Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Afghanistan
Delegate Name: Shakir Khan
School: Fishers High School

Afghanistan strongly believes that the legitimacy of government during popular uprising should not be recognized because due to past precedent of the UN never recognizing a political uprising such as the political uprising of the Taliban and how they were not recognized.

The people of Afghanistan believe that governments during a political uprising should not be recognized because of the history Afghanistan has with this topic. It is evident that Afghanistan has had diplomatic troubles in the past and there is no secret to Taliban’s presence in Afghanistan, where as their efforts to control Afghanistan during some points in time. During these points in time the United Nations has not recognized the Taliban as the governing body of Afghanistan and has always held Afghanistan to be known as the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, not the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. The Taliban was recognized as the governing body by only three countries, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and United Arab Emirates. The United Nations did not recognize the Taliban’s rule as a governing body and Afghanistan feels that this was the right thing to do, and due to precedent believes that that should happen to other countries as well.

However, Afghanistan would like to stress that the country may be under ill-advised rule that governing body during a political uprising should not be considered legitimate. In the past, Afghanistan has never recognized these governing bodies and believes Afghanistan never will. The people of Afghanistan believe that these parties can sometimes be corrupt and not in the best interest for that country. So the country of Afghanistan would like to stress that these countries not be legitimized by the United Nations and should not be recognized. The country of Afghanistan would also like to stress that while this topic is very sensitive the United Nations must remain neutral and not intervene aside from diplomatically, whereas sending troops. This ensures that the host country has their national sovereignty and this right has not been invaded on. The topic of national sovereignty arises from the conflict that the United Nations might get involved physically and Afghanistan believes that aside form diplomatically outlawing these popular governments the United Nations does not intervene in any other way like the United Nations has in the past.

The country of Afghanistan believes that the appropriate solution keeping all the commentary stated above in mind would be to not legitimize said countries with a government that aroused during a political uprising. Afghanistan believes this would be the best if not the only option keeping the nation’s national sovereignty in mind. The people of Afghanistan believe that this situation is appropriate for this situation and it is applicable to the member country as well as the other countries in the United Nations.

References: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/ , http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/National+sovereignty

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Australia
Delegate Name: Sarah Rusinowski
School: Royal Oak High School

The question of legitimacy in government has been called into question recently, especially with the uprisings and crisis in the Middle East and North Africa. These revolutions, particularly in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, and Syria, signaled unstable governments. Legitimacy is extremely complex, and many different factors should be taken into account when addressing the issue.

In the case of Libya’s recent revolution, Australia was at the forefront of international diplomatic and humanitarian efforts, being the 3rd largest donor in aiding the rebels. Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard said, “Throughout the crisis, we have been clear in supporting the universal aspiration for human dignity and for individuals to determine how they are governed.”

Australia believes that a government should rule with the consent of the governed, and should have its people’s best interests as highest priority. Therefore, Australia condemns governments who react to popular uprisings with resistance and military force. We uphold the belief that when crimes against humanity are being committed by a government, the international community has ‘Responsibility to Protect.’ The ‘Responsibility to Protect’ principle holds that states are responsible for the protection of their own civilians from grave mass crimes, and that the international community is responsible for assisting states in this effort. When basic civil rights are being violated, Australia advocates for the international community to intervene and support the common people, and to assist rebuilding the national government after an uprising. Australia believes that legitimacy in a government should uphold national sovereignty and should reflect support from the people. We fully support democratic, representative forms of government when rebuilding and restructuring a revolutionized nation.

To effectively be able to define the legitimacy of a government during popular uprising, we must note that our responsibility is not only defining a legitimate government, but also defining a legitimate uprising. When does a rebellion have legitimate cause? This is another factor that must be taken into account. A popular uprising should articulate clear political discontent to be considered legitimate.

Australia hopes that these aims will be met to relieve the governments and the people in nations struggling with uprisings. We believe that the international community’s goal should be protecting the interests of those who have fallen victim to oppression and met with government resistance, and also clarifying when international interference is necessary.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Brazil
Delegate Name: Nathan Flynn
School: Roeper School

Following the so-called ‘Arab Spring,’ it seems especially pertinent to be questioning the protocol used to determine the legitimacy of governments during times of uprising. This issue has (rightly) seen increased attention ever since the dispatch of peacekeeping troops to Libya to combat the volatile regime of Muammar Gaddafi. The incident has led Brazil to form opinions regarding the handling of governmental legitimacy.

During the Libya conflict, Brazilian officials released a statement that called on the Libyan government to “…uphold and protect the right of free expression of the protesters.” Thusly, Brazil believes in the legitimacy of the current government during a popular uprising insofar that they should be able to make decisions regarding policy, such as the right to free expression, as well as maintaining the ability to safely shelter during the riots, and expedite their departure from the country. It is fair to assume that, given the protocol followed during Libya’s revolution, Brazil will support a similar pattern of allowing the government to remain in power during the revolution.

Brazil also supports the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), which believes in empowerment and supporting the resilience of nations. Brazil in turn supports the governments that are struggling to remain effective despite the possible fallout, as well as supporting the recovery of the country after the dispute has ended. To keep in line with the UNDP, Brazil believes in preserving the United Nation’s system of protocol during times of crisis, however, and will not always support the government in place if it is not in the best interest of the United Nations. Preserving peace is the most important thing, and if a government collapsing is agreed to be the best way to handle maintaining peace, then Brazil will support that decision.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Canada
Delegate Name: Caroline Sawatzki
School: Saginaw Arts and Sciences Academy

The Dominion of Canada upholds its firm belief that a government’s most imperative duty is to act as a protective body with respect to the welfare of its populace. As recent uprisings have indicated, oppressive governments in the throes of revolt may attempt to stifle the freedoms of political expression by violent or unethical means. In the quest for power and political gain, some governments lose sight of their obligation to preserve the rights and ensure the safety of the population.

It is often difficult to assess the legitimacy of a government, as a government can be illegitimate and legal simultaneously. A government can maintain legality even when not possessing the full support of its governed bodies, and within its rights in using militaristic force to block protest or prevent uprising. Due to the uneven distribution of political control in many countries, corrupt, ineffective and unfavorable governments can be upheld solely because they are supported by a small group of powerful political elites. Action must be taken to ensure that the people of any area do not fall prey to such governing bodies.

As nations and populations undergo change, the leadership of such bodies must change in order to accommodate for the needs each community expresses. Failure of a government to do so can lead to revolt among the population, a pattern which is historically expressed and recently reinforced in the cases of Egypt, Syria, and Libya. Canada believes that the leadership of each country in transition should be closely evaluated and assessed for legitimacy. A government that dismisses the welfare of its population in favor of political agenda, imposes violent restrictions as a means of control, or is considered inauspicious by a measurable majority of the population should be considered illegitimate and replaced in due course by a competent and favorable government.

Canada believes strongly that individual nations should not take action that may compromise a partnership between nations, and refuses to become involved with the internal sovereignty of another nation. Canada agrees that every government should be given the chance to address the needs and issues raised by their communities through reform and suggests that governments respect the will of the people and act accordingly. However, Canada strongly urges the United Nations to question its support of a government when its course of action shifts from protecting its citizens to undermining its population, regardless of motivation. It is the role of the United Nations to intervene in these cases by calling for reform or changes in leadership. Canada believes that the safety of citizens is of utmost importance and will continue to assist in the prevention of attacks on people by providing military reinforcement as well as imposing economic or other sanctions on nations who threaten the safety of their populace.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Chile
Delegate Name: Lauren Williams
School: Mattawan High School

Chile prides itself on the respect that it has toward its civilians. With this in mind, Chile finds it completely intolerable for cruelty to be placed on citizens in the time of peaceful protests. The right of petition and assembly is an ability that should be bestowed upon every native without hesitation.

To further express Chile’s position on the legitimacy of government during a popular uprising, Chile finds it necessary to address a rebellion that is most recent to the global community. Libya’s recent revolution is found to have the quality of great importance for Chile, because of the element that human rights were so heavily violated during the uprising. Government’s legitimacy dwindles as it proves itself to be abusive of its own power. Upon the persistence of unjustified use of force against civil population, the Government of Chile deplored and energetically condemned the governmental repression against its citizens. This is an action contrary to the spirit of dialogue claimed by Chile and the international community to solve the political crisis in that country, and deeply opposed to the full respect for the human rights consigned in the charter of the United Nations. The Government of Chile urged Libyan authorities to establish mechanisms for dialogue and citizen participation and to immediately cease the repression against its own people.

The case of Libya exemplifies the necessity of the United Nations’, along with other globally active countries’, participation in circumstances relative to this. Chile still would like to express its position on the significance of the accountability of each nation to protect the human rights of its populaces. The United Nation can be of assistance to the countries in the rejuvenation period. Chile does feel that there is most certainly urgency for state to take responsibility and make advancement of modification.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: China
Delegate Name: Elizabeth Patterson
School: Mattawan High School

The Egyptian uprising is an awkward fact for the People Republic of China’s rulers because it undermines one of their favorite arguments. They have long claimed that the Peoples Republic of China has “special characteristics” (meaning that its people prefer authoritarianism, at least for now) and that demands in the Peoples Republic of China for democracy and human rights are merely results of the subversive tactics of “anti-China” forces based in Western countries. But if that theory is true, then one needs to explain why millions of Egyptian people were opposing Mubarak, who was a US client. Plainly something deeper was motivating them.

In the pasy the example of Tunisia raises a related question, equally awkward. For the Peoples Republic of China’s rulers, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, the ousted dictator of Tunisia, would have been seen as following the Peoples Republic of China’s own approach—the so-called “Chinese model” of economic growth combined with political repression—and having much success with it, or so it was assumed for many years. But the Tunisian people took to the streets to overthrow him. Did the people want something more than the Chinese model? How could that be?

It is believed that the social media such as Facebook and Twitter assisted Tunisia and Egypt in uprising. However, the Peoples Republic of China didn’t have this acess until Twitter emerged in the Peoples Republic of China. This was empathized as “Gods gift to China.”

The Peoples Republic of China is willing to work with the UN to get our government back in helping uprisings; however, will not take the blame for failed governments and leaders such as the blame given from Tunisia.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Colombia
Delegate Name: Natalie Ciocca
School: Fishers High School

Colombia strongly believes that government during popular uprising is completely legitimate. Government is meant to do what is best for the citizens residing within the country and therefore a government should always be legitimate.

Having significant problems in the past with violence and uprisings, Colombia has found that the best way to handle certain situations is to put them down by any means necessary. Being a Republic, the people of Colombia elect who they choose as there is universal suffrage over the age of 18 and therefore, there is no reason as to why the governmental system should not be in legitimate in any case.

As per the Preamble to the Charter of the United Nations, any uprising which would be put down would be due to the ends that would, "unite our strength to maintain international peace and security." The delegation of Colombia wishes to work towards theses ends and others that are outlined in the Charter of the UN. Colombia has worked with other countries in the past like the US in 2009 with a Military Cooperation agreement. This has been essential in helping to settle some of the unrest that has arisen in the past as the government attempts to retain power in the difficult times it has been faced with in the past.

Solutions to this problem would easily be settled by future agreements such as that of the Military Cooperation Agreement. By acquiring aid from other countries, future uprisings would be more easily put down and governments would retain their power during times of political unrest.

The Republic of Colombia would be open to accept aid from foreign countries to preserve the government which is in place due to the social unrest and potential future uprisings and would also be willing to aid, if resources are available, in settling uprisings in other countries. The UN should aid in the creation of such treaties and also that it should play a role in the attempt to aid the governments during the times of these popular uprisings to promote eventual peace within the country and by extension, the world and ultimately working towards the goals of the UN.

References:

"CIA – The World Factbook." Welcome to the CIA Web Site — Central Intelligence Agency. Web. 21 Nov. 2011. <https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/co.html>.

