Addressing the rise of Xenophobia and racism in developed countries as a result of a rise in nationalism Overview

This topic will analyze the current situation in a large number of developed nations where there has been a rise in the amounts of racism and Xenophobia due to a substantial increase in political-ly charged rhetoric from right-wing politicians How to define nationalism and populism?

Nationalism is an ideology and movement that promotes the interests of a particular nation (as in a group of people) especially with the aim of gaining and maintaining the nation’s sovereignty (self-governance) over its homeland. Nationalism holds that each nation should govern itself, free from outside interference (self-determination), that a nation is a natural and ideal basis for a poli-ty, and that the nation is the only rightful source of political power (popular sovereignty). It fur-ther aims to build and maintain a single national identity—based on shared social characteristics such as culture, language, religion, politics, and belief in a shared singular history]—and to pro-mote national unity or solidarity.[1] Nationalism, therefore, seeks to preserve and foster a nation’s traditional culture, and cultural revivals have been associated with nationalist movements.

Populism refers to a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of “the people” and often juxtapose this group against “the elite”. The term developed in the 19th century and has been applied to various politicians, parties, and movements since that time, although has rarely been chosen as a self-description. Within political science and other social sciences, several different definitions of populism have been employed, with some scholars proposing that the term be re-jected altogether.

Populist parties can be anywhere on the political spectrum. In Latin America, there was Venezu-ela’s late President Chávez. In Spain, there is the Podemos party, and in Greece, the label has also been applied to Syriza. All these are on the left. But “most successful populists today are on the right, particularly the radical right,” Prof Mudde said.

Politicians “like Marine Le Pen in France, Viktor Orbán in Hungary, and Donald Trump in the US, combine populism with [anti-immigrant] nativism and authoritarianism,” he added.

Experts point to both societal changes like multiculturalism and globalism, and more concrete crises as behind the rise of populist parties in Europe.

Overview

Martin Bull, Director of the European Consortium of Political Research (ECPR), says the emer-gence of populist parties in Europe could be seen in the early 2000s - but they remained small for several years.

The swell in support seemed to happen “from 2008 - and particularly in 2011, when the banking crisis turned into a sovereign debt crisis”, he said. It was a rare occasion when an elite class - the wealthy bankers - could be identified as more or less directly responsible for a crisis which affected the majority of society.

Key Issues

1. The relevance and impacts of racism and xenophobia on minorities in developed countries

2. The importance of the migrant crisis in 2015 and how it changed the European political landscape

3. The facade of development and how being an economically developed nation doesn’t always mean social equality

4. Possible solutions to key issues surrounding racism that stem from a country’s internal legal mechanisms

5. Evaluating the accuracy of the claim that “immigrants are taking a large number of jobs” away from the working population of a country

(there are several other issues surrounding the topic that delegates will have to submit during moderated caucus session)

Examples from the developed world

Germany

Formed just six years ago, in 2017 the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) entered the federal parliament for the first time with 12.6% of the vote, becoming Germany’s biggest opposition party.

Examples from the developed world

Germany(Continuation)

From its beginnings as an anti-euro party, it has pushed for strict anti-immigration policies, tapped into anxieties over the influence of Islam and broken decades-old anti-Nazi taboos. It en-joyed a surge in popularity as Germany allowed in over a million undocumented migrants.

Despite attempts by Chancellor Angela Merkel to toughen her stance on immigration, AfD has added to its electoral success and now has representatives in every state parliament. AfD is also a Eurosceptic party and Nigel Farage, who has returned to the political stage to lead the UK’s Brexit Party, took part in its 2017 election campaign. His former party, UKIP, came top in European Parliament elections in the UK in 2014, but the Brexit vote in 2016 led to most of its MEPs leaving. UKIP has no MPs in the UK parliament.

• How right-wing is Germany’s AfD? • • A guide to the UK’s European elections

Spain

One of the big political stories in Spain has been the sudden rise of the far-right Vox party, which entered parliament for the first time in elections on 28 April, with 24 seats and more than 10% of the vote.

