JC History Tuition Singapore - What is the United Nations Partition Plan - Arab-Israeli Conflict Notes

What is the United Nations Partition Plan?

/in , /by

Topic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]: 
Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1948-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 1: Arab-Israeli Conflict (1948-1979)

Learn more about the day when Palestine was partitioned as part of the United Nations Plan [Video by the Associated Press].

Historical Context: The end of the British mandate of Palestine
Between 1922 and 1947, Great Britain assumed control of the Palestinian territory, as part of its mandate authorised by the League of Nations. As mentioned in the Balfour Declaration, the British government expressed support for the creation of a ‘national home for the Jewish people’ even though it did not specify the territorial delineation of Palestine.

As Jewish immigration from Europe took place between 1922 and 1947, the Arab-Jewish tensions (see Arab revolts of 1936-39) grew and escalated by the onset of the Second World War. Even the British was not spared of the escalating violence, pressuring the government to seek an viable solution for the two groups.

In the years between the 1929 Wailing Wall riots, which had shaken the Zionist leadership’s complacent faith in eventual Arab acceptance of the Zionist enterprise, and the outbreak of the Arab Revolt, informal negotiations took place between Ben-Gurion and Musa Alami. […]

Ben-Gurion seemed to come to a more sober understanding of the Arab position: “There is a conflict, a great conflict. There is a fundamental conflict. We and they want the same thing: We both want Palestine. And that is the fundamental conflict.”

An excerpt taken from “The Palestinian People: A History” by Baruch Kimmerling and Joel S. Migdal.

Enter the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP): The Partition Plan
In April 1947, Britain referred the ‘Palestine matter’ to the United Nations – an inter-governmental organisation that took over the mantle of the defunct-League of Nations. In May 1947, the UNSCOP examined the matter. This committee consisted of eleven members: The Netherlands, Peru, Sweden, Uruguay, Yugoslavia, Canada, Australia, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, India and Iran.

In summary, the UNSCOP concluded that the British Mandate should be terminate and that Palestine should be partitioned into two independent states.

The Partition Plan was as follows:

  1. The proposed Jewish state: Land around Tel Aviv and Haifa, Negev, Jezreel and the Hule Valleys. The Jewish state was to be comprised of about 5,500 square miles and the population was to be 538,000 Jews and 397,000 Arabs.
  2. The proposed Arab state: Gaza strip, Nablus, Galilee, Hebron and Beersheba. The Arab states was to be compromised of 4,500 square miles and the population was to be 804,000 Arabs and 10,000 Jews.
  3. The Jerusalem city was to be administered as an international zone.

On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) obtained a two-thirds majority, adopting Resolution 181. Both the United States and the Soviet Union supported the Partition Plan, whereas Britain abstained.

It is important to note that the Palestinian Arabs and Jews were divided on the Partition Plan, which may have explained why tensions persisted even after 1948.

The question of the Palestinian position regarding the UN partition plan which was adopted on the 29 November 1947 is not as clear and sharp as it is customary to portray it in most of the historical sources dealing with the issue. In the Palestinian camp there was a variety of views which were not expressed in the ultimate position, which crystallized and was perceived by the international community as an absolute rejection of the partition resolution.

The Palestinian people was forced to pay an unbearable price for their acquiescence of the decision of a short-sighted leadership. The terrible tragedy which befell them demolished their hopes to realize their national ambitions and to live in a state where they would enjoy sovereignty and independence like all other nations.

An excerpt taken from “The Two-State Solution: The UN Partition Resolution of Mandatory Palestine – Analysis and Sources” by Ruth Gavison.
A map to illustrate the United Nations Partition Plan of 1947 [Source: The United Nations Department of Public Information].

Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.

We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.

JC History Tuition Singapore - What is the Balfour Declaration - Arab-Israeli Conflict Notes

What is the Balfour Declaration?

/in , /by

Topic of Study [For H2 History 9174 Students]: 
Paper 1: Conflict and Cooperation (1948-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 1: Arab-Israeli Conflict (1948-1979)

Learn more about the Balfour Declaration to understand its impact on the Arab-Israeli conflict in the 20th Century [Video by The Economist]

Historical Context
During World War One, Britain and France clashed with Germany on the Western Front. In December 1917, British Prime Minister David Lloyd George publicly supported Zionism. The Russian Jew Chaim Weizmann was one of those that led this movement.

The British government’s decision to declare its support of Zionism was partly driven by hopes of garnering Jewish support for the Allied Powers amidst the war.

On 27 November 1914, tentatively reviewing British war aims, [C. P. Scott] raised the question of Palestine and Zionism, but found that the subject was not new to Lloyd George, who told him that he had had a ‘heart to heart’ talk with Herbert Samuel, that he sympathised with the aspirations of a small nation and was interested in a ‘partly Jewish buffer state’. Scott continued diligently to press the Zionists’ case and at the end of January 1917 he urged the British Government to issue a definite statement in favour of making Palestine a national home for the Jews.

An excerpt taken from “The Question of Palestine British-Jewish-Arab Relations, 1914-1918” by Isaiah Friedman.