"Colombia: Conflict Timeline." Insight on Conflict. Web. 21 Nov. 2011. <http://www.insightonconflict.org/conflicts/colombia/conflict-profile/conflict-timeline/?gclid=CKnJ45egyawCFQrHKgodIn3hpg>.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Congo
Delegate Name: Sean Baas
School: Forest Hills Central High School

The question of how much legitimacy a government should have during a popular uprising has come into question in recent years. The Arab Spring posed many examples of this anywhere from the protests in Tunisia to the overthrowing and execution of Libya’s president Moammar Gadhafi. In both of these cases the people overthrew their government but not without much conflict. Their governments wanted to keep their power as long as they could so they tried to suppress the uprisings. There are still many problems in the World today that relate to these situations mostly that of the situation is Syria. Currently Syria’s government is using violence to suppress the protestors who want a new leader. Looking back it seems that every time there has been an uprising by the people their government has stepped in and tried to stop it in order to keep their power for as long as possible.

Congo believes that a government should have complete legitimacy during a popular uprising in most cases. The government is what controls the country and keeps it in check so it should maintain its power during an uprising for the greater good of its country unless that government is not allowing its people their basic human rights. If the government is not causing any harm to its people then it should keep its power and authority during an uprising. If a government loses its power during an uprising then it has no control over the people and even greater problems can occur. The United Nations should start by sending aid and helping in all ways possible to governments who are currently experiencing an uprising by the people unless that government is denying its citizens of their rights. By doing this it will ensure that the government will maintain its power and be able to resolve conflicts in the best way possible.

There are quite a few countries that Congo believes will agree with our way of solving this growing problem. Some of these countries include the major powers of the world and members of the Security Council such as The United States, Great Britain, France, and Russia. All of these countries see the importance that there is in keeping a government in power during a popular uprising and could also add their ideas to helping resolve this issue.

On the other hand there seems to be very few countries who would disagree with Congo’s point of view on this topic. Most countries are un-willing to give up their power over the people in situations like this because of the danger that there is in letting the people have control of the country. If the people of a country currently experiencing popular uprising were to take charge, there would be much greater consequences to be paid than if the government maintained its legitimacy and stayed in power.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Cuba
Delegate Name: Blythe Bugg
School: Mattawan High School

As rebellious movements continue to swarm across Northern Africa demanding the rights that nations such as the United States deem necessary, many have disputed whether or not to entangle the United Nations in such an ambiguous situation. Furthermore, many have questioned who exactly the legitimate government ruler is: the current standing government or the citizens attempting to form a government. The Republic of Cuba would merely like to present its strong disapproval in such a situation as the United Nations stepping forward, especially if they were to show approval for the rebellious groups forming their own government.

There are a few simple points that the Republic of Cuba would just like to point out which many countries voicing their views have skimmed over. Citizens of Egypt have had the right to vote for their president for quite some time now, and if they truly believed Hosni Mubarak was unfit to be president, shouldn’t the citizens use their right to vote him out? Obviously, certain groups of extremists felt it necessary to use force and violence to get their way instead of using the rights their government gave them. These citizens should be grateful for the rights they had compared to the rights they’ll be losing with these Islamic extremist groups coming into power.

The Republic of Cuba would like other nations to see this conflict realistically. These revolts do not bring peace and justice to these nations, but only bloodshed and chaos. The United Nations need only look at the growing casualties in countries such as Syria, Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt to entirely grasp how unnecessary these “revolutions” have been in creating democracy as they had hoped for and how these nations should take responsibility for what has happened to their countries, not the United Nations.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Czech Republic
Delegate Name: Connor Helakoski
School: Mattawan High School

The Czech Republic is a pluralist multi-party parliamentary representative democracy, a member of the European Union, NATO, the OECD, the OSCE, the Council of Europe, and the Visegrad Group. As a member of all of these organizations the Czech Republic has learned how through laws, and acts, the government can maintain legitimacy while also being supported by its citizens.

Considering popular uprising, the Czech Republic was founded upon a constitution, a constitution approved by its people. The president of Czech Republic is only the head of the parliament and has very limited power. The people wield power to change aspects of their nation. These aspects of Czech Republic are very important to helping creating and maintaining a legitimate government. Many of these aspects are not held by governments who have had uprisings in the recent past such as many in the Middle East. Because of their lack of legitimacy they now face very serious issues that can lead to severe suffering and damage that can last for a very long time.

The Czech Republic was taken over by the German armies during World War II. Although the Czech Republic government was no longer officially in power, they still managed to help stage the Prague Uprising that led to ridding the Czech Republic of the German armies. Maintaining legitimacy during that kind of uprising is an incredible feat, and one that shows it could certainly be done again by the strong people of Czech Republic. These events show that the Czech Republic is iron clad in their belief in upholding democracy, no matter what comes their way.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Denmark
Delegate Name: Paige Etchison
School: Fishers High School

The people of Denmark believe that revolt in a country has the right to a revolt if the government has become corrupt or is no longer fit to run their country. Denmark has been previously affected by the uprisings of other countries such as the popular revolt of the French in 1848. That uprising caused severely shaken government systems and stemmed into minor revolts and uprisings all over Europe, along with abuse of workers rights, a lack of political equality, and a state of despair all over Europe. Before this time period, there were many socio-economic changes that greatly affected the economy of Europe and industrialization all over Europe was improving living conditions and making the economy better for people all over the country. This was quickly ended by the tidal wave of revolts and uprisings all over Europe, replacing it with a downed economy and leaving many European governments in ruins.

This can be applied in modern times with the political unrest in countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and many Middle Eastern countries. Denmark takes the position that, in these cases, the best response would be to help relieve the repressing governments and to give the people of the country in question the basic human rights that they deserve. One way that the country of Denmark could assist those people in revolt would be to bring in military troops, and to give basic necessities to people who have been displaced by efforts to remove the repressive government from power, and to have medical supplies delivered to people who have medical problems that they are having to deal with without medical care. Another way that Denmark and other countries could assist in popular uprisings against oppressive governments would be to help countries set up governments that they agree with for their country if and when the government being revolted against has been abolished. Denmark takes the position of assisting countries in their popular uprisings as long as they are in a controlled way, and will not negatively affect too many other people in surrounding countries.

Denmark is willing to assist countries in need in their times of popular uprising as long as those actions and decisions will not be detrimental to the economies of the surrounding countries and/or cause any kind of negative effects on a widespread basis. Based on Denmark’s past experiences involving popular uprisings of other countries, namely France and their popular uprising in 1848, and the way that Denmark generally gravitates towards the more peaceful solution to conflicts, Denmark takes the position that they are willing to assist people in times of popular uprisings in their countries as long as those uprisings and their fallouts do not detriment the states and peoples surrounding them in a way that is similar to the fallout from the popular uprising of the French in 1848, the aftermath of which caused subsequent uprisings all over Europe and was detrimental the status of workers and the economy all over Europe. By this statement Denmark is willing to assist countries in need from the fallout of the uprising as long as it does not hurt Denmark or people in any surrounding areas to do so. This is the official position of Denmark on the issue of popular uprising, and the legitimacy of a government while the uprising is taking place.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Egypt
Delegate Name: Ryan Kerr
School: Forest Hills Eastern High School

“The United Nations Development Program (UNDP), in its 1997 policy paper, defined governance as ‘the exercise of economic, political and administrative authority to manage a country’s affairs at all levels. It comprises the mechanisms, processes and institutions through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights, meet their obligations and mediate their differences’” (“Legitimacy). Popular uprisings, like those that have occurred in Tunisia, Syria, Libya, and Egypt, happened in response to violations of citizens legal rights that disable the efficacy of the government’s needed ability to manage affairs at all levels (as required by the above definition of governance). Since our own regime change, we have openly supported nations like Libya, as they fight for liberation from tyrants like President Muammar Gadhafi: including a call to move the UN Security Council vote to authorize international military support to Libya and recognizing the National Transition Council, the de facto Libyan government (“National).

The United Nations should immediately begin investigating the reasons for war or revolt within any nation. If a prolonged and violent struggle breaks out, like the all-out civil war in Libya, then there needs to be a well-researched view available to the public from both sides. The sooner the UN acknowledges or denies the legitimacy of revolutionary grievances and ideals; they can lend aid to the correct side; hopefully leading to a quicker peace. A committee can be established to carry-out the investigation. Important to note, however, is to not act on any acquired information from the investigation till a violent struggle of an extended period of time has been occurring. The emphasis of self-determination without outside intervention that doesn’t involve massive loss of life is key to creating a new government that satisfies the needs of the people. Like in Egypt, the brief struggle didn’t call for outside intervention. Nations have the right to at least try to solve the problem of necessary changes on their own. The violence from the Mubarak regime is also being taken care of within our national courts; at least the chance to enforce justice on a tyrannous leader should also be preserved for each nation.

In the case of Libya, which is a struggle that had clearly grown too violent and continued too long to not warrant international intervention (for peoples’ safety sake), a large number of states agree with our position. The new, anti-Gadahfi, government of Libya, has garnered support from a majority of UN GA members, all but two nations (Algeria and Syria) within the Arab League, and the African Union (“National), and the United States. The large backing of Libya, and the helpful activity to end the violence in Libya, shows the willingness of many nations to support a righteous revolution, especially in the interest of bringing peace to the people of a nation and the international community.

The most inhibiting factor against legitimizing a new government the people want is the self-interest of varying regions and nations, depending on the country in which the uprising is taking place. Currently, the international community relies on the information of media. An unbiased investigation into the uprising and a peace priority to protect a nation’s people first, through a new investigational committee, can provide information to hopefully bring about righteous support and a victory for the oppressed people.

Works Cited

"Legitimacy of Governments during a Popular Uprising." GLICA. Web.

"National Transitional Council." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Web. 13 Nov. 2011.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: France
Delegate Name: Trevor Grayeb
School: Forest Hills Northern High School

The march of global progress has been paved, for centuries, by revolutionaries, those who would seek to have their voices heard by a government that does not want to listen. Indeed, France’s own history is steeped in uprising against tyrants and monarchs. But this is a long-closed chapter buried in Europe’s Age of Revolution. Today the world stands upon the brink of a systematic upheaval, as France and its fellow “old powers” see their role in world affairs change while fostering the growth of new powers born from the ranks of developing nations. And as these countries seek their fullest untapped potential, a new Age of Revolution has begun to spread throughout the Islamic Maghreb and beyond, sparking the long-predicted “Fourth Wave” of Democratization.

But this fourth wave will ripple through a world vastly different from that which France found itself in at the dawning of the so-called “First Wave.” And indeed, peaceful uprisings by sons of democracy in the Arab world have been met time and again with the barrel of a gun. When circumstance of progress pits a despot against his own people, the question must inevitably be raised as to the right of a government to rule in the face of such a crisis. As one of the globe’s premier diplomatic players and an active proponent of the United Nations since its inception, France stresses the active role that the UN, as the chief forum of the international community, must play in evaluating the legitimacy of these governments that would slaughter peaceful protesters, their own citizens.

As a nation whose history, resources, and diplomatic standpoint poises it to effectively mediate the rise of a new epoch of democratic change, France has taken the initiative in the support and protection of those who are oppressed by illegitimate regimes. The French Republic was the first nation on Earth to recognize the National Transitional Council in Libya. We were the first to organize a transnational effort to protect the Libyan people and the first to lead the fight for sanctions on rogue despot Bashar al-Assad. The French Armed Forces were the first in the air over Benghazi and the first on the ground in Cote d’Ivoire to assure that an illegitimate government did not usurp Ivorian democracy. Through this all, France has led the fight to defend the true legitimacy of governments, enshrined in the mandate of the people.

