Unrest in Bahrain in 2014 (UNSC)

Set in August, 2014. In the small island country of Bahrain, government and security forces have clashed with protestors seeking democratic reform. The ruling al-Khalifa family has responded to these protests with force and mass arrests. The most recent clashes between government forces and protestors are not the first but certainly the bloodiest. In February 2011, Bahraini activists, inspired by uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt, gathered in the capital to seek political reform. The fact that Bahrain’s leaders are part of the Sunni minority and the demonstrators represent the Shiite majority gives the uprising a sectarian complexion, in addition to the broader social issues of disenfranchisement and limited economic opportunity. The UN Secretary-General has called a meeting of the UN Security Council to assess whether the situation warrants a response and, if so, what kind.

Three years after Bahrain’s 2011 uprising, progress toward reform has stalled. In January 2014, the government suspended its “national dialogue” with opposition groups. The government blamed opposition groups for the breakdown. Soon after, renewed unrest gripped the country. On February 14—the anniversary of the initial uprising—thousands of protestors calling for King Hamad’s ouster gathered in Bahrain’s capital, Manama. The protestors met stiff resistance from security forces. This resulted in several injuries and dozens of arrests. Outside the capital, a bomb struck a police bus in a Shiite village, killing one police officer. Three more officers were killed by another bomb weeks later. Although mainstream opposition groups denied any connection to the bombings and condemned the acts, the attacks only amplified an already severe crackdown by Bahrain’s security forces. This crackdown was especially focused on predominantly Shiite areas. Activists, along with international human rights organizations, are calling for an international response. In this context, the UN Secretary-General has called a meeting of the UN Security Council. The Council will assess whether the situation warrants a response and, if so, what kind.

CFR Education extended simulations use a variety of pedagogical tools to create an effective, meaningful, and memorable learning experience for students that builds their global literacy. Students will develop crucial skills such as critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity. Students will complete authentic assessments that feel relevant: instead of five-paragraph essays and book reports, students will write policy memos and participate in a role-play of a meeting of a foreign policy–making body. There are no right or wrong answers in actual policy deliberations, and there are none here, either; students will walk away from this experience with an appreciation for the complexity of policy questions.

In this simulation, students will learn about the UN Security Council, as well as meeting these learning outcomes specific to this simulation:

Concepts 

Issues 

This section presents context, potential benefits and drawbacks, and other information about the policy options outlined in the case that you may find helpful as you guide the role-play and assess students.

Members of the Security Council need to assess the situation and determine whether it warrants a response. Some countries are likely to see the Bahraini government’s behavior as a crackdown that violates the human rights of its Shiite citizens. Others could see this behavior as a sovereign country’s reasonable effort to keep order. Moreover, many of the UN Security Council’s veto-wielding permanent member states have close economic ties and military interests in Bahrain. These relationships have the potential to hinder any UN Security Council action toward Bahrain. The United States, China, France, and the United Kingdom frequently trade with Bahrain and have various economic interests in the region due to its rich supply of oil. The United States and the United Kingdom both maintain naval bases in Bahrain and regard the country as an important foothold for their interests in the Middle East. Supporting aggressive measures against Bahrain to encourage democratic reforms could therefore go against council members’ economic, political, and military interests. Considering these conflicting interests, UN Security Council members will need to carefully consider whether and how they should take action to put meaningful pressure on Bahrain.

The principal policy options available in this case are discussed below. These responses are available individually, in combination, or all together. 

Call for All-Inclusive National Dialogue Between the Bahraini Government and Political Opposition Groups 

The UN Security Council could direct Bahraini government officials and leaders from political opposition groups, human rights organizations, and Shiite communities to conduct a peaceful dialogue to discuss implementing democratic reforms in the country and curbing the use of state force to subdue opposition. This dialogue could take place under the auspices of the UN secretary-general or be mediated by an outside organization. 