The Declaration: A letter to Rothschild
On 2 November 1917, British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour wrote a letter to Lionel Walter Rothschild, a friend of Weizmann. The letter stated that the British government was in favour of the ‘establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people’. Rothschild represented the British Jewish community.

His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

An excerpt taken from the Balfour Declaration written by Arthur James Balfour to Lord Rothschild, 2 November 1917.

After the Declaration was made, the League of Nations declared that Palestine would fall under the British Mandate on 24 July 1922. This ‘mandate’ system was meant to give the League authority to administer non-self-governing territories, so as to advance the well-being of the population within.

While the British Mandate allowed both the Jewish and Arab communities to manage their own affairs, the British was unable to maintain regional stability.

But the Balfour Declaration, far from being dropped, became embedded – even augmented – in British policy to Palestine. This continuing British commitment was made in the face of all-but overwhelming evidence and argument that a British-backed Zionist project for a Jewish national home would lead to inter-communal antagonism and, in time, a territory that would be ungovernable. Arab opposition was rekindled after the war and, as Jewish immigration resumed, soon manifested itself in demonstrations, petitions and outbreaks of violence.

An excerpt taken from “Legacy of Empire Britain, Zionism and the Creation of Israel” by Gardner Thompson.

Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about Conflict and Cooperation. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.

We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.

JC History Tuition Online - What was the Bretton Woods gold standard system

What was the Bretton Woods gold standard system?

/in , /by

Topic of Study [For H2 History Students]: 
Paper 1: The Development of the Global Economy (1945-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme II Chapter 1: Factors for the growth of the global economy (1945-1971)

Historical Context: The end of the Gold Standard
In 1913, the Federal Reserve introduced the Gold Standard. A law was passed, requiring the Federal Reserve to hold gold equal to forty percent of the value of the currency it issued. At the same time, it had to convert these dollars into gold at a fixed price of $20.67 per ounce of pure gold. Back then, the Federal Reserve held more gold to back the issued currency. This was known as ‘free gold’.

The quantity of ‘free gold’ could be influenced by the prevailing interest rates. For instance, higher interest rate encouraged Americans to deposit in banks, facilitating movement of gold from households to the Federal Reserve.

However, the Great Depression of the 1930s saw substantial outflow of gold from the Federal Reserve. Both individuals and business owners preferred to hold gold instead of currency. This economic crisis even influenced foreign investors to reduce their demand for USD as well. Over time, the quantity of ‘free gold’ fell, making it difficult for the Federal Reserve to honour its commitment to convert currency to gold. As a result, the Roosevelt administration suspended the Gold Standard on 20 April 1933.

The reaction of the global currency markets was instantaneous. In one day the dollar lost 10 percent of its value relative to the pound sterling, and 8 percent relative to the French franc. […] Commodity markets also reacted with force, reflecting the sentiment among market participants and the general public that getting off gold, and implementing some (or all) of the policies in the Thomas Amendment, would help raise prices and bring deflation to an end.

An excerpt taken from “American Default: The Untold Story of FDR, the Supreme Court, and the Battle over Gold” by Sebastian Edwards.

Bretton Woods Conference: System Renewed
During the Bretton Woods Conference in July 1944, the USA contemplated on replacing the Gold Standard with a new international monetary system to achieve economic stability. In particular, a system that fixed the US dollar (USD) to gold at the parity of USD$35 per ounce. All other foreign currencies had fixed, but adjustable, exchange rates to the USD.

Historically, countries sought credibly to commit not to change the value of their currencies by pegging them to a particular amount of precious metals – either gold or silver or a combination of the two. As the volume of global trade increased in the late nineteenth century, more and more countries joined the club of advanced nations that fixed their currencies to a given quantity of gold. When they did so, they effectively promised to maintain reserve of gold (or of currencies like the British pound that were considered as good as gold) and allow holders of their currencies to redeem bills at will at the fixed exchange rate.

An excerpt taken from “The Bretton Woods Agreements: Together with Scholarly Commentaries and Essential Historical Documents” by Naomi Lamoreaux and Ian Shapiro.

In 1958, the Bretton Woods System was functional. Countries used USD as the international currency for economic activities. The USA honoured its commitment to ensure gold convertibility. However, this commitment was later put to the test when the USA experienced twin deficits.

What can we learn from this article?
Consider the following question:
– How far do you agree that the Golden Age of Capitalism was mainly the result of the Bretton Woods System?

Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Global Economy. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.

We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.

JC History Tuition Online - What did the UN do to help Somalia - UN Notes 2

What did the UN do to help Somalia?

/in , /by

Topic of Study [For H1/H2 History Students]:
Paper 1: Safeguarding International Peace and Security 
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 2: Political Effectiveness of the UN in maintaining international peace and security

Historical Context: The rise and fall of Siad Barre
After a ten-year transition period under a United Nations (UN) Trusteeship in the 1950s, Somalia gained independence. From 1960 to 1969, Somalia was led by multi-party system. In 1969, Major General Mohamed Siad Barre became President after a bloodless coup.