Vox styles itself as defending the unity of the Spanish state, with a promise to deport illegal immigrants and repeal laws against gender violence. It has made major gains by calling for a suspension of autonomy for the north-eastern Catalonia region, after separatists failed in their push for independence in October 2017.

Many believed that Spaniards would never endorse a far-right party due to its history un-der dictator Francisco Franco, who died in 1975. Just a single seat had been won by a far-right candidate since then - in 1979. Yet Vox saw its first major success in Andalusia’s re-gional elections in late 2018, entering government there with other right-leaning parties.

Examples from the developed world

Austria

The Freedom Party (FPÖ) became the only far-right party in power in Western Europe when it joined a coalition as junior partner with conservative Chancellor Sebastian Kurz in 2017. His People’s Party, along with the center-left Social Democrats, have long dominated Austrian politics.

As in Germany, the migrant crisis that unfolded in 2015 is also seen as key to the FPÖ’s success, and an issue they long campaigned on.

During its time in power, the Freedom Party became caught up in a series of race rows. Then, party leader Heinz-Christian Strache and parliament group head Johann Gudenus were caught up in a scandal over a video “sting” filmed in Ibiza in 2017. Mr Strache re-signed and the fallout led to the far-right party quitting the government. • Deputy mayor resigns over ‘racist’ rat poem • The young Austrian leader sharing power with the far-right

France

Despite the efforts of leader Marine Le Pen to make the far-right palatable to France’s main-stream, she was comprehensively defeated by Emmanuel Macron for the presidency in May 2017.

Her far-right party, the National Front (FN), failed to breakthrough in parliamentary elec-tions the following month.

So the FN became the National Rally (Rassemblement National) and latest opinion polls give the rebranded party a lead over President Macron’s ruling liberal LREM ahead of the European elections.

Ms Le Pen’s party is opposed to the euro and blames the EU for mass immigration, and she has found a common voice with other nationalist and far-right parties in Europe. IShe appeared alongside Dutch anti-Islam and anti-EU politician Geert Wilders on Thurs-day, talking of a “democratic movement of patriots”.

Although many are skeptical that any pan-EU alliance of nationalist parties would work, Marine Le Pen is expected to take part in a pre-election rally with Italian’s Matteo Salvini and other parties in Milan next month.

Examples from the developed world

Sweden

The anti-immigration Sweden Democrats (SD) made significant gains in the 2018 general election, winning about 18% of the vote.

The party has its roots in neo-Nazism, but it rebranded itself in recent years and first en-tered parliament in 2010. It opposes multiculturalism and wants strict immigration con-trols. As with many of the countries featured here, though, the picture is complex. Sweden has welcomed more asylum seekers per capita than any other European country and has one of the most positive attitudes towards migrants.

Finland

The far-right Finns Party was narrowly beaten into second place in the April 2019 general election, coming within 0.2% of the left-wing Social Democratic Party (SDP). Its success was built on two policies: opposition to immigration and a rejection of ambitious policies aimed at combating climate change. It was an extraordinary recovery for a party that had also done well in the previous vote in 2015 but had since faded in popularity because of party splits. “I could not expect a result like this, and no-one could,” party leader Jussi Hal-la-Aho said - putting the party forward for negotiations for government for a second time.

Estonia

Estonia’s far-right Conservative People’s Party of Estonia (EKRE) won its first seats in par-liament in the 2015 election. Four years later, EKRE has more than doubled their share of the vote to nearly 18%, making it the third-largest party. It used that power to negotiate a place in government, as it joined fellow runners-up the Centre and Pro Patria parties to stop liberal leader Kaja Kallas from becoming Estonia’s first woman prime minister. EKRE campaigned on an anti-immigration platform, and is also critical of same-sex marriage. Its leader, Martin Helme, once said that only white people should be allowed to move to Esto-nia.