The legitimacy of government is derived solely from the consent of the governed, from popular mandate, regardless of the form of government in question be it republic, kingdom, or otherwise. This is an unshakable tenet of the French Republic, and an idea deeply ingrained in the United Nations. Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights charges the international community to uphold this principle, stating that "the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government." But as progress wracks the globe, that popular mandate finds itself under attack in countless theatres, and it is the responsibility of the international community to protect it. Any government that intentionally suppresses the will of the people through military or paramilitary action against peaceful civilians has undoubtedly lost that mandate. Similarly, any state that willfully nullifies the will of the people as it has been objectively verified through a UN-monitored election also sheds the popular mandate, and with it their legitimacy as a governing body. We must take action against such states, developing for application in international law a strict and exacting system for weeding out those who have no right to rule and ensuring a transition to legitimate rule with popular mandate, be that through extensive reforms or through transfer of legitimacy to an opposition body. The precedent of determining illegitimacy has been set by the United Nations in their action in Cote d’Ivoire and Libya, through UNSC Resolutions 1962 (2010) and 1973 (2011,) both authored by France. Now, to be more actively prepared to protect the will of the people in a changing world governed by cruel regimes resistant to change, we are called upon to standardize this precedent and codify it in international law. To this end, France hopes to avoid the bloodshed and military intervention required by both of the above resolutions, and to save the lives of many thousands of peaceful civilian protestors with democratic aspirations.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Gabon
Delegate Name: Kate Kelley
School: Royal Oak High School

Governmental legitimacy is not defined by the type of government in power – in Africa and across the globe, a range of democratic and autocratic governments maintain peace, stability, and security in the nations they rule. This spectrum of autocracy exists not only in leaders, but in institutions. Strong institutions promote stability in government and allow for more successful regime change. Furthermore, strong institutions act as a balance against slides back into tyranny – once an institution has power, it becomes more difficult for an autocrat to extricate that authority again.

So rather than basing definitions of legitimacy on government type, Gabon wishes to focus on the effectiveness, stability, malleability, and legal rectitude of governments. Effectiveness is a term that must be carefully defined for economic, military, and political usage – an “effective” government is one that ensures economic diversity and growth, while avoiding damaging speculations and fluctuations, protects its citizens and its borders, and has a system for political democratization and succession. Obviously, all governments exist somewhere within a spectrum of effectiveness – it is up to the Legal Committee to define effectiveness more explicitly and to establish a minimum criteria for a government to be considered effective.

Similarly, the Legal Committee must characterize and define a spectrum and minimum level of stability, meaning that governments experiencing a certain level of unrest, involved in acts of aggression, or complaint in the conduct of genocide or crimes against humanity lose legitimacy and clout in the international community.

Legal rectitude is another important concept of legitimate government that the committee must define. Co-operation with international legal bodies like the ICC and ICJ, and internal laws that correlate with international standards will be the main criteria for determining a government’s legal competency and legitimacy.

Any definition of legitimacy created by the Legal Committee must be universally applicable, and must be helpful for furthering discussion in the international community. Overly specific or restrictive definitions (for example, defining democracy as the only legitimate form of government) will be rejected as ignorant of political realities and complexities. However, very generic characterizations of legitimacy will also be unhelpful, by failing to establish norms that can guide international policy and behavior.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Germany
Delegate Name: Claire Fishman
School: Ann Arbor Community High School

A little more then two short decades ago, the East German people felt the joys of replacing autocracy with democracy. Today, we are pleased to see the same process being replicated throughout the Middle East. We support the process of democratization in these countries and continue to offer our help to them through the various stages of this process by offering monetary aid and guidance both generally and for specific projects. This is because Germany strongly supports and promotes the ideals of freedom and democracy, believing that these are concepts that apply and appeal to all people, no matter what their culture or location.

An important issue to address before offering assistance is the legitimacy of both the established and newly formed governments in these countries. We have two main guidelines for this- that a government that uses violence against it’s own people forfeits all legitimacy and that free elections are essential to establishing and maintaining legitimacy. In stating the latter, we point to our own past, when East Germans were able to choose through their votes to unify with West Germany.

When a government commits human rights violations against it’s own people, as has unfortunately been occurring in these recently events, a just response is sanctions, as in our vote for Security Council Resolution 1970. Another path is directly offering assistance to the movements being threatened by their governments. Something we are not automatically willing to do in these situations, however, is escalate to armed interventions, as shown by our decision to abstain from the vote on Security Council Resolution 1973. Our concern was that a no-fly zone over Libya was just a slippery slope towards the involvement of ground forces, and we respect other countries’ sovereignty. However, it is necessary to make a distinction between a government fighting it’s own armed citizens and a government attacking unarmed civilians, though both are cause of concern. If there are very serious proven human rights violations in the vein of the latter, we will consider using force to protect civilians, as we did in Serbia in 1999.

While it is important to assist in these current crises, the support of the international community cannot cease once a new government has been established, but must continue through the transition process and beyond. We ourselves have continued to help the newly established governments in countries like Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt. There are various ways that we can and have used our expertise and resources to their benefit, to help them develop and to ensure the success of their democracies and their transition process.

The advancement of democratization and civil society is a subject that is especially important to us. We have established an endowment fund for the promotion of democracy in Tunisia, and have also signed a declaration with Tunisia stating our intentions to support their democracy. This is something we plan to do through various projects, including training journalists and NGOs, supporting administrative reform, and reducing corruption. We have also offered our support for their development of an independent judiciary.

It is our belief that all people have the right to have a voice in their governments. We invite other countries to join us in our support of reforms in existing governments and the development of new legitimate governments, to the benefit of the both the countries in question and the entire international community.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Ghana
Delegate Name: Arica Jackson
School: Forest Hills Eastern High School

By supporting the TNC of Libya, The United Nations has been able to effectively insure the people of Libya with the hopes of a better democratic society. Ghana believes that democracy and good governance advances the civil liberties, political representations, and constitutionalism; which are all elements that Ghana believes legitimizes a government. Therefore, The Republic of Ghana believes that the United Nations must come to a consensus that can protect and enforce those democratic ideals, that seems to become a dire necessity amongst the citizens of many of these transitional Arab nations. The UN has already achieved improvements with the UNDP. Through its track progress that is reported in the MDG, the program is currently protecting the democratic institutions in countries like Iraq, Serra Leon, and countless other improving countries by assisting many institutions in finding solutions to economic and social problems, especially in terms of protecting Human rights. Each of these countries use the UNDP as solution program that helps regulate their own countries tax systems, insure representations in the government, and help protect the rights of its citizens. A huge framework of this development program that Ghana believes that the Arab countries must utilize is the Millennium Declaration. This declaration stresses the most important principles of Equality, Solidarity, Tolerance, respect for nature, and shared responsibility. The real essence it has captured is this standard common goal to promote and protect the welfare of institutions, as well as the citizens that practice within these institutions, and halve poverty and diseases hopefully by 2015. This shared future will thus contribute to developing and/or transitional governments. In 2000 Ghana, along with 189 countries, adopted the Millennium Declaration; a declaration that has captured the aspirations of the international community. The Declaration has proven to be the best tool in improving the government of Ghana and the status of the Ghanaian citizens. Based on the Millennium report of 2010, Ghana is on track of achieving both goals of promoting education and gender equality both at .92 and .96, as well as on track of halving extreme poverty by 2015. Therefore, The Millennium Declaration will set goals for the upcoming governments; Judging by the recent uprisings in Tunisia, Libya, and especially in Egypt, these goals will have to focus primarily on protecting the rights of the Citizens of these countries and establishing stable representations of these citizens in the governments to give more power to the citizens of these transitional governments and provide a commonality with the rest of the international community. The Development program and the Millennium Development Goals will give faith to the citizens in a new democratic society that will represent their interests and will protect them from any corruption from their governments.

The new potential Government of Libya should take strong measures to protect the human rights of its citizens. Which means The Transitional National Council, as well as the other new transitional countries, such as Egypt and Tunisia, must adopt the Millennium Declaration. The Legitimacy of these governments will be granted by the citizens of these countries. Ghana proposes that the United Nations recognizes a government as legitimate when the citizens of that country are protected under the newly drafted democratic constitutions of these new countries, are given the civil liberties, political representations, and constitutionalism; otherwise, given the democracy that they see fit. Ghana proposes that these elements be the standards of all upcoming governments because it will provide as peace and protection for the citizens of all upcoming governments.

The United States and many European nations have greatly expressed their ideals about democratic societies that should not exploit its citizens, but rather represent the interests of its citizens. However; the bloodshed that was expressed, rather than a fair trial for Former President Maummar Gaddafi, during the transitions of the governments is extremely looked down upon by the Republic of Ghana. Ghana recommends that the United Nations should emphasize more diplomacy when dealing with any future overthrow of former governments.

The many African governments who have not supported the transitional governments of Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya should recognize and remember that the role of the United Nations is to insure peace and stability amongst citizens of any government. When any government does not exercise democracy in the correct way, where citizens cannot express their ideas of an institution that represents the interests of the government, causes more harm because of their ideas, must be overthrown. To any African Union country that has opposed the transitional government, including South Africa, it is our international duty to support the people of these governments, for the people legitimize the government.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: India
Delegate Name: Akash Premkumar
School: Forest Hills Eastern High School

The legitimacy of a government is defined as the ability of the government to control and rule its people. Some governments lack structure, official and authoritative regulation or strict rule. This lack of regulation can lead to the government’s subjects to revolt and ultimately result in revolution. Once a popular uprising begins or has begun to occur, the legitimacy of a government is tested. The government can be deemed legitimate if its stronghold can withhold the revolt or rebellion from the group of its people. However, a government must be able to effectively instill certain caules, beliefs and traditions that it holds in its people. Instances of popular uprisings have occurred recently in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya and have led to widespread debate on the role of the United Nations in promoting and assessing the legality of standing governments as well as those forming in response to these social movements. There exists much tension between the ideal of self determination on the part of populations and the interests of the member state that make up the international community, some of which have resorted to less than savory methods in order to maintain power. There is also an information problem arising from the fact that although the international community may know a popular uprising is occurring, it is difficult to assess its projected effect on areas involved and even surrounding areas. Despite the effective communication of the Information Age, the overwhelming amount of information that individuals receive confound their thoughts and even inhabitant’s abilities to judge the exigency of a revolt or for that matter an imminent revolt.

There have been no recent events directly regarding India that involve popular uprising; however, the current popular uprisings have directly been able to affect India in various areas. Minor conflicts within India remain such as the ongoing conflict regarding Sikhs and Muslims. However, these revolts do not scale anywhere near the importance of recent event sin other countries. The popular uprising in Egypt, the most populated and influential country in the Arab world, against the authoritarian dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak directly affected India’s economy. India's trade with Egypt stands disrupted and companies such as Dabur and Marico have suspended their operations in the strife-torn African country. Ten Indian firms, including Wipro, Ranbaxy, IFFCO, Dabur and Marico, have their wholly-owned subsidiaries in different parts of Egypt. Fears of the Egyptian crisis spilling over into the Suez Canal, through which a significant amount of oil supplies are routed, has resulted in a rise in crude oil prices. India’s economic performing index has fallen 14.17% since the beginning of the year. The Tharir Square protests have profound implications for both the theory and practice of democracy. Socially and politically, popular uprisings have effected change in India’s people and their new found hope in replacing their unable and corrupt government. India’s however, holds that popular uprising can be implemented in dire situations and when the existing government is truly inept. “Social and mainstream media in India has suggested the possibility of emulating an Egypt-type uprising in India to challenge the corruption and inefficiency of the government. Many observers have even drawn parallels between the Tahrir uprising and public protests in Srinagar in the summer of 2010.” In another instance, the Indian government strongly condemned the violence after an Indian man was killed and many others were injured during the protests. On March 17th, India abstained from voting on a United Nations Security Council resolution to establish a Libyan no-fly zone in its capacity as a nonpermanent member. This is because of India’s “bipartisan” view regarding popular uprising’s effect. Nevertheless, India's abstention cannot be viewed as opposition to the resolution. In practical terms, by abstaining, India did not pose an obstacle but rather cleared the way for the UNSC to take action against Gaddafi's regime. It may be recalled here that India had voted in favor of the earlier UNSC resolution 1970, which was about taking tough measures against the Gaddafi regime as well as referring the matter to the International Criminal Court. Therefore, India's concerns about and opposition to the threat posed by the brutal Gaddafi regime to common civilians in Libya cannot be questioned. India mainly seeks to attain peace in the area through preventive diplomacy. In addition, countries such as Tunisia which began the Arab Spring have been able to attain complete freedom from its autocratic and authoritarian regime. In Tunisia, the protests and uprisings of in January of 2011 began a new era for the Arabic population of North Africa. These actions resulted in the jingoistic democratization of the nation. For example, the country recently held its first national democratic election to select new members of its 217 member National Constituent Assembly. Mohamed Kamez Jendoubi, the head of the country's election commission, stated “More than 80% of the [Tunisian] nation's registered voters cast ballots the previous day. Some waited three hours, in lines looping around polling stations, to have their say in what is [our] first national election since [we] became independent in 1956.” This auspicious and immense voter attendance has revealed to humanity not the spectrum of political ideologies that Tunisia is establishing. This has not been a facile task; however, freedom has arrived; democracy has arrived; the Tunisians’ inalienable rights have arrived and civility has arrived. India firmly holds that popular uprising must be a last resort in the journey to ameliorate a government and that a government should maintain rule over its citizens.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Indonesia
Delegate Name: Eboni White
School: Forest Hills Northern High School

The Republic of Indonesia understands the sentiments and inspirations for the popular uprisings occurring currently in the Middle East and parts of North Africa. The Republic of Indonesia has only recently become a constitutional republic, from 1998 to hitherto, Indonesia is proud to boast of its current republic. Before 1945 the Republic of Indonesia was a colony. After an independence movement Indonesia, meant to be a democracy, unintentionally transitioned into an autocracy.