Under the Cold War context, Somalia had received Soviet military and financial aid. Yet, the Soviet Union disapproved Barre’s decision to launch an invasion of Ethiopia in July 1977, which was known as the Ogaden War. The war concluded with Somali defeat in March 1978 as well as the termination of Soviet aid.

The Ogaden War had a profound effect on international relations in the Horn of Africa. Russia and Cuba withdrew from the long-standing military and naval bases they had helped build in Somalia, and relocated to what was then the Red Sea coastline of Ethiopia (now Eritrea). As a result, Siad Barre switched allegiance to the West, making his first visit to the USA in 1982 […].

An excerpt taken from “Somaliland: with Addis Ababa & Eastern Ethiopia” by Philip Briggs.

In addition, the Barre government had to contend with clan-based rebellions that lasted throughout the 1980s. By then, more Somalis became disillusioned with a military dictatorship under Barre. The rebellions began with a failed coup attempt in April 1978, which were carried out by disgruntled army officers led by Colonel Mohamed Osman Irro.

By late 1990, the United Somali Congress (USC) launched an offensive on the capital Mogadishu, thus forcing Barre to flee in January 1991.

Enter the United Nations: UNOSOM
After Barre’s self-imposed exile, a civil war broke out between two factions: one that backed the Interim President Ali Mahdi Mohamed and another that supported General Mohamed Farah Aidid. In hopes of brokering peace between the factions, the Secretary-General Javier Pérez de Cuéllar dispatched a UN envoy, James Jonah.

More importantly, many Somali civilians’ lives were undermined by the civil war, thus necessitating humanitarian intervention. By November 1991, about 300,000 people died. Many suffered from malnutrition and other related diseases. Also, a million Somalis fled their homes, giving rise to a refugee crisis.

On 3 March 1992, leaders of both competing factions (Mahdi and Aidid) signed a ceasefire agreement (“Agreement on the Implementation of a Ceasefire”), which granted consent for the UN to deploy military observers to oversee the process.

On 24 April 1992, the UN Security Council (UNSC) adopted Resolution 751, which authorised the deployment of the United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM). UNOSOM was tasked to distribute food supplies to the Somali civilians with the help of other non-governmental organisations (NGOs), such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). However, its relief efforts were hampered by the absence of security, which gave rise to looting by armed gangs.

However, humanitarian aid was preyed upon by a mixture of the warring factions and unaffiliated bandits. The militia leaders used food to pay their fighters and buy weapons that allowed them to extend their control and subsequently their access to wealth. […] Khalil Dale, a British Red Cross worker, recalled:

I’ve been to Afghanistan, two or three times. I’ve been to Sudan, I’ve been to a lot of war zones and famine camps and cholera camps. But I’ve never seen anything like Somalia was at that time. And it was certainly the most frightening place for me, it was the most insecure, unpredictable. You just didn’t know what was going to happen next.

An excerpt taken from “Soldiers and Civil Power: Supporting or Substituting Civil Authorities in Modern Peace Operations” by Thijs Brocades Zaalberg.

General Aidid held dominant control of strategic locations where most of the food aid had arrived from abroad, namely the port and airfield. The problem was so serious that the ICRC had to employ nearly 20,000 armed guards to protect their personnel from looters.

Help is on the way: United Task Force
Frustrated by the lack of progress, the Bush administration supported the UNSC’s resolution to authorise an American-led force to establish a “secure environment for humanitarian relief operations in Somalia”. On 9 December 1992, Operation Restore Hope was conducted by the US government under the United Task Force (UNITAF).

Out of the 38,000 troops deployed, 24,000 were American, reflecting the commitment of the US government to support the UN’s humanitarian intervention in Somalia. Between December 1992 and May 1993, the UNITAF secured nine humanitarian relief sectors, thus enabling the resumption of humanitarian aid to the Somali civilians.

Providing security relief operations was obviously a success. By late December and early January there was consensus worldwide that the US-led intervention enabled the relief organization to deliver much-needed supplies much more effectively. As a result, many thousands of lives were saved. […]

According to the official US Army After Action Report of the Somalia mission, the Bush administration recognized that lasting peace in Somalia could only be achieved by disarming the warlords, reconciliation and assisting in the restoration of law and order and societal infrastructure.

An excerpt taken from “Soldiers and Civil Power: Supporting or Substituting Civil Authorities in Modern Peace Operations” by Thijs Brocades Zaalberg.

What can we learn from this article?
Consider the following question:
– How far do you agree that the failures of the United Nations mission in Somalia were expected?

Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the United Nations. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.

We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.

JC History Tuition Online - What does Daewoo do

What does Daewoo do?

/in , /by

Paper 1: Understanding the Global Economy (1945-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme II Chapter 3: Rise of Asian Tigers from 1970s to 1990s [South Korea and Taiwan] 

Background
Daewoo (대우) refers to the ‘Great Universe’. On 22 March 1967, the Daewoo Group was founded by Kim Woo-Choong. Kim was the son of a provincial governor. Notably, Kim’s father used to teach Park Chung-hee, who later became South Korea’s authoritarian leader.

