Cambodia

Kingdom of Cambodia

WAMUNC XXI

January 31, 2019 – February 3, 2019

Sixth Committee: Legal

Shaina Banduri and Anuj Khemka

Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology

Topic I: The Right to Go to War

Introduction and Background

The idea of an international body regulating a nation’s right to go to war is one that is relatively novel, yet as a high number of military conflicts continue to take place on a global scale, the implementation of such an idea is becoming increasingly necessary. In assessing whether a war is just, many countries, along with regional and international bodies have referred to Just War Theory. Just War Theory states that going to war may be justified if the causes are sufficient and military force is used in proportion to the circumstances present.5 Although this theory presents legitimate guidelines for nations to abide by when justifying going to war, along with maintaining justice after war, it also poses humanitarian violations, an increase of aggression, and other areas of concern that have recently been brought to light. For example, Just War Theory raises questions about how advancements in warfare, including the development of nuclear weaponry and other means of mass destruction, affect the decision to engage in preemptive or preventive behavior.6 In addition to Just War Theory, the majority of countries seek peaceful international relationships through war policies based on the UN Responsibility to Protect doctrine (R2P), which establishes the responsibility of individual states and the international community to prevent humanitarian crimes.2 Nonetheless, principles in both guidelines contain areas of concern and have often been ineffective in addressing certain cases of conflict. Therefore, this committee must work towards redefining and improving upon our current measures for determining when war and violence are justified.

Cambodia and the Right to Go to War

In the 1980s, Vietnam, backed by Western-allies, invaded Cambodia in order to end the brutal Khmer Rouge regime led by revolutionary and politician Pol Pot. Although the invasion eradicated the atrocious behaviors of the Khmer Rouge regime, the Vietnamese invasion brought about similarly despicable actions, and as a result, whether the invasion could be considered a just war is a common source of debate when discussing the right to war and its various theories.3 However, Cambodia, led by prime minister Hun Sen since 1985, has not experienced any further military conflict after Vietnamese withdrawal.4 This is largely due to its adoption of Just War Theory and recently, the United Nation’s Responsibility to Protect Initiative.7 Nonetheless, as evidenced by its stance against UN action on the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar, Cambodia remains a country committed to a principle of “non-interference,” and therefore only supports the application of R2P to a limited extent.7  

Possible Solutions

In order to move towards a global environment in which unjust wars are completely absent, Cambodia recommends that the United Nations Security Council adopts Just War Theory as a facet of international law. Should countries and other entities fail to meet the requirements of Just War Theory, most notably attempting diplomatic action prior to the use of force, they will face unilateral international sanctions in addition to other possible consequences such as actions taken by UN peacekeeping troops to mitigate the situation. Concerning the application of R2P, Cambodia urges this committee to limit the scope of the initiative from the international level at which it is currently at. Cambodia would instead like to see this committee redefine a set of rules that are recommended for regional bodies such as ASEAN to consider and apply. Regional bodies are ultimately a more effective way for countries affected by initiatives such as R2P to represent themselves amongst surrounding countries extremely familiar with each member state. Therefore, by limiting R2P to an initiative enforced by regional bodies, this committee can ensure that the United Nations does not act prematurely in interfering with a member state’s national sovereignty and using force.  Finally, Cambodia would like to see R2P defined more specifically so that it includes actions for specific infractions. This will ensure that actions taken to mitigate mass atrocities will be more targeted and in turn, effective.

Topic II: Redefining Maritime Freedom of the Seas

Introduction and Background

The need to govern legal disputes surrounding navigable bodies of water has long been recognized as a significant aspect of maritime law, and with the recent increase in interstate and foreign commerce, it has escalated in importance.2 Current attention has been concentrated among territorial disputes over the ownership of the South China Sea, a commercial passage responsible for over $5.3 trillion worth of annual trade and global merchant shipping within the Indo-Pacific.6 Historically, oceanic bodies have been subject to the freedom-of-the-seas doctrine, a principle from the 17th century limiting a country’s nautical freedoms.5 With Southeast Asian countries vying for ownership of the economically critical South China Sea, the international guidelines and definitions established by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in 1982 are becoming increasingly important in understanding the issue at hand. Despite UNCLOS being ratified by numerous international bodies, there are at least six Southeast Asian governments claiming the Spratly and Paracel Islands, with more economically powerful countries constructing their own artificial islands and blocking other nations’ attempts to explore the area.9 Cambodia looks forward to developing detailed solutions that refrain from infringing upon national sovereignty, while keeping in mind historical presence and commercial interactions.