Under the power of Suharto the government became military dominated. Through an anti-communism campaign, for which Suharto received international support, 100,000 people were put to death due to possible affiliation with the Indonesian Communist Party, under his dictatorship. However Suharto’s reign led to higher living standards as well as economic prosperity. The economy became more industrialized, which has lasting benefits. The quality of education and health improved dramatically. His oppressive fashion of managing the people of Indonesia finally led to a popular uprising in 1998, a little over 10 years ago. Amien Rais led the uprising using forms of protest similar those used in the uprising in Egypt and Libya. Over 200,000 demonstrators we jailed without charges or trials. Under military threat the uprising demonstration in Jakarta was postponed.

Suharto, with some international pressure, voluntarily abdicated power, allowing the Republic of Indonesia to become the leading Islamic country the democratic world. Thus the Republic of Indonesia sympathizes with not only the Islamic community but also with all other uprisings. Due to the fact that Suharto did have some positive impacts on the development of the Republic of Indonesia, his going presented mixed emotions. Therefore, Republic of Indonesia prefers all other peaceable means of implementing a new government be exhausted before renouncing a government as illegitimate, since the Republic of Indonesia understands that the transition of power will not be without emotional and literal confusion.

The recent circumstances in the Middle East and parts of North Africa have forced the world as a whole to consider what makes a government legitimate, and when does it loose its legitimacy? While it seems like many countries are willing to disown a government prematurely, the Republic of Indonesia urges reservation and caution when declaring a country illegitimate. For example in the case of Libya the Republic of Indonesia, from the commencement of the popular uprising, had been urging for a peaceful abdication of power. The Republic of Indonesia also had urged a cease fire in the region. Although a peaceful solution was not reached, the Republic of Indonesia will continue to support the Libyan people through economic resources and diplomatic means. It is the hope of the Republic of Indonesia that governments currently dealing with popular uprisings will think logically and follow the example of Egypt and the Republic of Indonesia, and willingly turn their power over. It is also the hope of the Republic of Indonesia that the countries in dispense of a corrupted governing system will turn to democracy and that the United Nations will take measures to help the country transition while allowing the sovereignty of the said nation stay intact.

It is the opinion of the Republic of Indonesia that the purpose of government is to govern and guide the nation with the best interests of its people in mind. Therefore if it is in the interests of the people to have a new person in power or a new system of governing altogether then the current government should allow for a peaceful transition to occur. If a majority of a country’s population lead an uprising, at that moment then the government should yield to its people. If a government refuses to do so the Republic of Indonesia believes international pressure such as embargos should be utilized. If the government still refuses to concede to the demands of its people the international community should continue to exhaust all other methods without resorting to military use. If the said government begins prosecuting demonstrators as well as rejecting diplomatic compromises, and actively chooses to use military force to dissolve the uprising, only then does the Republic of Indonesia consent to renouncing the said government’s legitimacy. Also if a government is deemed illegitimate actions need to be taken by the international community to aid the country in creating a new government and recognize its new government.

Also the United Nations should agree upon a resolution specifying what qualifies as an illegitimate government as well as the protocol for dealing with the illegitimate government. The resolution should also address how previous treaties, affiliations or diplomatic relationships may be affected now that the government is illegitimate and whether they will transfer to the new government. The issue of how to deal with other countries who still view the said government as legitimacy must too be addressed by the international community.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Iran
Delegate Name: Raid ElKhawaja
School: Forest Hills Northern High School

The Islamic Republic of Iran strongly encourage any changes that takes place in the region, that’s able to cutout the occidental involvements , while creating a strong diplomatic relations with the government in Tehran.

Iran strongly support the idea of the revolution against the dictatorship monarchs in the Middle East. The idea of democracy under an Islamic state is what the government of Iran always support and agree with, where people can have the right to vote with freedom while living under the Islamic Sharia laws – which help to create a powerful Islamic society.

In the past years, Iran had to create a peaceful relation with the Arab’s regime in order to maintain security while winning the Arabs side for the Republic statehood, nevertheless, Iran indirectly addressed the need for changes in the Middle East. The Arab regime and their media viewed Tehran as an Shiite-Persian-anti-Sunni movement, therefore, Tehran tried to reduce any propaganda that calls for changes in the middle east, in order to keep a good relation with its nearborhood Arab’s regimes.

The Iranian view of the Arabic Spring “Arabs Uprising” is still blurry, Iran indirectly encourages any changes in the middle east, but Tehran never supported the situation directly, in fact that the middle eastern region is one of the most changeable region in the world, Iran always tries to keep their public opinion off the situation while supporting the situation indirectly.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Iraq
Delegate Name: Elizabeth Caldwell
School: Ann Arbor Community High School

With the recent demonstration by the citizens of Syria, Egypt and Libya it has become clear that, once again, citizens and non-citizens alike are calling the legitimacy of governments into question. The Republic of Iraq has had and will continue to have a very strong ideology in this matter. Iraq is a strong positive supporter of allowing governments to deal with their own citizens and the issues that the citizens present. The most recent example of this belief is our President’s statement during his address of the Syrian crisis “We believe that Syria will be able to overcome its crisis through reforms”.

We believe heavily in the fact that government policies should deal with the problems, not the military. Unless there is an overwhelming issue of a humanitarian crisis or terrorist activity, the other sovereign nations of the world have no part in influencing the government in question in its dealings with the problems it faces.

Our stance in this matter is heavily influenced by our own history and current government policy as well as “The Millennium Development Goals Report of 2011 for Northern Africa”. Iraq is dedicated to securing our borders and stabilizing the nation from terrorism, which in turn stabilizes the region. Iraq encourages the neighboring sovereign nations to help stabilize the region and stem the flow of terrorism by sharing border protection and protecting the coalition boundaries. We therefore consider partnership with other governments very important and will continue to encourage other governments to deal with problems without outside influence.

Iraq wishes to allow all governments under scrutiny for their legitimacy to be allowed the chance to deal with the popular uprising by changing policies and reforming their governments rather than the gross waste of life exhibited by the rebel forces in the attempt to see their lives bettered by forcibly changing the government.

Many governments under question were making admirable progress under The Millennium Development Goals until these popular uprisings occurred. A huge drop in child and maternal mortality rates coupled with improved sanitations as well as highly improved literacy rates and poverty reduction shows these governments to have a strong goal of positively influencing the lives of their citizens. Iraq firmly holds the belief that these governments should be allowed to continue this influence rather than being forcibly removed because they have had past success with changing citizens’ lives. The Syrian government should be allowed to stay in power to pass policies and reform the government rather than instituting an entirely new governing body, which may do less for its citizens than the current government.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Israel
Delegate Name: Matthew Suandi
School: Williamston High School

The State of Israel, as a parliamentary democracy, maintains universal suffrage for all above 18 years of age. The recent popular uprisings around it however, this so called "Arab Spring," are only bringing anything but democracy to the Middle East. The current transpiring events are not a cause for celebration. Indeed, Israel believes that with these uprisings, the Arab World is moving backwards, not forward.

Israel has learned from history, and history has taught it that the Arab people simply cannot maintain stable democracies. As its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu has stated, the Arab Spring has turned into a "Islamic, anti-Western, anti-liberal, anti-Israeli and anti-democratic wave." Israel points to the current situation in Egypt as an example. The military still retains control over the state, and there are only more and more protests against what continues to remain as autocratic rule! Meanwhile, the Egyptian people also incite hatred of their neighbor Israel by violently attacking the Israeli embassy and staging other protests. At least while Hosni Mubarak was still around, Israel could take comfort in the fact that a reasonable man, who respected the national security of countries in the Middle East, was in charge. Today, Israel cannot take comfort in anything.

Israel has much reason to be concerned for its national security. Its people have already witnessed the horrors of hate crimes and their terrible effects. Israel fears the fall of other nations who maintain diplomatic relations with Israel, such as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The thought of further nations falling to extremist elements is of great concern to Israel.

Regarding the Palestinians and their own efforts for a separate state, Israel recognizes that it must tread carefully. Israel cannot know who will take over in any territory that Israel gives up. If it is a terrorist organization such as Hamas, the results would be disastrous for the Israeli State. That is why Israel has not rushed to conclude a treaty with Palestine in the midst of these recent uprisings. Israel desires a lasting peace with Palestine, not one that will collapse immediately after it is signed.

Israel sees reality. Israel does not see hopes and wishes. It does not have the illusions of a few naive other nations who believe that the Middle East is about to enter into a new, prosperous, democratic era. This is where Israel believes that the United Nations should stand a role. Israel calls upon the UN to recognize the situation for what it is, and uphold the legitimacy of the existing governments, instead of allowing said governments to be toppled by potential extremist elements who present threats to other nations. At this current stage, Israel must place its stability and security over all other matters, and therefore it cannot possibly support the present efforts of the international community to condone the recent uprisings.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Italy
Delegate Name: Rebecca Michelson
School: Roeper School

In the recent uprisings in Tunisia, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and Egypt, the question of governmental legitimacy during political turmoil is more important than ever. In a time of popular uprisings when established governments are turned against, whether the people hold the cards or the government should remain a functional structure for the means of the people is critical. Legitimacy of a government is a key question, and should be examined under the lens of the people’s microscope. In order to have legitimate government, Italy believes, the constitution and foundation of power must be built on the people’s needs and desires, and its implementation must respect the human and political rights of its people. Elections stand for true government, as well does the ability for the people to speak up and voice their needs in such an uprising if government is not serving justly.

The Italian Republic finds it necessary that government should be a representative body utilized by the people and for the people. Italy sees that in the case of popular uprisings, it is this body’s duty to ensure that the people are being heard and represented to these ends. As a member of the European Commission, Italy remains an active supporter of the UNDP’s efforts toward the recognition process of government and a leading contributor to the progress being made. The Italian Republic recognizes that the demands made in Egypt and Libya by the people due to a lack of basic freedoms stems from a root failure of government’s role: to serve the people.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares that, “Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.” The Italian Republic strongly backs this fundamental principle, and urges the body to think about the future of government and its legitimacy during popular uprising based on: access to free elections, ability to run for or serve in public office, respect of basic human rights, and the right to peaceful measures of negotiation and cooperation.

Through these core values of the role of government, Italy believes that this body can seek

to determine the necessary process to go about in the event of an uprising, both for a current established government and for an up-and-coming one.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Japan
Delegate Name: Cinoo Lee
School: Forest Hills Northern High School

Over the history, the international community came to recognize the colonial people’s rights of self-determination–a freedom to seek independence from an imposing imperialist power. However, there is yet to be a clear legal stance, endorsed by the international community, on the rights of self-determination for people living within a sovereign state.

Japan believes that people should be granted the right of self-determination even within a sovereign state if the current central government lost its legitimacy. In determining the legitimacy of a government, Japan, as a nation conscious of global era, regards the response of neighboring states, and more broadly, the international community crucial–especially whether the current government imposes a threat to international peace and security. Perhaps more importantly, Japan, as a nation endorsing democratic merits, would like to uphold the value imperative in determining the legitimacy of a government: it is the national government’s responsibility to protect and respect its population. The ruling government should not attack or abuse its innocent civilians; rather, it should protect and respect the citizens’ opinions and rights.