Examples from the developed world

Hungary

In 2018, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban secured a third term in office with a landslide victory in an election dominated by immigration. The victory, he said, gave Hun-garians “the opportunity to defend themselves and to defend Hungary”. Mr Orban has long presented himself as the defender of Hungary and Europe against Muslim migrants, once warning of the threat of “a Europe with a mixed population and no sense of identity”. But his Fidesz party remains inside Europe’s mainstream center-right grouping, the EPP. In March 2019, the EPP suspended the party because of its anti-EU stance. So far Mr Orban has been keen to remain under the center-right umbrella, but he is due to meet Matteo Sal-vini next week. Hungary has two nationalist parties - with Jobbik attempting to escape its far-right past and appeal to centrist voters - and gaining 19% of the vote in 2018.

Links That Will Help:

1) https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/01/world/europe/denmark-immi-grant-ghettos.ht ml 2) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36130006 8 3) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-43301423 4) http://aei.pitt.edu/8697/1/8697.pdf 5) https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brookings-now/2017/08/24/do-immi-grants-steal-jo bs-from-american-workers/ 6) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911 7) https://www.thelocal.se/20180511/un-concerned-about-level-of-racism-in-sweden 8) https://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/migration/taskforce/docs/wcar.pdf

Assessing the impacts of the conflict in Yemen in light of human rights abuse and the path to effective rebuilding and resto-ration

Overview

The conflict has its roots in the failure of a political transition supposed to bring stability to Yemen following an Arab Spring uprising that forced its longtime authoritarian president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, to hand over power to his deputy, Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi, in 2011. As president, Mr Hadi struggled to deal with a variety of problems, including attacks by jihadists, a separatist movement in the south, the continuing loyalty of security personnel to Saleh, as well as corruption, unemployment and food insecurity. The Houthi movement, which champions Yemen’s Zaidi Shia Muslim minority and fought a series of rebellions against Saleh during the previous decade, took advantage of the new president’s weakness by taking control of their northern heartland of Saada province and neighbouring areas. Disillusioned with the transition, many ordinary Yemenis - including Sunnis - supported the Houthis and in late 2014 and early 2015, the rebels took over Sanaa. Fighting began in 2014 when the Houthi Shia Muslim rebel movement took advantage of the new president’s weakness and seized control of northern Saada province and neighbouring areas. The Houthis went on to take the capital Sanaa, forcing Mr Hadi into exile abroad. The conflict escalated dramatically in March 2015, when Saudi Arabia and eight other mostly Sunni Arab states - backed by the US, UK, and France - began air strikes against the Houthis, with the declared aim of restoring Mr Hadi’s government.The Saudi-led coalition feared that continued success of the Houthis would give their rival regional power and Shia-majority state, Iran, a foothold in Yemen, Saudi Arabia’s southern neighbour. Saudi Arabia says Iran is backing the Houthis with weapons and logistical support - a charge Iran denies. Both sides have since been beset by infighting. The Houthis broke with Saleh and he was killed by Houthi fighters in December 2017. On the anti-Houthi side, militias include separatists seeking independence for south Yemen and factions who oppose the idea. The stalemate has produced an unrelenting humanitarian crisis, with at least 8.4 million people at risk of starvation and 22.2 million people - 75% of the population - in need of humanitarian as-sistance, according to the UN. Severe acute malnutrition is threatening the lives of almost 400,000 children under the age of five.

Key issues

VIOLATIONS OF HUMANITARIAN LAWWhen analyzing the alleged humanitarian and human rights violations, as well as interna-tional crimes committed by parties on all sides, the classification of the conflict under in-ternational law is of note. It is widely accepted that the conflict in Yemen is classified under international humanitarian law as a non-international armed conflict. The law applicable to the conflict includes the 1949 Geneva Conventions of which Yemen is a party, and the min-imum standards of Common Article 3, which includes protections of “[p]ersons taking no active part in the hostilities” from violence to life, mutilation, cruel treatment, torture, hos-tage taking, outrages upon personal dignity, and unfair trials.In 1990, Yemen further rati-fied Additional Protocol II of 1977 concerning non-international armed conflicts. Yemen is also party to a number of human rights instruments that the state, and arguably non-state actors, are bound by, including the Convention against Torture, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The applicability of human rights law is particularly relevant when considering the terms of the Agreement and attention to human rights considerations.

