlier reports?
-How many traffickers has your country prosecuted and convicted in the past year? How
many victims identified? (Available in the 2013 Trafficking in Persons Report)
-If your country is a recently independent state, has your country faced any problems
transitioning into an independent state?
-If your country is not a recently independent state, what are your country’s relations with
nations in the regions discussed in this guide? Has it provided any assistance in curbing that
nation’s trafficking problem?
-How has your country been affected by human trafficking?
UCMUN 2013 Special Political Decolonization Committee
Topic B: Human Trafficking in Newly Independent States
Works Cited
Bilefsky, Dan. "Kosovo Declares Its Independence From Serbia." New York Times, 18
Feb. 2008. Web.
Dallago, Christian. "Unique Aspects of Human Trafficking in Eurasia." Wilson Center,
18 Apr. 2011. Web.
"Eritrea: Rampant Repression 20 Years after Independence." Amnesty International, 09
May 2013. Web.
Friman, H. Richard, and Simon Reich. "Human Trafficking and The Balkans." University
of Pittsburgh Press, n.d. Web. 01 Sept. 2013.
Orlova, Alexandra V. "From Social Dislocation to Human Trafficking: The Russian
Case." Problems of Post-Communism 51 (2004): 14-17. Web.
Shah, Anup. "Conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea." Global Issues, 20 Dec. 2000. Web.
"Timeline: Break-up of Yugoslavia." BBC, 22 May 2006. Web. 24 Aug. 2013.
Trafficking in Persons Report (2013): n. pag. Department of State. Web.
Transchel, Kate. "Hidden in Plain Sight: An Oral History of Modern-Day Slavery From
Russia And Eastern Europe." Irex, Dec. 2010. Web. 05 Sept. 2013.
Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 Trafficking in Persons Report.
Rep. N.p.: Department of State, 2001. Print.