In the late 1960s, Kim relied on government loans to develop export-driven industries. His access to government loans was made possible with the Second Five-Year Plan from 1967 to 1971, which targeted export-oriented production. Within this period, the South Korean economy experienced an average growth rate of 9.6%. Also, the share of manufacturing in exports rose from 60 to 70%.

Diversification
At the early stages, he focused on the production of clothing and textiles, given the country’s sizable and affordable labour supply. Before 1972, Daewoo focused on its core business by purchasing three businesses, two textile producers and one leather processor.

In the 1970s, Daewoo moved to new areas, such as the production of cars, ships and oil rigs, which aligned with General Park Chung-hee’s plan to promote heavy and chemical industrialisation under the third Five-Year Plan from 1972.

By mid-1970s, Daewoo catapulted to economic success. Barely eight years after the company was established, Daewoo’s exported exceeded $300 million, which was equivalent to more than 4% of South Korea’s combined exports. In 1975, Daewoo owned 23 companies, 30 overseas branches and employed 35,000 workers.

Daewoo was originally a textile firm but also ended up making electronic goods, cars, and ships, in accordance with subsequent government economic plans. In fact, Kim entered the shipbuilding business against his will – Park forced him to do it. Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Ltd. now generates annual revenues of well over U.S. $10 billion.

An excerpt taken from “Korea: The Impossible Country: South Korea’s Amazing Rise from the Ashes: The Inside Story of an Economic, Political and Cultural Phenomenon” by Daniel Tudor.

Case Study: Daewoo Electronics
It can be observed that the founder Kim embarked on diversification to expand his business plans. One such example is Daewoo Electronics, which was formed in 1971, which began its first step by assembling radios and amplifiers. Two years later, a large-scale plant was set up in Kumi, enabling its to make its mark in Korea as one of the key electronics producers.

Daewoo Electronics’ growth acquired several firms. It acquired Joo-Ahn Electronics in 1975 and Dae-Han Electronics in 1983; the former allowed Daewoo to become a major producer of radios, while the latter became a core of its consumer electronics production. […]

Later, it supplied amplifiers to Germany’s Telefunken and Zenith of the USA. By 1982, Daewoo diversified itself as a comprehensive consumer electronics maker, exporting televisions, VCRs, cassette recorders, car stereos, refrigerators and washers.

An excerpt taken from “Technology Transfer and International Production: The Development of the Electronic Industry in Korea” by Jin W. Cyhn.

Daewoo Electronics’ success could be traced to its strategy of focusing on Original Equipment Manufacturing (OEM). In 1981, the Japanese multinational company, also known as the Nippon Electric Company (NEC), approached Daewoo Electronics to iron out plans for an OEM arrangement. The Korean chaebol was identified as a viable organisation, given its capacity for large-scale production.

Daewoo Electronics benefited from its contract manufacturing role with Japan’s NEC in terms of technological learning. The NEC engineers facilitated the transfer of technology through various forms of interactions. For instance, Daewoo engineers were advised to used more accurate electronic measuring devices by their Japanese counterparts.

A crumbling empire?
However, Daewoo’s economic track record was blemished by financial mismanagement, which surfaced in the wake of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. By the end of 1997, the Korean conglomerate accumulated a debt that was five times its equity. By 1999, Daewoo racked up debts of about US$50 billion.

The fall of Daewoo will undoubtedly be seen as an important event in Korea’s postwar economic history. The government did not altogether avoid support for the firm, since debt was rolled over and some core firms were not liquidated. Moreover, in September and October, the government was forced to establish massive funds to support the investment trust companies, which were big purchasers of Daewoo bonds.

An excerpt taken from “Resolution of Financial Distress: An International Perspective on the Design of Bankruptcy Laws” by Simeon Djankov, Constantijn A. Claessens amd Ashoka Mody.

What can we learn from this article?
Consider the following question:
– Assess the view that the economic transformation of South Korea between 1970 and 1990 was exaggerated.

Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Global Economy and the Asian Tiger economies. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.

We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.

JC History Tuition Online - What was the Brahimi Report - UN Notes

What was the Brahimi Report?

/in , /by

Topic of Study [For H1/H2 History Students]:
Paper 1: Safeguarding International Peace and Security 
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 3: UN Reforms

Historical Context: The Report
Following the disasters in Bosnia and Rwanda, the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations. He tasked the Panel to review the challenges faced by ongoing peace operations and make specific recommendations. The Panel was chaired by the UN Under-Secretary-General Lakhdar Brahimi.

On 21 August 2000, the Report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations (also known as the “Brahimi Report” in short) was published, offering a comprehensive assessment of peacekeeping operations as well as specific recommendations to finetune the processes.

The recommendations focus, to a large degree, on structural and management problems, but the Panel also commented on the doctrine on which peace operations should be conducted. Although the Panel states that the ‘consent of the local parties, impartiality and the use of force only in self-defence should remain the bedrock principles of peacekeeping’ (Brahimi Report, para. 48), the Report calls for more robust mandates that are also clear, credible and achievable, and does not only question, but also modifies, the traditional approach to peacekeeping concerning the consent of the parties, the principle of impartiality and the non-use of force.