THE DISCUSSION OF WAR CRIMES All parties to the continuing armed conflict committed war crimes and other serious vi-olations of international law, with inadequate accountability measures in place to ensure justice and reparation to victims. The Saudi Arabia-led coalition supporting the interna-tionally recognized Yemeni government continued to bomb civilian infrastructure and carried out indiscriminate attacks, killing and injuring civilians. The Huthi-Saleh forces indiscriminately shelled civilian residential areas in Ta’iz city and fired artillery indiscrim-inately across the border into Saudi Arabia, killing and injuring civilians. The Yemeni gov-ernment, Huthi-Saleh forces and Yemeni forces aligned to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) engaged in illegal detention practices including enforced disappearance and torture and other ill-treatment.

Key issues

EDUCATION AND SOCIAL WELFARE ISSUES The U.N. children’s fund says the education sector is on the brink of collapse because of conflict, political divisions and chronic underdevelopment. As a consequence, UNICEF spokesman Christophe Boulierac said around two million children are not going to school this year. Furthermore, he said nearly four million primary school children soon may not be able to get an education because of a severe shortage of teachers. “About 67 percent of public school teachers — and this is across the country — have not been paid for nearly two years. Many have looked for other work to survive or are only teaching a few subjects. So, obviously, the quality of education is at stake. Children are not getting their full lessons due to the absence of their teachers. Even when schools are functioning, the schools’ days and years are shortened.” Yemen also suffers from a shortage of learning facilities. UNICEF reports more than 2,500 schools have been damaged or destroyed by the war. Many schools also are being used as shelters for displaced people and some have been taken over by armed groups. The agency warns children who are out of school run many dangers. It notes boys are at risk of being used as child soldiers. It estimates more than 2,600 children have been recruited by all armed groups.

Women and girls continued to face entrenched discrimination and other abuses, including forced and early marriage and domestic violence. The death penalty remained in force; no information was publicly available on death sentences or executions

Historical Dates and TreatiesThe Stockholm Agreement

The undertakings set out in the Stockholm Agreement came in three parts—the Hodeidah Agreement, the Taïz Understanding, and a prisoner swap agreement. Taken together, these undertakings committed parties to a ceasefire in the city of Hodeidah and the ports of Ho-deidah, Salif, and Ras Issa, as well as redeployment of forces on both sides ;an opening

of humanitarian corridors for the movement of aid via these ports;and a prisoner swap aiming to release more than 15,000 prisoners and detainees.

Key Points to Consider

I. THE DIRECT INVOLVEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL BODIES IN CATALYSING THE CONFLICT

Delegates to the Arab League voted to study the formation of a joint military force on 29 March 2015, days after the intervention in Yemen began. Secretary-General Naril Elaraby affirmed that the intervention would “continue until Houthi militias withdraw and submit their weapons” and asserted that the international operation was necessary. The European Union criticized the military intervention. It suggested that military inter-vention would not solve the crisis and expressed concern about the “serious regional reper-cussions” after the Saudi military intervention in Yemen, describing that this move is not a solution, and urging regional powers to “act responsibly”. The European Union reiterates its support for all efforts by the United Nations.

II. THE PATH TO EFFECTIVE REBUILDING AND RESTORATION

UNDP engages Yemenis around the country in emergency and temporary work opportu-nities in the construction and rehabilitation of small-scale infrastructure – such as wells, toilets, roads and schools – and in the delivery of social services like post-traumatic stress and nutrition counseling. The prolonged conflict in Yemen has required considerable investment in repair, rehabilitation and construction of health facilities, schools, roads, electricity, water and other areas. Repairing and constructing these helps Yemenis get critical health and nutrition services. It enables children to continue to go to school, prevents the spread of diseases such as cholera, and helps protect against food insecurity. Clean water and roads boost economies, resulting in increased productivity and sales for farmers, livestock producers and fishermen. Ensuring and improving these critical services reduces the need for humanitarian assistance.

Discussing the implications of the crisis in Venezuela on governance and democracy.