Consequently, Japan would like to remind the global community that if a government ignores its responsibility and systematically violate human rights, it is no longer fit to govern a sovereign state; and therefore people within that state should have the freedom to determine what government they see as fit.

In accordance to this belief, Japan offered to assist in projects to build infrastructure and develop industry in the Middle East and North Africa to support the current pro-democracy movements in the area. Likewise, Japan urges the international community to extend a hand to those struggling to take hold of the last flicker of the human’s basic rights and freedom.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Jordan
Delegate Name: Charles Blair
School: Fishers High School

The Kingdom of Jordan recognizes the importance and pertinence of the issue of popular uprising. This has become increasingly important in regards to the recent events in Libya. The African Union has been strained by these events. Being that the region is calling for the removal of the Gaddafi government, Jordan would not argue against actions against them. It is foolish to ignore the importance of their concern and is satisfied with actions of the international community in light of the civil conflict. Indeed, the issue has grown in importance due to the toppling of regimes in Tunisia and Egypt, earlier this year. Especially with the recent problems in Libya, the question of the time when government retains legitimacy is brought into question.

The Kingdom of Jordan believes that the legitimacy of government is subject to the will of the citizens of that nation. We believe that a set definition of a valid government would be most helpful in directing action in any further situations that arise. It would also be prudent to establish a set of procedures to follow in another case of civil unrest. Though military action is not the first option, Jordan believes that it often can be necessary when facing autocratic, militant rulers.

Another instance dealing with civil unrest that has appeared in the Middle East is the situation with Syria. The increasing violence and turbulence in the country creates the ideal situation to create a set of procedures to address civil discourse. In particular, Jordan is especially concerned about the growth of the violence in Syria; not only as a neighbor, but that we may become a bystander in military operations from both forces. Accidently or intentionally, any damage to our country might encourage the opposing forces in Syria to ask for our aid. While we would assist with refugee camps and protecting fleeing civilians, we do not want involvement in the affairs of Syria in any other way. The Kingdom of Jordan desires to retain sovereignty and peace as events unfold and this should even into a future policy. The tension has caused our king, Abdullah to call for Syrian president to step down. This declaration was made on November 13, 2011 as we recognize the fragile situation in that country. We hope this committee will consider the suggestions here for the betterment of all governments and their people.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Kuwait
Delegate Name: Esperanza Cirilo
School: Saginaw Arts and Sciences Academy

During popular uprising, a big problem occurs when defining a time when the old regime is no longer recognized and the uprising becomes supported by the UN to create a democratic government in the interests of the people. There are basic standards many countries have regarding civil liberties. Kuwait for example, states in articles 53, 159, and 184 of the Criminal Law Code that torture and other cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment or treatment is illegal.

The country of Kuwait is very much in support of individual rights so long as they do not interfere with national security. We are very liberal when compared to our surrounding neighbor's on issues such as woman's rights to other civil liberties such as freedom of speech. As part of the MEPI(Middle East Partnership Initiative), Kuwait supports efforts to expand political participation, strengthen civil society and the rule of law, empower women and youth, create educational opportunities, and foster economic reform throughout the Middle East and North Africa. As such, Kuwait is appalled at the treatment of protesters by their own governments in recent uprisings and feels that there should be a list drawn up of certain collective rights many countries agree upon that, if violated during popular uprising, would be a defining factor for the continued legitimacy of the offending government.

If this were to be implemented, a problem arises if the uprising in not likely to succeed. The UN does not have the resources, nor do other countries, to sustain every uprising that is met with humanitarian crimes by the acting government. There needs to be a way of determining if the uprising would possibly succeed on its own. Perhaps the size and frequency of protests could be a way of determining the efficacy of government; such as in the cases of Egypt and Libya.

In such cases as the gross violations of human rights that have happened in the Arab Spring particularly, and as part of a pattern that seems to arise when a government is called into question by its people, Kuwait is very much in support of a systematic method to effectively recognize new governments. We feel that when a government explicitly uses forceful military measures that lead to unnecessary violations of civil liberty to prevent political and governmental reform, that government should be removed. Kuwait displayed this ideal when we called for the removal of Qadhafi from Libya. Kuwait is also a big financial supporter of the Transitional National Council giving 50 million dinar to help address financial difficulties the TNS is facing in Libya.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Lebanon
Delegate Name: Julia Rugg
School: Mattawan High School

With the recent events of the “Arab Spring”, the world has come to question when a government maintains its legitimacy. The uprisings have shown people rally against their political leaders and demand change. As many of these events have occurred in the Middle East, Lebanon is immediately affected the outcome of its neighbor’s uprisings. The unrest has influenced the economy of the region as trade has stalled and tourism slowed throughout the Arab world.

In its recent history, Lebanon has experienced a revolution where our people had the goal of uniting an independent people and country. The Cedar Revolution was sparked after the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and called for the withdrawal of Syrian troops and Syrian interests in the Lebanese government. After demonstrations by Lebanese people, world powers called for the implication of the UN Security Council Resolution 1559, which required the withdrawal of all foreign interests in Lebanon. Syrian troops departed the country and fair elections were held to put a new government in place.

With many other Arab countries’ governments collapsing, Lebanon has maintained a stable government during the “Arab Spring”. This is attributed to Lebanon’s open society, transparency of banks, and free press. Some protests did occur, but they were peaceful and the government did not see it necessary to use violence in order to keep peace.

When the Libyan people rose against the dictator Muammar Gaddafi, Lebanon, as a member of the Arab League, recognized the rebels as the legitimate leadership of the country. It was clear that Gaddafi had lost the support of his people and no longer could maintain control. Beyond this, the former leader fought back the protesters with violence and was accused of killing civilians. The Arab League also supported the NATO led no-fly zone that attributed to the downfall of Gaddafi’s government.

With the precedent of recent events in both Lebanon and surrounding areas, Lebanon recognizes that a government has lost its legitimacy when the people no longer support the leadership and the leadership has clearly shown it is unwilling to mediate with the rebels. Foreign interference may be necessary when violence is inflicted on civilians or important figures, such as the cases in Libya and Lebanon.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Libya
Delegate Name: Rachel Nichols
School: Roeper School

In the past, Libya’s previous regime had a significant role in this question by demonstrating its authority in an extremely violent manner in attempting to repress uprisings throughout the nation. During the 2011 Libyan Civil War, former ruler Muammar Gaddafi’s forces attacked citizens protesting his authoritative rule in Benghazi and his military forces had a failed attempt at putting down a revolt in the working-class district of Suq al-Juma. On August 15, Gaddafi called on his followers through state television to liberate Libya from rebels which had gained the support of NATO, stating “Get ready for the fight… The blood of martyrs is fuel for the battlefield.” He later made two audio addresses which called on Libyans to fight off the rebels as well.

Libya’s Gaddafi regime also questioned the legitimacy of other nations, such as the United Kingdom. Former Deputy Foreign Minister Khaled Kaaim noted after viewing the 2011 England riots that the British Government had lost all legitimacy and the citizens reject the government that is trying to impose itself through force. This was an attempt to show that Libya was not alone in repressing its citizens and that Western criticism of the Gaddafi regime’s oppression of its citizens would be hypocritical. As of Gaddafi’s death on October 20, 2011, the National Transitional Council (NTC) has become Libya's provisional government. This presents challenges of achieving international recognition for our new policies and encouraging their implementation in other nations.

With the new constitutional democracy, Libya does not enforce government intervention during uprisings. The Declaration of the founding of the NTC states that one of its aims is to ensure the safety of the national territory and citizens. The NTC also acknowledges that its legitimacy is weak. There have been many efforts not to tread roughly on regional sensitivities such as the creation of local councils to achieve a peaceful civilian life as an example of Libya’s government transferring a degree of power to society.

An aim of the NTC is to avoid conflict, especially reprisal killings, as well as gain national and international recognition of this new system of governance, thereby improving domestic and international relations. The NTC had reminded former rebel fighters on numerous occasions that the nation’s human rights record will significantly affect their future relations with current Western and Arab benefactors. The NTC’s chair, Mustafa Abdel Jalil, threatened to step down if revenge murders are carried out, stating “I object strongly to any executions outside the law.” This means that only the government has to authority to determine whether an execution takes place of not and that the NTC does not support involvement in civilian rebellion.

Libya’s goal is to install a system to identify failing regimes and reduce the role of government in their civilian-state conflicts. To accomplish this, Libya especially wants to work with democratic nations such as France, as it was the first to recognize the rebellion, as well as the United States. Also, Libya plans to work with African neighbors, specifically Tunisia after the overthrow of Ben Ali and with Egypt, which continues to attempt to define its way forward in the ongoing 2011 Egyptian anti-governmental protests.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Mexico
Delegate Name: Sarah Hinkel
School: Mattawan High School

The United Mexican States believe that the legitimacy of government during popular uprising is occurring more frequently and needs to be discussed. The United Nations needs to establish guidelines as to what constitutes as a popular uprising and how the existing government dissolves to lead way into the new, better government.

In order for a state to be efficient, the percentage of citizens in poverty should be decreasing, unemployment rate should be decreasing, and citizens show a genuine love for their country. Uprising consists of at lease two-thirds of the citizens show rebellion and distaste of the government and when the old government is unable to control everyday law violations humanely. The most important guideline is the country needs to ask for international aide before it is given. Countries should not intervene unless the majority of the civilians show the common expressed desire of international help. It is important that the country experiencing a rebellion should handle it on their own. This way, the country will mature and obtain more experience and increase in prestige that they controlled their own country with no help. An outside country should not decide to give the rebelling country aide without consent because an outsider looking in has a different view than one who is in the middle of the conflict.

Once the country in uprising has dissolved the former government, the United Nations can set up a National Transitional Council to restore peace until a new government has formed. This has taken place in Libya. Another country that has experienced rebellion, Egypt, placed the military in charge of the government instead of forming a new government. There are many different ways to establish a new government; however, it is important that the country in question asks for the help of the United Nations before establishing a National Transitional Council.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Netherlands
Delegate Name: Edie Jiang
School: Forest Hills Northern High School

The issue of the legitimacy of a government during a revolution by the people of a national state has been a long withstanding issue in the international community. Particularly with cases like the Libyan Civil War, revolutionary governments have recently been thrust to the front of the list of world issues. Naturally, individual states support the endeavor towards liberty and independence against a tyrannical government, but the legal question of whether or not those in rebellion have the right to be self-governing remains in dispute.

Initially, in the Libyan case, the Netherlands refused to fully recognize the newly founded National Transitional Council of Libya, declaring that the state would support anti-government rebels but would recognize states, not governments. As a part of the United Nations Security Council, the Netherlands believed that the other member states were too quick in evaluating and confirming the legitimacy of the NTC of Libya. However, we did eventually affirm the legitimacy of the National Transitional Council during a meeting at which the Netherlands, along with Belgium and Luxembourg, declared the representative of the council a legal diplomat of the Libyan people.

As a country that has its policies rooted at the heart of popular consensus on major issues by both the political and national community, the Kingdom of the Netherlands supports anti-government forces that are backed by the majority of the population. Also, the Netherlands is a strong advocate of the protection of human rights, particularly in the case of rebellion. The Netherlands believe that any government that treats its people brutally should be overthrown. Acting on that belief, during the Syrian rebellion, the Netherlands called for the United Nations to respond to Syrian’s situation of having a murderous leader and aid in the process of establishing a truly independent and legitimate government.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Nigeria
Delegate Name: Rebecca Manack
School: Williamston High School

Due to the recent developments in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt it has been called into question how we are to evaluate the proficiency of government. When popular uprisings occur this is made more difficult by adding in whether or not a government is sufficient its assigned instruction. Nigeria remains to be in support of the United Nations Development Programs (UNDP) actions to measure the efficiency of government.

It is our view that democracy and centralized government is key to increasing the legitimacy of governance. Good governance enhances civil liberties, accountability, and political representation amongst countries. These components bring about stability and peace that is essential to economic investment, thus making good governance a necessity for poverty reduction. Nigeria has deep-seated view on the reduction of poverty due to the fact that over fifty percent of its population is below the national poverty line. It is our opinion that the UNDP plan to achieve MDG is effective in poverty reduction.