An excerpt taken from “International Peacekeeping” by Boris Kondoch.

Let’s take a look at some of the points raised in the Report:

1. The need for clear, credible and achievable UN mandates
The Brahimi Report advised the UN Secretariat to highlight the key requirements for peace operations in dangerous environments. Also, the Secretariat should inform the UN Security Council (UNSC) when a possible operation goes beyond its capacity. By doing so, the UNSC can hold consultations with troop contributing member states when making risk assessments before deployment.

2. Requirements for effective peacebuilding
The Panel recognised the essential role that peacekeepers play in the post-conflict phase. It urged the UN to ensure that there is adequate budget allocated for disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR). Delays in funding may risk the resurgence of violence in mission areas.

3. Enhancements to the recruitment and deployment of troops
While the United Nations Stand-by Arrangement System (UNSAS) was already established in the early 1990s under the former Secretary-General’s “An Agenda for Peace” report, the Brahimi Report made recommendations to improve on it.

In particular, the Panel requested the re-organisation of the UNSAS, with the inclusion of four levels of commitment, a new “Rapid Deployment Level” for troop resources available within 30 or 90 days of a Security Council mandate. In addition, the Department for Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO) will create a “Military On-Call List”. This List will facilitate timely deployment of military headquarter staffs of new missions.

Given that prevention is better than cure, one possible option for the UN would be to engage in the kind of preventive deployment that appeared to have worked in Macedonia. Deployment of peacekeepers in ‘unstable areas’ would appear to provide the possibility of helping to provide an environment in which problems could be nipped in the bud, or at least controlled. […]

However, the option of preventive diplomacy faces several problems. […] Such political will seems to have been lacking in some instances and at best the UN Security Council has been reactive to events rather than taking a more pro-active stance. Secretary-General Annan has highlighted the root causes of conflict arising out of the Brahmi Report, but it requires political action to support his efforts to address such problems. Moreover, states may be offended by being named as sites for potential armed conflict; particularly intense conflict and recourse to this option would raise serious sovereignty issues.

An excerpt taken from “United Nations Peacekeeping in the Post-Cold War Era” by John Terence O’Neill and Nick Rees.

What can we learn from this article?
Consider the following question:
– Assess the view that the Brahimi Report showcased the relevance of the United Nations in maintaining international peace and security.

Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the United Nations. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.

We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.

JC History Tuition Online - What happened in South West Africa - UN Notes

What happened in South West Africa?

/in , /by

Topic of Study [For H1/H2 History Students]:
Paper 1: Safeguarding International Peace and Security 
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 2: International Court of Justice: ensuring adherence to international law; arbitration and advisory opinion

Historical Background: Mandate Territory and Trust Territory
After the end of World War One, the German colony South West Africa was declared a League of Nations (LON) Mandate Territory. Under the Treaty of Versailles, South West Africa was considered a British protectorate with the Union of South Africa handling its administration. When World War Two came to an end, the LON Mandates were moved to the United Nations (UN) Trusteeship system, thus South West Africa was expected to become a UN Trust Territory.

However, the South African government opposed the process of South West Africa becoming a UN Trust Territory. Its Prime Minister Field Marshal Jan Christian Smuts supported policies of racial segregation in South Africa, sparking controversy among member nations in the UN General Assembly (UNGA).

First key response by the Court
On 11 July 1950, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) gave its Advisory Opinion at the request of the UNGA. With regards to the legal status of the territory in South West Africa, the ICJ asserted that the UN was “legally qualified to discharge the supervisory functions formerly exercised by the League of Nations”. Also, South Africa “had no competence to modify the international status of South West Africa unilaterally”.

If the reason for the South African government’s refusal to cooperate or negotiate with the United Nations about the status and administration of South West Africa was the fear that its racial policy would be discussed in the world forum, its tactics were a complete failure. On December 6, 1955, the General Assembly adopted a resolution which emphasized racial policy in the territory as the chief issue. It reminded the Union government “of the faith it had re-affirmed in signing the Charter, in fundamental human rights and in the dignity and worth of the human person,” and called on it to observe Article 56 of the Charter.

An excerpt taken from “South Africa and the World: The Foreign Policy of Apartheid” by Amry Vandenbosch.

Even so, South Africa did not relent with its repressive policies towards South West Africa. With mounting pressure from the member states in the Sub-Saharan region in the UNGA, the UN Security Council (UNSC) passed resolutions in 1969 and 1970, denouncing South Africa’s occupation of South West Africa.

On 12 June 1968, under UNGA Resolution 2372 (XXII), South West Africa was renamed as Namibia.

The second key response by the Court
On 29 July 1970, the UNSC requested the ICJ to give an Advisory Opinion on the legal consequences for states of the continued presence of South Africa Namibia. On 21 June 1971, the Court declared that South Africa’s presence in Namibia was illegal, thus the former should withdraw its administration. At the same time, the Court stated that all member states of the UN had to recognise the “illegality of South Africa’s presence in Namibia and the invalidity of its acts on behalf of or concerning Namibia”.