A socio-economic and political crisis that began in Venezuela, marked by hy-perinflation, escalating starvation, disease, crime and mortality rates, resulting in massive emigration from the country. The situation is the worst economic crisis in Venezuela’s history and the worst facing a country that is not experi-encing war since the mid-twentieth century. In comparison to historical crises, the crisis in Venezuela is more severe than that of the United States during the Great Depression. On 2 June 2010, President Chávez declared an “economic war” due to increas-ing shortages in Venezuela. The crisis intensified under the Maduro govern-ment, growing more severe as a result of low oil prices in early 2015, and a drop in Venezuela’s oil production from lack of maintenance and investment. The government failed to cut spending in the face of falling oil revenues, and has dealt with the crisis by denying it exists and violently repressing opposition. Extrajudicial killings by the Venezuelan government became common, with the U.N. reporting 5,287 killings by the Special Ac-tion Forces in 2017, with at least another 1,569 killings recorded in the first six months of 2019; the U.N. had “reasonable grounds to believe that many of these killings constitute extrajudicial executions”, and characterized the security op-erations as “aimed at neutralizing, repressing and criminalizing political oppo-nents and people critical of the government.” The U.N. also stated that the Spe-cial Action Forces “would plant arms and drugs and fire their weapons against the walls or in the air to suggest a confrontation and to show the victim had resisted authority”, and that some of the killings were “done as a reprisal for [the victims’] participation in anti-government demonstrations.” Political corrup-tion, chronic shortages of food and medicine, closure of companies, unemploy-ment, deterioration of productivity, authoritarianism, human rights violations, gross economic mismanagement and high dependence on oil have also con-tributed to the worsening crisis. Supporters of Chávez and Maduro say that the problems result from an “economic war” on Venezuela and “falling oil prices, international sanctions, and the country’s business elite”; critics of the govern-ment say the cause is “years of economic mismanagement, and corruption”.

Some critics say the crisis is caused by the country’s socialist policies, while others assert that the crisis has more to do with anti-democratic governance, corruption and mismanagement of the economy. In 2018, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) documented that “infor-mation gathered indicates that the socioeconomic crisis had been unfolding for several years” before international sanctions, with Michelle Bachelet saying in 2019 that the social and economic crisis was dramatically deteriorating, the government had not acknowledged or addressed the extent of the crisis, and she expressed concern that although the “pervasive and devastating economic and social crisis began before the imposition of the first economic sanctions”, the sanctions could worsen the situation. National and international analysts and economists have stated that the crisis is not the result of a conflict, natural disas-ter or sanctions but the consequences of populist policies and corrupt practices that began under the Chávez administration’s Bolivarian Revolution and con-tinued under the Maduro administration. The crisis has affected the life of the average Venezuelan on all levels. By 2017, hunger had escalated to the point where almost seventy-five percent of the population had lost an average of over 8 kg (over 19 lbs) in weight, and more than half did not have enough income to meet their basic food needs. Reuters reported that a UN report estimated in March 2019 that 94% of Venezuelans live in poverty, and more than ten percent of Venezuelans (3.4 million) have left their country. The UN analysis estimates in 2019 that twenty-five percent of Venezuelans need some form of humanitarian assistance. Venezuela led the world in murder rates, with 81.4 per 100,000 people killed in 2018, making it the third most violent country in the world.

Key Points to Consider The growing levels of poverty The increasing need for adequate food, water, shelter and sanitation Health Care needs (eg mental health) Infectious and preventable diseases Women, maternal and infant related issues. Eg mortality rates and abuse Humanitarian aid, humanitarian action Crime, violence, human rights violations, protests, corruption Emigration crisis of Venezuela

Addressing the issues of religious freedom in developing with special emphasis on non-secular states

What is a Secular state? A secular state is a country where the state is kept separate from religion, and the state does not discriminate or favor persons based on their religious beliefs. Within a secular state, the government does not interfere with religion and its activities, as long as such activities are done under the confines of the law. A secular state is not inspired by religion when formu-lating laws and policies. The establishment of a secular state is necessary if a country is to have true freedom of religion. Countries can become secular states upon creation (such as the United States), or after undergoing secularization where the religion (the church) is separated from the state (such as France).