In accordance with this Nigeria believes the removal of Gaddafi was essential for an improved growth and quality of life. This belief came after Gaddafi stated that Nigeria should split into a Muslim and Christian state. Gaddafi compared this proposed split to the partition of British India into Hindu-dominated India and Muslim Pakistan, which led to a minimum of 200,000 deaths. Libyans recognized the inefficiency of their government and sought to fix it the only way the thought they could. Citizens resort to conflict when issues that are important to them are not seen as issues to the government. A government is responsible for looking into the issues that matter to its people.

Nigeria believes that during a popular uprising the UN should look at how it will affect the UN and the areas around the uprising. Such as how protests coming back to Nigeria were barricaded in the airport. The ideal and needs of the citizens should come before those of any leader or monarch. The ability to transition smoothly from on governance to another is a matter not to be taken lightly. If the wrong people rise to power the whole country could be thrown into even more chaos that which those people where put in place of.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: North Korea
Delegate Name: Amit Khandhadia
School: Roeper School

Across the globe, upstart rebellions, labeled “popular uprisings,” have toppled legitimate governments. Outside nations have supported these so-called popular uprising in an attempt to increase their influence over the newly formed governments, building alliances with nations that hold a strategic or economic advantage. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea rebukes such behavior on the international stage and favors a resolution defending legitimate governments.

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea demands the United Nations recognize only the incumbent government, for the a UN to support these anti-governmental movements will only fuel them to escalate their dissent. These dissenters, with the claim of defending their people’s rights, receive the assistance of the international community in their quest to undermine the legitimacy of long-standing governments. Moreover, Western nations have often supported these uprisings individually, perpetuating violence to overthrow even close allies. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea believes the United Nations should pass a resolution reprimanding these self-interested nations for capitalizing at the expense of the legitimate governments by selling weapons, provoking dissenters, and challenging the legitimacy of the troubled nation.

Lastly, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea advocates for a resolution to remove weapon limitations. Serving as a model, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea maintains peace both within and along its borders because, with a powerful weapons program, the people of the DPRK do not question the strength or legitimacy of the Dear Leader Kim Jong-Il. The DPRK believes the international community should refrain from interference in the national sovereignty of any nation. Every nation has the right to build up its strength, enabling it to preserve order within its borders and prevent any challenges to the true legitimacy of its government.

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea hopes these set of measures can form the basis of a strong resolution to help ensure the international community can solve the future problems of these “popular uprisings.”

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Pakistan
Delegate Name: Erica Pincumbe
School: Williamston High School

The legitimacy in government has been called in to question due to the uprisings in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt. These uprisings showed illegitimacy in these governments because they no longer had the support of the citizens that they represented.

The link between human development and quality of governance is strong and well established and is at the core of development issues in Pakistan. Pakistan believes that strong, credible and effective governing institutions that have the confidence of the citizens and the ability to deliver their mandate are the foundations of sound governance. Pakistan supports capacity strengthening of the key governing institutions such as Parliament and Election Commission of Pakistan and other public sector organizations and enables their engagement with other partners in civil society to improve the relevance and effectiveness of their mandate.

Pakistan is a Federal Republic. In this system of government where the central government has control over areas such as national security and defense, monetary policy and other issues on the national scope. On the other hand, the government of separate states handles issues on a more local level. The division of powers is a threshold for the legitimacy of the Pakistani government. It establishes a strong basis for the inner workings of the government as a system.

Legitimacy is the universal acceptance of a government by the people. In the event of an uprising, the government no longer has control over the population. The government can experience deadlocks and collapses within its foundations.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Portugal

Portugal believes that representative government is the most legitimate form of government. It is necessary for a government to represent the people as a whole, and representative government is the best method to enact agendas that benefit the citizenry and not merely the perpetuity of a particular regime.

The root of most recent popular uprisings has been the citizenry’s dissatisfaction with the government. The people publically protest in order to revolutionize their government because they believe legitimate governance should represent and be responsive to the people. In the case of the uprisings, the people are not being represented adequately and therefore initiate a popular movement to overthrow the government.

The greatest challenge the UN currently faces regarding representative government is in Libya. The international community has supported legitimate governance by recognizing the rebels as the true representatives of the nation, and Portugal has recognized the National Transitional Council of Libya as the official government of Libya. Portugal has also supported UN Resolution 1973, which established a no-fly zone over Libya.

The situation in Kosovo exposed the dangers of not having a legitimate representative government. When the citizens of a country rise up and a protest escalates in order to secure a representative government, it is the duty of international organizations to step in to prevent human rights abuses and help procure a representative government for that nation. However, it is imperative that the international community support national sovereignty by only intervening when protests reach a critical threshold, threatening the integrity of the state and making it clear that the current government is inadequate to peacefully quell the rebellion or perform the daily operations necessary for legitimate governance.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Qatar
Delegate Name: Julia Heenan
School: Royal Oak High School

Qatar is a diplomatic nation. It solves conflicts without military interference. In past years Qatar received protection from stronger countries. Most recently Britain supported the Qataris, but their treaty ended in 1971 and Qatar declared independence and became the fully independent State of Qatar on September 3, 1971. The countries Egypt, Libya, and Yemen, which surround Qatar, have experienced their citizens overthrowing the governments in place. The country of Qatar would like to remain as a diplomatic state.

The nation of Qatar supports the United Nations efforts to defend peace and security. Qatar’s foreign policy is based on strengthening international peace and security through encouraging the resolution of international disputes peacefully and supporting self-determination of people. We attempt not to meddle in the internal affairs of countries, in addition to cooperating with peace-loving nations. The country's constitution formalizes the hereditary rule of the Al Thani family, and it also has established an elected legislative body and makes government ministers accountable to the legislature.

Conventions and resolutions Qatar has signed in the past year at the General Assembly include voting against the resolution condemning Iran human rights, abstained from condemning the human rights circumstances in North Korea…but voted in favor of combating slander of religions. Eventually Qatar joined a resolution condemning the human rights situation in Burma, but declined to support the resolutions that extended the permission for independent monitors on Congo and Sudan.

Qatar believes that to be a legitimate government you have to be supported by the people. Qatar realizes that not every citizen can be pleased with the state of the government, and that mild civil dissatisfaction doesn’t mean the abolishment of the countries’ government. Putting a number on the amount of people dissatisfied with the government to be necessary for abolishment is impractical. In the case of popular uprisings, Qatar thinks that the response of the government is an important factor in determining the legitimacy of the government. If the government responds with aggression, not just containment, it is unfit to be in charge. All legitimate governments are to be recognized by other countries and the UN.

The above criteria for a legitimate government sufficiently deals with popular uprising. If a country responds with aggression, like in the forms of crimes against humanity, it should be considered illegitimate and the UN should do everything in its power to intervene and help to create a valid and stable government for those countries.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Russia
Delegate Name: Jacob Pope
School: Forest Hills Central High School

Given the tumultuous political history of the Russian Federation, it seems only natural that we have come to value our national sovereignty as perhaps the most important fundamental right granted to any governing body. In the lengthy history of Russia, there have many times been momentous popular uprisings, military coups, and exchanges of power that have dictated the course which has brought Russia to where it is today. Fortunately, Russia has managed to undergo these changes without significant interference from the world at large, and would care to extend this courtesy to other developing nations, as well. The recent upheaval in the Middle East has prompted again the question of what actions the international community is morally obliged and legally authorized to make when such demonstrations take place. Whether, for example, we can implement standards to which all governments might be subjected to determine their legal standing from the perspective of popular approval, maintaining human rights, and the other functions of government to which all citizens of the world are entitled and whether any action based on such standards could ever be taken are of vital interest in today’s ever-shifting global political community. Many consider the preservation of human rights to be the primary deciding factor in whether a government ought to be recognized by the international community, but in such a narrow worldview one fails to consider by what standards human rights might be judged as “preserved,” and how one might remove the inherent political bias and underlying motivations that accompany such judgments from a process which needs must present an objective display of factual information. That is, how can we be assured of the neutrality of human rights observers, that they might not manipulate such judgments to enact political change or social reform that falls in line with their individual perspectives? And does the United Nations even have the authority, once such judgments are made, to take any action on them in the vein of promoting regime change, imposing sanctions, or invoking a military response?

It is the position of the Russian Federation that in all cases but gross human rights abuse that a nation’s government is, ultimately, given legitimacy by the support of its people, not by the cold, unfeeling vote of an international body which is largely removed from the culture and society which makes up said nation. It is, simply, not our role to determine whether a government is “entitled” to rule, but rather our role is to ensure that, as much as possible, the process can be determined by the nation’s people without significant conflict or international manipulation. In the case of Libya, for example, Russia recognized the Transitional National Council once it became clear that it would be able to unite Libya under one leadership, with significant public support. Until that became clear, it was premature of other nations, such as France, to jump to the side of the rebel army and give legitimacy to an uprising that may have ended in total failure, possibly fracturing the delicate country even further than it already was. Should we grant legitimacy to every disenfranchised group in every nation? Would France have appreciated the international community granting legitimacy to the ETA, for example, on its southern border? We must take great caution in throwing out claims of “legitimacy” to rebel groups, and must carefully consider the efficacy and structure of such groups and whether they truly represent the desires of their nations’ people, and whether they can act upon such desires to unite their countries. Only when such factors are clear and unambiguous can we claim “legitimacy.” Furthermore, operations by power-hungry Western democracies to enact political change such as bombing campaigns are gross overreaches which should not ever be repeated in the 21st century. The desire to ensure civilian safety is an admirable one, but when conflated with a desire to overthrow an established regime, and when tainted with corrupt intentions to enact political change for personal gain, ensuring civilian safety can easily become an infliction upon that nation’s national sovereignty.

Russia understands that, within the international community, there are many nations and organizations with legitimate concern for the safety of citizens and who promote the preservation of human rights within countries undergoing popular uprising. However, that admirable position can lead to potentially dangerous consequences, and it is the role of the international community to, whenever the options of taking too much or too little action are in conflict, take the route which avoids infringing upon a nation’s national sovereignty. Fortunately, this understanding is shared with the Russian Federation by nations such as China and other African nations, who have demonstrated an apt comprehension of the political, social, and tribal intricacies that have thus far made up much of the political unrest in the Middle East and North Africa.

However, other nations, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, have shown themselves more than willing to embroil themselves in the conflicts of other nations, intruding where they are not welcome. These countries, with mixed intentions, have thrown themselves into conflicts about which they have little understanding, and could not, given the social and political differences which separate Western democracy with Near East and North African theopolitical regimes. It is the hope of the Russian Federation that these countries, through our calm, measured discussion, will come to realize that the national sovereignty of these countries in which they hope to effect change must take priority over their own personal desires to topple regimes for political or economic reasons. Russia will take every measure it is able to preserve the national sovereignty of every nation, and sincerely hopes that these countries which have, thus far, abused other nations’ sovereignty, will come to see the illogical, hypocritical nature of their requests, and work with Russia to ensure a safe political environment for all popular demonstrations, and to preserve human rights and basic freedoms around the world.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Saudi Arabia
Delegate Name: Hayley Kord
School: Fishers High School

Saudi Arabia has mixed opinions on rebel governments based on who is being occupied and the situation at hand. Saudi Arabia believes that keeping stability and doing what is best for that particular country is the best thing to do when it comes to uprisings and deciding whether to support either the government, or the resistance. The most important thing for Saudi Arabia, up until a certain point, is to keep things consistent and make sure to not affect negatively the current monarchy that is standing.

During the Gaddafi hold on Libya, Saudi Arabia was late to recognize the National Transitional Council (NTC) as Libya’s legitimate national representatives in hopes to keep consistency within the country. However, once it became present to Saudi Arabia of the actions being taken by Gaddafi, Saudi Arabia changed its support to the National Transitional Council and agreed to supply them with weapons to fight of Gaddafi and his supporters. However during uprisings in both Yemen and Bahrain Saudi Arabia was not all for supporting the rebels. As both Yemen and Bahrain were showing resistance to the Saudi Arabian rule, Saudi Arabia decided to add in pro-Saudi rulers to keep the countries doing what they are supposed to, despite massive protests that could have toppled other regimes. Also, earlier this year Saudi Arabia was the first of the Arab League to speak against the “brutal crackdowns” Syria was taking against protests in August of this year. King Abdullah said in a written statement that:

“What is happening in Syria is not acceptable for Saudi Arabia. Syria should think wisely before it’s too late and issue and enact reforms that are not merely promises but actual reforms, either it chooses wisdom on its own or it will be pulled down into the depths of turmoil and loss.” ("Saudi Arabia Calls for Syrian Reforms – Middle East – Al Jazeera English." AJE – Al Jazeera English. 08 Aug. 2011. Web. 18 Nov. 2011.)