In the Namibia Opinion, the ICJ drew another set of limits, this time in the context of treaty law, to the responses that states may legitimately adopt, even where this concerned an obligation erga omnes (towards all), the breach of which was invoked by, and the reaction to the breach authorized by, collective bodies. The ICJ held that the obligations of states flowing from a Security Council resolution (in this case, Resolution 276 (1970)) not to enter into treaty relations with South Africa could not “be applied to certain general conventions such as those of a humanitarian character, the non-performance of which may adversely affect the people of Namibia”, a holding reminiscent of Article 60(5) of the 1969 Vienna Convention.

An excerpt taken from “The International Court of Justice: Its Future Role After Fifty Years” by J. M. Thurnszky Sam Muller and A. S. Muller.

This time, the UNSC passed Resolution 418, imposed a mandatory arms embargo against South Africa to put sufficient pressure on the latter to comply with the Court’s Opinion. On 22 December 1988, the Tripartite Accord was signed by Angola, Cuba and South Africa, granting independence to Namibia from South Africa.

What can we learn from this article?
Consider the following question:
– Assess the view that the International Court of Justice was effective in managing the legal dispute over South West Africa.

Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the United Nations. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.

We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.

JC History Tuition Online - How did the UN respond to the Suez Canal crisis - UN Notes

How did the UN respond to the Suez Canal crisis?

/in , /by

Topic of Study [For H1/H2 History Students]:
Paper 1: Safeguarding International Peace and Security 
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 2: Political Effectiveness of the UN in maintaining international peace and security

Historical Context: Trouble in Suez
In October 1956, Egypt, Jordan and Syria formed a joint military command that alarmed Israel. When the USA and UK backed down on their decision to finance the development of an Aswan dam project for Egypt, President Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal, declaring that the transit fees would be used to pay for the infrastructure.

In retaliation, Britain and France orchestrated an attack on Egypt to reclaim the Suez. In the process, Israel was brought into the picture. On 29 October 1956, Israel invaded Sinai. On 5 November, the British and French deployed paratroopers along the Suez Canal. From October 1956 to March 1957, the Suez Canal was closed as a result of the crisis.

The [Suez] canal had been built during the 1860s under French management in partnership with Egypt. The canal itself was Egyptian, guaranteed as an open waterway under an international treaty, the Convention of Constantinople, signed in 1888. But the canal was operated by an unusual private firm, the Universal Suez Canal Company, headquartered in Paris. The British had bought a large minority of the stock from a bankrupt Egyptian government in 1875. The company had a concession to operate the canal until 1968. Surrounding the canal, loaded with infrastructure such as railroads, harbors, and warehouses, was the Canal Zone – an elaborate British base operated under an Anglo-Egyptian treaty signed in 1936.

An excerpt taken from “Suez Deconstructed: An Interactive Study in Crisis, War, and Peacemaking” by Philip Zelikow and Ernest May.

The First United Nations Emergency Force: UNEF I
On 7 November 1956, the United Nations General Assembly passed resolution 1001, leading to the creation of a peacekeeping force, known as the First United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF I). UNEF I was tasked to secure and supervise the cessation of hostilities, including the withdrawal of foreign troops (France, Britain and Israel) from Egyptian territory. Also, the UNEF I functioned as a buffer between Egyptian and Israeli forces, monitoring a ceasefire agreement that lasted for ten years.

Through the efforts of Canada’s Minister for External Affairs Lester Pearson and various European delegates, on February 2 the General Assembly passed two resolutions that focused on both Egypt and Israel. The first deplored Israeli noncompliance with the earlier General Assembly resolution that had mandated a complete Israeli withdrawal from all occupied territory and called upon Israel to complete its pullback without delay. The second resolution called upon both countries to observe the armistice agreement and, after Israeli troops withdrew, mandated the stationing of UNEF troops on the Israeli-Egyptian border.

An excerpt taken from “The Economic Diplomacy of the Suez Crisis” by Diane B. Kunz.

With the help of the charismatic Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld, Nasser agreed to the presence of UNEF I on the condition that Egypt could revoke its agreement at any time. Furthermore, the peacekeeping troops stationed in Egypt have no authority over the people. On the other hand, Israel refused to give UNEF consent to enter its territory.

By February 1957, UNEF I had 6073 personnel, which were contributed by eleven member states of the United Nations (Yugoslavia, Finland, India, Indonesia, Norway, Sweden, Canada, Brazil, Colombia, Denmark and Norway).

Six-Day War: A political bystander?
However, Egypt no longer welcomed UNEF’s presence by 1967. Given Israel’s participation in the invasion of Egypt during the Suez Canal Crisis as well as its hostility following the Palestinian War of 1948, tensions were high.

In May 1967, the Soviet Union delivered reports to Egypt, claiming that Israeli troops were amassing on the Syrian border. In anticipation of a possible military incursion, Nasser withdrew consent, forcing Secretary-General U Thant to comply with the expulsion of UNEF stationed in the Sinai Peninsula.