Religious freedom The world today is plagued by a plethora of multifaceted issues related to religious freedom and the general oppression of minorities around the world. Ideally, the religious freedoms of different groups of individuals should be respected however Looking around the world, we tragically know that this is not a reality for millions of people. It is totally unaccept-able in the twenty-first century for people to face discrimination and intimidation for their beliefs. The persecution of religious minorities is utterly intolerable. The full scope of their human rights is guaranteed, and States have an obligation to implement policies that ensure their identities are respected and that they feel fully part of society as a whole. The United Nations has continued to aggressively pursue its agenda of campaigning for the rights of minorities and ensuring that these groups are granted the protections that they deserve

We must reject those who falsely and maliciously invoke religion to build misconceptions, to fuel division, to spread fear and hatred — and we must be vigilant about attempts to in-strumentalize religion and identity to restrict the full enjoyment of rights by others, and to perpetuate or justify inequalities.“ There is richness and strength in diversity; it is never a threat. Profiting from that diversi-ty requires a strong investment in social cohesion policies. We have much wisdom to guide us on our way. All major religions espouse mutual respect and peaceful coexistence in a spirit of shared humanity. And our shared foundational text, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, affirms everyone’s “right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion”. Simply put: the best way to promote international religious freedom is by uniting our voic-es for good, countering messages of hate with messages of peace, embracing diversity and protecting human rights everywhere “ - Anthony Gutierres

Key Issues 1.The validity and effectivity of the UN ‘special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief ‘

2.The importance of secular governance and the justification for non-secularism in the developing and developed world

3.The discrimination of minorities based on religion in seemingly secular states (eg: - chi-na’s detaining of Uyghur Muslims)

4.The impact of hate speech on religious minorities and existing policies to oversee and curb online hate speech

5.Breaking down systemic barriers that exist in law enforcement and judicial processes in non-secular states

6.The extent to which cultural practices should be given precedence in light of moderniza-tion

(there are a multitude of other sub-issue under the main topic which delegates can submit as moderated caucuses for discussion)

Historical dates and Treaties

1948: Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18

1966: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 18

1981: Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief

1986: Establishment of the Special Rapporteur to identify existing and emerging obstacles to the enjoyment of the right to freedom of religion or belief

1993: Human Rights Committee’s General Comment Number 22 on Article 18 of the Civil and Political Covenant

Addition (but essential) information: Article 6 of the 1981 declaration: Manifesting Religion or Belief In accordance with article I of the present Declaration, and subject to the provisions of article 1, paragraph 3, the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief shall include, inter alia, the following freedoms: (a) To worship or assemble in connection with a religion or belief, and to establish and maintain places for these purposes; (b) To establish and maintain appropriate charitable or humanitarian institutions; (c) To make, acquire and use to an adequate extent the necessary articles and materials related to the rites or customs of a religion or belief; (d) To write, issue and disseminate relevant publications in these areas; (e) To teach a religion or belief in places suitable for these purposes; (f) To solicit and receive voluntary financial and other contributions from individuals and institutions; (g) To train, appoint, elect or designate by succession appropriate leaders called for by the requirements and standards of any religion or belief; (h) To observe days of rest and to celebrate holidays and ceremonies in accordance with the precepts of one’s religion or belief; (i) To establish and maintain communications with individuals and communities in mat-ters of religion and belief at the national and international levels.

Issues that remain Un-resolved in a large ma-jority of cases The 1981 UN Declaration was a compromise between states, drafted after twenty years of complex discussion and debate, and after final passage by the General Assembly. Though it represented a remarkable step forward, numerous issues remain to be addressed: · National law versus international law; How will states incorporate the right to freedom of religion or belief into their national legal systems?;· Proselytism;· Conscientious objection to military service;· Status of women in religion or belief;· Claims of superiority or inferiority of religions and beliefs;· Choosing and changing a religious commitment;· Religious registration and association laws; and· Public media and religion or belief, and the relationship of religion or belief to the state; and· Religious extremism