Saudi Arabia believes that the best thing for the United Nations to do regarding the government during times of popular uprising, is to judge the country based on how their actions will not only affect the United Nations, but also the current monarch, the people of that country, and the country itself. If the country is not benefited by the United Nations recognizing a new representative for that country, then the United Nations should not react. Saudi Arabia believes that in situations such as ones involving Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Bahrain, the United Stations should allow the countries to figure it out on their own. However, if that country is being harmed by the actions of the monarch, the United Nations should recognize the resistance as the new representative of that country and take action against the previous monarch, as was done not only towards Libya earlier this year, but also towards Syria.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Serbia
Delegate Name: Graham Agee
School: Forest Hills Northern High School

Over the past year the legitimacy of governments has become a major world issue. More specifically, the question centers around the Arab Spring uprisings. Starting with a mass media outcry using social networking, the people of Egypt rose to the streets demanding change in their government. Eventually, after many months of protests, not all of which were peaceful, the Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak stepped down from power. A transitional government was put into place by the military. In Libya, the people took to the streets with violence, taking Coronel Kaddafi’s forces on with homemade weapons in February of 2011. After a long war and support from NATO, the rebels prevailed and formed a transition government. Colonel Kaddafi was killed 23 August 2011. Since then, several other protests have been started in countries such as Syria.

The Republic of Serbia has had a history of breakups and divisions of nations. Since 1918, Serbia belonged to a larger nation of Yugoslavia. In 1992, following the breakup of the United Soviet Socialist Republic, Yugoslavia dissolved into various nations consisting of Bosnia, Croatia, Herzegovia, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The nation continued to fall apart until the president of the time, Milosevic, conceded defeat. With the help of the United Nations, Serbia was restructured and stabilized as a legitimate government. Serbia does not recognize the rouge succession of Kosovo, which remains a part of Serbia under the terms of UNSCR 1244.

The Republic of Serbia requests that the other nations of the world take three primary steps in determining the legitimacy of a government. First, decide on a specific outline for when a government becomes illegitimate. Reasons should include genocide of their own people. Second, when does a rebel uprising become a legitimate government? When the support of the people favors the new government, then they should represent the people. Third, those committing the crimes of the former government should be brought to justice under the supervision of the International Criminal Court, or ICC.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Sierra Leone
Delegate Name: Amelia Berg
School: Williamston High School

The recent demonstration by citizens of Libya, Egypt and Syria, once again, citizens and non-citizens are calling legitimacy of government into question. The Country of Sierra Leone has had some of these problems in the past. Sierra Leone is still having government issues today. Sierra Leon's Government is not a believer of having the government deal with its citizens or problems cause by the citizens.

Sierra Leone feels that there are more important things in their country to worry about. Sierra Leone feels that they would rather worry about Sierra Leone than other countries right now. Sierra Leone feels they need to deal with their popular uprisings before they help others.

Sierra Leone believes in taking over by force with the military. Sierra Leone believes that with extreme crimes that physical force is required to get the point through that what they did was wrong and they should not do that again.

The international community has improved sanitation, they are also creating more education laws and they are also trying to lower the poverty rates. Sierra Leone likes this because Sierra Leone is poor and dirty. With these new laws Sierra Leone's education rate will raise, Sierra Leone will gain more money and it will become a cleaner country.

Sierra Leon's stance on all of this is influenced by the actions of their citizens and the reaction of the end of Sierra Leone's civil war. Sierra Leone's rules on how to govern during a popular uprising is not set yet. Sierra Leone's government is having many problems of its own in Sierra Leone and they feel it is more important to deal with their problems first.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: South Africa
Delegate Name: Emma Holcomb
School: Royal Oak High School

During this time of turmoil and change throughout the world, the legitimacy of a government during a popular uprising has become an issue of importance. The Republic of South Africa views this issue on several different levels. As a committee, we must first define legitimacy, and then determine in what situations a government’s legitimacy may be called into question by a popular uprising.

There is no one factor that makes a government legitimate or not. Previous definitions of legitimacy do not always take popular sovereignty or international recognition into account. In practice, popular sovereignty, international recognition, and effectiveness are some of the most important factors in determining a government’s legitimacy. If the people of a nation do not find their own government legitimate, it could severely impact the effectiveness of the government and its standing in the international community.

Legitimacy is not easily defined. In any definition of legitimacy, popular sovereignty should be emphasized. Through fair elections, popular sovereignty can be guaranteed. Additionally, international recognition is important. When the international community as a whole refuses to recognize a government, internal legitimacy issues are likely.

How do we create legitimate governments out of those deemed illegitimate? If the government’s legitimacy is threatened because it is not effective, assisting the government in this respect of the upmost importance. Support from other nations in the region, which may have experienced similar issues, or from regional bodies should be available to these nations if necessary. When popular sovereignty becomes an issue, it can be addressed through similar means. Simply ousting the government is almost always disastrous. South Africa has found that one of the most effective means of increasing legitimacy is through democratic elections. The focus of this debate should not be placed on ending illegitimate governments, but assisting them in a constructive way to meet the needs of the nation’s people through dialog and cooperation.

Popular uprisings do not automatically invalidate the legitimacy of a government. When solutions can be found that are acceptable to both the people and the government, legitimacy is only reinforced. When governments begin to commit international crimes in order to quell an uprising, however, legitimacy definitely comes into question. Dialog with other nations, particularly those in the region, should be encouraged in such cases. Through this, the government may find an effective end to violence and return to legitimacy.

When it is found that the current government is no longer legitimate and must be changed drastically, it is necessary that there is an international standard for nations to reference. Peaceful, democratic transition, not the total ousting of the previous government through violence, has been found to be, in the long term, one of the most effective forms of government transition. When this is not possible, a transitional government may be established. South Africa would like to see this emphasized in any resolution passed.

International sovereignty becomes an issue here. Who is the international community to decide whether or not one government is legitimate? Should the government not decide for itself? Of course, when a nation approaches the regional or international community for help with legitimacy, assistance should be provided. In other situations, however, when a government will not attempt to make itself more legitimate, there must be standards in place as to when it is appropriate for the international community to step in. When atrocities such as crimes against humanity are being committed, the nation’s region and the world has a responsibility to end them and reestablish legitimacy- an issue that we will debate further through our other topic. In other situations, such as popular sovereignty and effectiveness, it is first the responsibility of the region and regional bodies to help solve the issues, through constructive dialog, and secondly the responsibility of the international community and international bodies. It is necessary that we first look to regional solutions. What works in one region often does not work in another, and the region itself will best know how to address the issue at hand in the context of that nation. Through dialog and diplomacy, we can also respect the sovereignty of nations whose governments are struggling with legitimacy.

The legitimacy of any government, during popular uprising or not, needs to be defined. Through that definition, we can begin to find ways to assist nations struggling with the legitimacy of their governments. South Africa hopes to see a conclusion to debate that emphasizes the importance of dialog and regaining legitimacy.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: South Korea
Delegate Name: Yasmeen Farran
School: Mattawan High School

The Republic of Korea sees that a country’s government is not legitimate if more than two thirds of the people show distaste, and rebellion against their government. Korea feels it is important for the UN to help the people of other countries have their voices heard if they are being ignored.

After its own uprisings in the 1960s, Korea reformed its own laws on justice. Korea now feels as a government it is its duty to try and destroy social injustices. The preamble of Korea’s constitution shows this promise, “…upholding the cause of the Provisional Republic of Korea Government born of the March First Independence Movement of 1919 and the democratic ideals of the April Nineteenth Uprising of 1960 against injustice, having assumed the mission … to destroy all social vices and injustice…”

Korea answered the pleas of its people. It established a new democratic government and reconstructed its constitution. Many other countries cannot reconstruct their own government without help from the outside. This can cause confusion on who the people’s leader is, which in turn, can cause trouble in a country that cannot always be controlled.

At this point, the international community can step in by establishing a National Transitional Council. This has been established in Libya. It gives the country a goal and vision to follow. The council serves as a temporary government for people to turn to. They have released many statements to make it clear this is only temporary. If this is established in other countries it can help prevent a power hungry leader from stepping to the top after the people have worked to rise above their previous power hungry government. This has happened in Iraq. Saddam Hussein took over power after a revolution, this lead the country to have problems in the future. Now, the country cannot seem to rise back up to a stable government. Now, it is uncertain what the country wants and the goals that the new government should have.

A more recent problem has occurred in the rebuilding of Egypt’s government. A military government has established itself since the uprisings earlier this year. This military government has not satisfied the people who worked so hard to overthrow the previous government. Now, the military leader, Scaf, has a great amount of power. If in three months, a new constitution is not drawn up and approved by him, he can appoint his own committee to write it. This makes the people upset with the direction their country has taken. The country has not changed from the bad position it was previously in. The aftermath of the uprising may have been more successful if an Egypt Transitional Council was established.

The UN should take up establishing this council and watching over it. The UN could look over this council to help make sure the countries best interests stay in mind. Korea would be supportive with the council and work to reach a solution. Korea would help the UN maintain this council.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Spain
Delegate Name: Tristen Mejias-Thompson
School: Fishers High School

The Kingdom of Spain has struggled for a long time to achieve the level of democracy it has today in its constitutional monarchy. Finally deposing its last dictator in 1975, Spain has been a champion of human rights and democracy from that point, as well as growing economically and joining the European Union in 1988. Spain believes whole-heartedly in its representative government although having some popular unrest of its own. However, the government of Spain is legitimate because it is a parliamentary monarchy, and the people are justly represented. A government cannot be cast down as undemocratic because of a few unpopular decisions. People elected to parliamentary positions know what is best for the people, and cannot be too reactive to the people. Too much democracy is an evil, not a blessing.

With regards to popular uprising, Spain believes that many factors contribute to the legitimacy of the government. Spain’s constitution was approved by the people, and so its government is legitimate. Dictators and non-democratic governments have no right to rule their people, especially when they revolt against them. People in these positions should be aided by democracy-loving countries, not put down brutally by an unjust government.

Another factor to consider when condemning or assisting a revolution is how democratic the government is. De juro, almost all countries have a democracy. Egypt had a democracy under Mubarak, but the people did not truly have a say in how the government was run. Obviously if every official in a government were elected by the people, it would become very cumbersome and ineffective, as well as having the possibility of having a modern day Hitler elected into office. After all, Nazi Germany was simply the result of a cunning man tricking the people into giving him enough power to ensure his continued reign. Appointed positions are a necessity, but they cannot be the bulk of the legislative body of a government.

There is no set solution to the problem of corrupt government and popular uprising. Each case must be examined individually before either the nation is condemned or condoned. People can be fickle and shortsighted, with no regard to how realistic their demands are or the actual cause of the problem. Governments can also be devious and stubborn, gaining powers not within their rights and refusing to give them up. Spain believes that to err on the side of caution is to err on the side of the people. They have truly no one to fight for them if their own government has turned against them, and it is (Spain believes) a basic human right to be represented by one’s government. While the United Nations may not be able to force democracies into place, we should at least prevent the spread of dictatorship, though it goes unnoticed every day by those outside of its borders.