On 13 May 1967, [Nasser] received a Soviet intelligence report claiming that Israel was massing troops on Syria’s border. Nasser responded by taking three successive steps that made war virtually inevitable: he deployed his troops in the Sinai close to Israel’s border, he expelled the UN Emergency Force (UNEF) from the Sinai, and, on 22 May, he closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping. In Israeli eyes, this was a casus belli, a cause for war. On 5 June, Israel seized the initiative and launched the short, sharp war that ended in a resounding military defeat for Egypt, Syria, and Jordan.

An excerpt taken from “The 1967 Arab-Israeli War: Origins and Consequences” by Avi Shlaim and William Roger Louis.

Egypt then declared its intention to impose a blockade through the Straits of Tiran, which would have hampered Israel’s access to the Red Sea. Israel was outraged by this announcement, declaring the blockade as an act of war. On 5 June 1967, Israel commenced Operation Focus, which was a series of pre-emptive air strikes that disabled Egyptian air operations. This marked the start of the Six-Day War.

Evidently, the UN peacekeepers were helpless to the situation in spite of their initial success in response to the Suez Crisis.

An illustration on the changes to Israeli-controlled territories before and after the Six Day War of 1967. [Source: BBC]

What can we learn from this article?
Consider the following question:
– How far do you agree that the key factor that determined the successes of United Nations peacekeeping was the cooperation of member states?

Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the United Nations. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.

We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.

JC History Tuition Online - How did decolonisation affect the United Nations - UN Notes

How did decolonisation affect the United Nations?

/in , /by

Topic of Study [For H1/H2 History Students]:
Paper 1: Safeguarding International Peace and Security 
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme III Chapter 2: Political Effectiveness of the UN in maintaining international peace and security

Historical context
On 14 December 1960, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples”. In essence, the Declaration advocated the right to self-determination, thereby bringing an end to colonial rule.

Recognizing that the peoples of the world ardently desire the end of colonialism in all its manifestations, […]

2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

An excerpt taken from the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV), 947th plenary meeting, 14 December 1960.

A commitment to decolonisation: C-24
To oversee the decolonisation process, a Special Committee was established in 1961 in accordance to the General Assembly resolution 1654 (XVI). The Committee of Twenty-four, also known as C-24, carries out activities, such as examining the political and economic developments of non-self-governing territories (NSGTs).


Infographic on the Special Committee on Decolonization. [Source: United Nations]

By resolution 1603 (XV) of 20 April 1961, a Sub-Committee on the Situation in Angola was created. Angola was both a colonial issue involving a commencement case, as well as a complex political situation characterized by armed conflict. In 1962 this Sub-Committee was absorbed by what was becoming the main U.N. instrumentality for decolonization, namely the Special Committee of Twenty-Four.

With a view to centralizing the U.N. action in the area of decolonization, and to concentrate it in the hands of the Special Committee of Twenty-Four, the pattern of absorption was repeated with regard to the Committee on South West Africa which was dissolved in 1961.

An excerpt taken from “The United Nations and Decolonization: The Role of Afro-Asia” byy Yassin El-Ayouty.

Branching out to security matters
In the early 1960s, the newly-formed C-24 tried to garner support from the United Nations Security Council. It called on the Council to address the issue in South West Africa, citing security concerns. Likewise, a similar matter was raised in Southern Rhodesia two years later. In 1965, the Committee expressed concerns in the Aden territory, labelling it as a ‘dangerous situation’.

Yet, the Security Council’s responses were not identical. For instance, the Council recognised the threats in South West Africa, but not so in Aden.

It is doubtful if in practice the Committee of Twenty-four had much influence on the policies which the colonial powers pursued in the territories for which they were responsible. Its pronouncements were for them an extremely marginal factor among all the considerations which had to be taken into account (including often a nationalistic home opinion holding diametrically opposite views). They were a factor which, if considered at all, were more important in the eyes of their foreign offices than of their colonial departments which had the main responsibility for policy concerning their colonial territories.

An excerpt taken from “A History of the United Nations: Volume 2: The Age of Decolonization, 1955–1965” by Evan Luard.

What can we learn from this article?
Consider the following question:
– How far do you agree that decolonisation created problems for the United Nations General Assembly?

Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the United Nations. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.

We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.

JC History Tuition Online - Why did Nixon end the Bretton Woods system

Why did Nixon end the Bretton Woods system?

/in , /by

Topic of Study [For H2 History Students]: 
Paper 1: Understanding the Global Economy (1945-2000)
Section B: Essay Writing
Theme II Chapter 1: Problems of economic liberalisation

Historical background
In 1944, an international monetary agreement was signed in 1944 at the Bretton Woods Conference. Under this agreement, foreign currencies were defined in terms of the US dollar (USD). A new system was established in the post-WWII period to replace the Gold Standard that ended in 1993 following the Great Depression.

Under this system, a fixed exchange rate was established, in which one ounce of gold is equivalent to 35 USD.