Cambodia and Maritime Freedom of the Seas

Cambodia has experienced conflict surrounding its own neighboring body of water, the Gulf of Thailand. Due to overlapping territorial claims in the resource-rich Gulf of Thailand by Cambodia and Thailand, its bordering nation, offshore resource-extraction in the body of water has remained nearly nonexistent as years of negotiations surrounding a joint petroleum project have continuously stalled.8 Nonetheless, in 2015, Cambodia appeared to have resolved the border dispute with Thailand, and in 2016, it awarded a contract to Krisenergy to begin development on the Anaparia oil field.7,3 Regarding the South China Sea conflict, Cambodia is not directly involved in the dispute in terms of territoriality, thus, its views have largely been influenced by those of China due to the financial aid provided by the Chinese government. After China declared that it would ignore an ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration that declared that its claims on the majority of the South China Sea had no legal basis, Cambodia followed suit, blocking mention to the ruling at a 2016 ASEAN summit, and leaving the regional body in a deadlock on the issue.4

Possible Solutions

Because nations in the Indo-Pacific region only started competing with China for the South China Sea territory after the discovery of oil and natural gas, the delegation of Cambodia believes that in order to successfully address the issue at hand, claimant countries should be encouraged to switch from a complete ownership, sovereignty-based mindset to one of multilateral cooperation in resource exploration. The undertaking of joint exploration and investment projects similar to the Malaysia-Thai Development Authority can help claimants cooperatively manage natural resources.1 Revenue from resources can be divided based on the proportion of costs invested by the specific stakeholders limited to a 50% cap per project, ultimately increasing transparency and functionality between all parties. Additionally, in response to possible military conflict in the South China Sea, Cambodia would like to see that this committee requires nations to receive a permit prior to sand dredging in overlapping claims areas. Should nations engage in dredging without UN permission, they will be faced with a decline in maritime trade in the region in which they sand dredge. Finally, due to the fact that trillions of dollars worth of goods move through the territory every year, Cambodia also believes that it would be in all nations’ best interests for member states to agree that shipping lanes within the South China Sea area should remain open for the innocent passage of ships transporting commercial cargo regardless of international conflict in the region.

Works Cited

Topic I:

[1] Amaro, Yesenia, and Kong Meta. “Cambodia Votes against UN Rohingya Resolution,

National, Phnom Penh Post.” Cambodia Votes against UN Rohingya Resolution,

National, Phnom Penh Post, 20 Nov. 2017,

http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/cambodia-votes-against-un-rohingya-resolution.

[2] “Background Information on the Responsibility to Protect.” United Nations, United Nations,

http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/rwanda/about/bgresponsibility.shtml.

[3] Bass, Gary J. “Jus Post Bellum.” Princeton University, 2004,

http://www.princeton.edu/~gjbass/docs/juspost.pdf.

[4] Chandler, David P., and Leonard C. Overton. “Cambodia.” Encyclopædia Britannica,

Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 26 Nov. 2018, http://www.britannica.com/place/Cambodia.

[5] “Ethics – War: Just War – Introduction.” BBC, BBC,

www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/just/introduction.shtml.

[6] Millies, Steven P., and Sarah Hower. “Three Problems for Just War Theory in the 21st

Century.” Academia.edu – Share Research, 2006,

http://www.academia.edu/917831/Three_Problems_for_Just_War_Theory_in_the_21st_Centu

ry.

[7] Sovachana, Pou. “Cambodia Can Lead on R2P, Opinion, Phnom Penh Post.” Cambodia Can

Lead on R2P, Opinion, Phnom Penh Post, 3 Mar. 2015,

http://www.phnompenhpost.com/opinion/cambodia-can-lead-r2p.

Topic II:

[1] “About MTJA.” Malaysia-Thailand Joint Authority (MTJA) – About Us,

http://www.mtja.org/about_mtja.php.

[2] “Admiralty and Maritime Law.” Hg.org, 2019, http://www.hg.org/admiralty-law.html.

[3] Cnbc. “Cambodia Could Finally Be about to Produce Its Own Oil after Years of Delays.” CNBC,

CNBC, 23 Aug. 2017,

www.cnbc.com/2017/08/23/cambodia-krisenergy-sign-deal-to-develop-offshore-oil-field-first

-oil-expected-in-2019.html.

[4] Mogato, Manuel. “ASEAN Deadlocked on South China Sea, Cambodia Blocks Statement.”

Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 26 July 2016,

www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-ruling-asean/asean-deadlocked-on-south-china-sea

-cambodia-blocks-statement-idUSKCN1050F6.

[5] “Oceans and the Law of the Sea.” United Nations, United Nations,

http://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/oceans-and-law-sea/.

[6] Saiidi, Uptin. “Here’s Why the South China Sea Is Highly Contested.” CNBC, CNBC, 7 Feb.

2018, www.cnbc.com/2018/02/07/heres-why-the-south-china-sea-is-highly-contested.html.

[7] Sea Globe. “Whatever Happened to… Cambodia’s Oil Prospects?” Southeast Asia

Globe Magazine, 17 Dec. 2018, sea-globe.com/cambodia-oil/.

[8] “Thailand, Cambodia discuss overlapping maritime oil resources.” Philippines News Agency, 21

Sept. 2011. Infotrac Newsstand,

http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A267650000/STND?u=tjhs_e&sid=STND&xid=8f3fa55

6. Accessed 16 Mar. 2019.

[9] Watson, Ivan, et al. “Inside the Battle for the South China Sea.” CNN, Cable News Network,

edition.cnn.com/interactive/2018/08/asia/south-china-sea/.