Spain recommends that a committee be created to combat the rising threat of legitimacy of governments during popular uprising. Maintaining the balance of protecting human rights and refraining to infringe on popular sovereignty, this committee would greatly improve the UN’s ability to react and decide upon courses of action in regards to this issue.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Switzerland
Delegate Name: Austin Pittsley
School: Fishers High School

The Swiss Confederation has upheld the principles and purposes of the United Nations in all of its international relations and has always strived for peaceful, diplomatic solutions to conflict. For example, in the recent uprising and subsequent human rights abuses in Libya, the Swiss Confederation has condemned government-sponsored violence against non-violent protesters, imposed sanctions against Libya, and supported other UN efforts aimed at ending violence and suffering in Libya. [1]

In accordance with our stance on international conflict negotiation as described in the above paragraph, the Swiss Confederation believes that the legitimacy of any particular government should be derived from meeting at least one of the following conditions: adherence of said government to Article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations or the presence of a clear intention, and faithful attempt, to achieve the above condition. Article 1 of the Charters of the United Nations states the purposes for which the United Nations was created, namely to advance international peace and security, develop respect for the equal rights and self-determination of peoples, encourage respect for universal human rights, address international problems of various character, and facilitate cooperation among Member states to achieve these ends. [2] Article 2 Section 2 likewise states that all Members are required to uphold the obligations presented in the Charter. [3] Finally, Article 2 Section 6 further requires nations that are not Members to abide by the Charter in ways necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security. [4] As such, the Swiss Confederation believes it is the imperative of the United Nations to evaluate the legitimacy of governments, and take appropriate action herein prescribed, using the standards set forth in the Charter for Member states, specifically Articles 1 and 2. In cases in which the nation and its government under scrutiny are not a Member, we again refer to Article 2 Section 6, which compels the United Nations to intervene when international security is threatened.

To further the purpose of the United Nations, as enumerated above, the Swiss Confederation believes the Security Council to be the most effective machination. Article 5 of the Charter delegates to the Security Council the sole duty of maintaining international peace and security. [5] As such the Swiss Confederation feels that three obstacles hamper the effectiveness of the Security Council: the ability for any one member of the Security Council to veto a proposition, thus nullifying it, the presence of permanent members on the Security Council, which undermines the principles prescribed in the Charter as well as ceding too much power to certain nations, the inconsistency and ineffectiveness with which Security Council resolutions are executed. In order to eliminate these obstacles, the Swiss Confederation proposes requiring three instead of one “no” votes in order to veto a resolution, eliminating the permanent status for those nations holding it, and increase funding for the tools used by the Security Council to execute resolutions.

Bibliography

[1] Switzerland. Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. Situation in Libya. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/recent/actu/arab/libyen.encoded-Show=1&print=1.html>.

[2][3][4] "Charter of the United Nations: Chapter I: Purposes and Principles." Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World. United Nations. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml>.

[5] "Charter of the United Nations: Chapter V: The Security Council." Welcome to the United Nations: It's Your World. United Nations. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter5.shtml>.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Syria
Delegate Name: Mace Ranazzi
School: Forest Hills Central High School

As having spent nearly twenty years as a French Mandate, Syria was more than happy to declare their independence from France in 1944, shortly before the end of World War Two. Finally, Syria was an independent republic amongst its neighbors; though many obstacles were to place themselves in front of Syria as the country tried to gain a democratic footing. The country faced swift entrances and exits of leaders as well as constant new drafts to their constitution as well as a floundering economy. It wasn’t until President Hafez al-Assad gained power in 1970 that true stability fell upon Syria as a democratic government was finally formed and maintained under his supervision and now is still maintained by his son, Bashar al-Assad.

Recently in the past year “Arab Spring” fever has swept across several Middle Eastern nations, such as Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya. In these cases, dissident protesters were able to topple their already existing governments, but only with the aid of outside help, such as the UN and NATO. If the rebels had been left to their own devices it is most likely their petty rebellions would have been simply squashed within days or weeks. Syria does not believe it is the place of any foreign nation to step in and handle a country’s affairs for them. Never once in those three rebellions did the governments themselves ask for such aid, yet the UN and NATO saw fit to work against the governments wishes to aid the rebels.

And to what cause? Rebellion only foments chaos to regions such as the Middle East. These rebels hardly know what it is they are fighting for and so are not adequately equipped to create their own democratic government. Take for example Egypt, after overthrowing their president Hosni Mubarak and their government, the rebels claimed they would have a truly democratic government; months later the citizens still have no say in their government as a military dictatorship has formed in Mubarak’s place.

Syria believes in their government as the one true ruling power and believes that no other outside nation has the right to say otherwise. Nations judge other nations in the form of biased newscasts and reports. Until a member of a foreign nation has spent an extended amount of time in another nation’s country and culture, then they have no right to condemn other nations for their actions. As the government is the one true ruling power then it should have complete loyalty from its citizens. And if small numbers of idle protesters do arise up, then it is the government’s duty to deal with the situation. This responsibility falls to no other nation or international organization.

Therefore, unless a nation specifically comes to the UN seeking aid in dealing with rebellion uprisings, then it is not the place of the UN to set forward any plans to aid that country unless requested by that country’s government.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Thailand
Delegate Name: Connor Renckly
School: Fishers High School

Recently there have been many incidents that have led the public to question the legitimacy of many countries governments. In fact this has not only been a global problem but has also affected the nation of Thailand as well. Given our nations experience in this area we have decided to enter this meeting with an “open mind” and we would like to request that others attempt to emulate this decision. We are prepared to consider all proposed solutions and we are willing to agree to any that are practical and reasonable.

The Nation of Thailand would also like to state that while we are willing to make compromises in exchange for the long term goal of progress we will not tolerate any unfounded accusations aimed at our nation. We are prepared to invest a reasonable portion of our technological and natural resources towards an effective long term solution to the proposed problems under the condition that other nations will do the same. Our nation is not going to enter this problem without a full understanding of what the United Nations plans to do to resolve this conflict and what individual countries think of this problem.

While Thailand considers diverse opinions to be a fundamental part of any society and practically crucial to any successful governmental system, we refuse to tolerate violent opposition to the flow of society or any form of protest that aggressively disrupts the flow of our nation. In place of the previously mentioned protests we believe that our citizens should state their opinions through more pacifistic means such as “peaceful protests”. We are prepared to put our troubled past with this subject behind us under the condition that the rest of the United Nations will do the same.

As previously stated Thailand will enter this meeting from a neutral stand point and has decided that in a gesture of good faith we will make an informed decision upon where we shall stand after we have addressed the problem at hand. We shall try to not let our past blind us to what may come in the future and will be willing to make amends if it is necessary to do so in the name of progress. The nation of Thailand as a whole enters this meeting with strong hopes for the future.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Turkey
Delegate Name: Rachel Jacobi
School: Ann Arbor Community High School

The Republic of Turkey is a secular constitutional republic and as such, is committed to Democratic rule. As part of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the Council of Europe, and the United Nations, the Republic of Turkey has adopted many laws to foster a legitimate government supported by the people.

Turkey was founded on Kemalist ideology, a theory developed by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk the first president of Turkey. Sometimes referred to as the “six arrows”, Kemalist ideology incorporates six core ideas: Republicanism, Statism, Nationalism, Secularism, Populism and Revolutionism. The last two ideas played a large part in Turkey’s founding—the idea of populism: revolutionary change in the interests of the people, and revolutionism: revolution being necessary to bring about modern society, are deeply linked to the concept of legitimacy of government during popular uprising. With quotes such as “Turkey’s true master is the peasant”, Atatürk’s belief in people being able to govern themselves has become deeply influential within Turkish society.

More recently, the Prime Minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, called for the removal of (now former) Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, after mass public protests against Mubarak's rule occurred earlier this year. Additionally, Erdoğan affirmed his support for the National Transitional Council of Libya (NTC) by announcing that The Republic of Turkey was “with the Libyan people” after having traveled on a diplomatic visit to Benghazi (the second largest city in Libya, and a key center for anti-Gaddafi forces). While supporting democracy is very important in Turkey, the use of violence to overthrow one's government should only be used as a last resort. Turkey is in favor of reforming current governments so as to make them more Democratic rather than immediately overthrowing a current regime. Having offered advice and support to Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad on how to create a more democratic state, and having no response by Mr. al-Assad, Turkey has recently declared sanctions on Syria; thus demonstrating Turkey's continued position on upholding democracy.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: United Kingdom
Delegate Name: Stuart Wilson
School: Fishers High School

The United Kingdom believes that human rights must be protected above all else. If a population of a nation is being oppressed, and the government is making no obvious effort to correct the issue, then the government is in no position to make and enforce laws or in any way control its people. However, if there is an uprising from a population in an issue other than an abusive or suppressive government, the validity of the governing body may remain intact and the UK respects the sovereignty of that government.

If people of a nation that is abusing human rights form a protest or uprising in resistance to the abuse, the government they are standing against has no legitimacy. An example would be the recent uprising in Libya. The UK voted with the rest of the Security Council for Resolution 1970, which declared the use of lethal force by Muammar Gaddafi an abuse of government power and set up multiple international actions to be taken against it. It was determined by The United Nations that the government in power in Libya was treating its citizens unjustly. Therefore, it was the belief of The United Kingdom as well as the rest of the Security Council that Gaddafi’s government no longer had a right to power or legitimacy and declared the uprising a movement for human rights. This belief can and should be applied to all situations of uprising against an abusive government.

In the case of an uprising in matters other than the direct violation of human rights or clear oppression of its people, the legitimacy and sovereignty of the government shall remain respected. The United Kingdom feels that it is not the duty, nor the right of uninvolved nations to interfere with a nation’s government if it is not in violation of the human rights of its people. That stated, the UK feels that these nations may be examined by the United Nations to determine and confirm no abuse of its people. If none is found, the government shall retain its authority over its people. However, if violations are found, it must then be determined as to whether or not the government body is attempting to correct the issue and, if not, whether action should be taken to declare the government’s illegitimacy of authority.

The United Kingdom believes that each nation’s government has the responsibility to protect and serve its people. If an uprising of non-oppressive matters occurs, the UK feels that it is that nation’s responsibility to manage the uprising, and that its legitimacy and authority remains strong. However, if it is determined that that nation’s government is in violation of the human rights of its people, then it shall have its influence removed.

Topic: Legitimacy of Government during Popular Uprising
Country: Yemen
Delegate Name: Alexandra Dulin
School: Royal Oak High School

The Republic of Yemen recognizes the importance of clarifying standards of legitimacy during popular uprising. Without first creating well defined and universally accepted standards of legitimacy the United Nations cannot develop procedures or follow existing procedures for dealing with illegitimate regimes or protecting the interests of the people victim to unsound governments. These standards of legitimacy will also prevent the U.N. from interfering with the sovereignty of legitimate governments.

Yemen believes that the U.N. definition of legitimacy during popular uprising must be explicit and detailed in order to prevent any discrepancies in the identification of legitimate government. First we must establish standards for when a protest is significant enough to cause concern to a government and the United Nations. We must quantify the number of protesters needed to constitute a viable protest. These protesters must have a sound reason for causing unrest. A time frame needs to be established as to when a protest has lasted long enough to demand response from the government or the U.N. A weekend? Two weeks? A month? A year? Moreover, the organization and leadership in a protest must also be taken into account, so as to prevent mob rule or the seizure of nations by terrorist groups. The actions of the protesters must also be included in our definition. Are they violent or peaceful? Are their actions constitutional in their country or not? Without a complex definition of protest any unrest within a country, such as the recent Occupy Wall Street Movement in the United States, could condemn a government to illegitimacy. Only after we establish methods for confirming the legitimacy of and the attention needed for a protest does Yemen believe we can create guidelines for delineating between governments that are made illegitimate during uprisings and those that are not.

A government’s responsiveness to a situation is the prime concern in ascertaining whether or not it retains its legitimacy during popular uprising. If a government does nothing to appease the people of a significant protest we can deem it illegitimate. There is a spectrum of responses after total complacency, however, that must be examined by the U.N to qualify acceptable government action. How much government action is necessary? Is the action necessary constitutional in the nation state? In responding to the whim of the protestors is the government still protecting the safety of the majority of its population, or those not represented by the protest? The answers to all of these questions, and many others are necessary to set standards of responsiveness.

The pertinence of creating standards for legitimate governments during popular uprising is obvious in today’s times. While Yemen believes that it is important to support action as quickly as possible in unsafe situation, Yemen is also interested in protecting national sovereignty and in the U.N. using only legal procedures to interfere in countries. Yemen therefore advocates for the Legal Committee to set clear and precise definitions of viable protest and the actions of legitimate government.