When nations participate in a pegged exchange-rate system, they agree to fix the value of their currencies relative to another currency rather than to a commodity such as gold. The US dollar was chosen as the base currency and all the countries agreed to keep the value of their currency within plus or minus 1 percent of a specific value of the dollar. […] In contrast to all other nations, the US currency maintained a relationship with gold fixed at $35/ounce. Thus, because the US dollar remained fixed to gold, this was an indirect gold standard, but nations used US dollars rather than gold to settle international transactions.

An excerpt taken from “International Business: Strategy and the Multinational Company” by K. Praveen Parboteeah and John B. Cullen.

With support from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), an automatic adjustment helped nations to avoid the onset of deflation, thereby maintaining stable exchange rates. By the late 1950s, key trading nations loosened exchange restrictions to accept the international gold standard.

Dollar shortage & the Gold Pool
Following the Second World War, governments in Western Europe imported US-made machinery and merchandise. Consequently, there was a surge in demand for USD, given that more nations underwent post-war economic reconstruction. During the Presidential polls in August 1960, US Senator John F. Kennedy declared his plan to “get America moving again“, giving rise to a ‘gold rush’.

As a result, the increase in market price of gold in London to $40 sparked fears of an unstable USD-gold parity. As such, a “Gold Pool” was created in November 1961, in which eight central banks agreed to buy and sell gold only at the official price of $35. Seven other central banks agreed to provide half of the gold supply to keep the market price of gold stable.

The spike in the London market price sparked fears that governments, seeing the writing on the wall, might demand wholesale conversion of their dollars into gold. In response, the US Treasury provided the Bank of England with gold to be used to bring the price of gold on the London gold market, where the metal was bought and sold by private investors (some would say “speculators”), back down to $35, and the governments of principal industrial countries agreed to refrain from buying gold at a higher price.

[…] What the left hand gave, the right hand taketh away, in other words, in a classic instance of a collective-action problem. As a result, the Gold Pool did little to resolve the internal contradictions of what was now referred to as the Bretton Woods gold-dollar system.

An excerpt taken from “The Bretton Woods Agreements: Together with Scholarly Commentaries and Essential Historical Documents” by Naomi Lamoreaux and Ian Shapiro.

Overvaluation of the USD: A currency crisis and a gold glut
However, the USA faced problems with the system. In the early 1960s, the USA experienced rising inflation. As a result of inflation, the increase in silver prices made it difficult for the USA to ensure adequate circulation of coins and silver certificates. In response, the Congress repealed the Silver Purchase Act in 1963 and enabled the Federal Reserve to produce notes in $1 and $2 denominations. At the same time, silver certificates were gradually retired, thus freeing up the silver holdings for use as coins.

Yet, inflation persisted. In 1968, the Congress repealed the requirement to hold gold reserves against Federal Reserve notes. This led to the collapse of the “Gold Pool”.

By the late 1960s, the inflationary condition exacerbated by the large spending to finance the ‘Great Society’ and the Vietnam War strained the international monetary system. Although a two-tier gold market was created in March 1968, foreign governments viewed it with much skepticism. Central banks were unwilling to accept USD in settlement.

The Bretton Woods was based on gold, but the global gold stock could not meet the world’s demand for international reserves, without which pegged exchange rates were impossible. Consequently, the United States provided dollar reserves by running a persistent balance of payments deficit and promised to redeem those dollars for gold at $35 per ounce. By 1961, however, the amount of dollar claims outstanding began to exceed the US government’s stock of gold. The deficit of gold implied that the United States might not be able to keep its pledge to convert dollars for gold at the official price.

[…] The prospect of a dollar devaluation created strong incentives to exchange dollars for US gold. The US Treasury and the Federal Reserve tried to keep this from happening through stop-gap measures, but they could not solve the underlying paradox: Without additional dollar reserves, the system was unworkable; with additional dollar reserves, the system was unstable.

An excerpt taken from “Currency Stability and a Country’s Prosperity: “Does a Mandatory Currency Stability Law Determine the Stability and or Prosperity of a Country?” by John E. Baiden.

As a result, US President Richard Nixon ‘closed the gold window‘ in August 1971, thereby disallowing foreign central banks from exchanging USD for the US Treasury’s gold. Notably, Nixon blamed other countries for their reluctance to share the military burden of the Cold War, which in turn contributed to the persistent balance of payments deficit.

What can we learn from this article?
Consider the following question:
– How far do you agree that the problems of the Crisis Decades were the result of American economic policies?

Join our JC History Tuition to learn more about the Global Economy. The H2 and H1 History Tuition feature online discussion and writing practices to enhance your knowledge application skills. Get useful study notes and clarify your doubts on the subject with the tutor. You can also follow our Telegram Channel to get useful updates.

We have other JC tuition classes, such as JC Math Tuition and JC Chemistry Tuition. For Secondary Tuition, we provide Secondary English Tuition, Secondary Math tuition, Secondary Chemistry Tuition, Social Studies Tuition, Geography, History Tuition and Secondary Economics Tuition. For Primary Tuition, we have Primary English, Math and Science Tuition. Call 9658 5789 to find out more.