This option is the least ambitious but the least likely to be controversial among permanent council members, as it likely would not damage relationships or agreements between Bahrain and member states. If successful, a national dialogue could promote peaceful conflict resolution, and allowing political opposition members a forum for discussion could potentially ease political unrest. However, there is no guarantee that either side will respond to requests for a dialogue or accept outside mediation. Even if negotiations can be arranged, this option has no way to assure or enforce any political changes in Bahrain. If either party refuses or negotiations fail, further conflict could result, and the UN Security Council could face criticism for not acting strongly enough.

Call for an Investigation of the Bahraini Government’s Suppression of the Political Opposition and Activists

The UN Security Council could pass a resolution calling on Bahrain to admit inspectors to monitor the political situation and Bahrain’s human rights practices. This option could provide legitimate, independent insight into the extent of Bahrain’s human rights abuses and undemocratic actions as well as Iran’s alleged involvement in Bahrain’s political unrest. An independent investigation could conclude with recommendations to improve Bahrain’s human rights practices, outline a timeline for reevaluation, and establish consequences, such as sanctions, should Bahrain fail to adopt reforms. International human rights organizations have previously criticized the BICI report and investigation of the events that took place in Bahrain in 2011. Freedom of the press is limited in Bahrain, underscoring the need for an international organization to investigate claims of human rights abuses and undemocratic practices. If Bahrain allows independent inspectors into the country under the auspices of the United Nations, they could have greater access to information than previous investigations. 

However, requesting access from the Bahraini government could prove challenging. Security Council members would need to secure Bahrain’s consent to allow UN inspectors into the country. Bahrain’s government has routinely refused to allow independent investigators into the country, including UN special rapporteurs (experts appointed by the UN Human Rights Council). However, a Security Council resolution calling for an investigation could bear more weight than requests from other organs of the United Nations. Council members could also consider backing up their request for an inspection with threats of sanctions should Bahrain refuse, although this could be met with resistance from Security Council members with close ties to Bahrain.

Enact Sanctions on Bahrain

The UN Security Council could enact sanctions on Bahrain in an attempt to coerce Bahrain’s government to cease its crackdown against protests and negotiate with opposition groups to implement certain reforms. These sanctions could be targeted against individuals in the Bahraini government or take the form of broader restrictions, potentially on the trade of luxury goods and manufacturing materials. Security Council members could also call for a halt on international arms sales to the country. Since 2011, Bahrain has ignored or deflected calls from the United Nations to enact democratic reforms and end the use of force to suppress the political opposition. Sanctions would ensure that Bahrain faces consequences for ignoring the international outcry against it and could put significant pressure on Bahrain to change its behavior. Sanctions could also set a forceful example to other countries that violating international human rights treaties will bear consequences. 

However, garnering the support needed to pass sanctions would be difficult. Given the strategic military relationships that both the United States and the United Kingdom have with Bahrain, their support would be unlikely. Other permanent council members, such as China and Russia, could see Bahrain’s actions as a legitimate exercise of state sovereignty and be reticent to support forceful action. Due to the veto power of each of these permanent council members, the chances of gaining the required consensus to approve sanctions are low.

Do Nothing

The Security Council could decide it is unable to take meaningful action on the dispute in light of conflicting interests among council members. In this case, the UN Security Council could adopt a statement expressing concern about violent crackdowns on protests, the lack of freedom of expression and free press, and the use of torture, mass arrests, state harassment, intimidation, revocation of citizenship, disenfranchisement, executions, and the lack of due process for political opposition and activists. Such a statement could show support for Bahraini opposition groups and draw international attention to the issue. Increasing international attention could help pressure the Bahraini government into adopting reform. If the situation worsens, council members could also revisit the matter. However, inaction on this issue could draw criticism from human rights groups. Especially given the council’s willingness to approve a military intervention in Libya in 2011, remaining silent on Bahrain could be seen as upholding a double standard when council members’ interests are involved and erode confidence in future Security Council action.

CFR Education extended simulations are project-based learning activities. Project-based learning (PBL) leads to better learning outcomes and improves skills, and is more fun than traditional instructional methods. The website that students will navigate throughout the simulation is divided into several parts:

In the UNSC Guide, students will learn about the UN Security Council, the body they will be simulating. Included are details on its history, how it works, who its major players are, and more. There is also a video interview with experts who have served on the body.

In the Case Notes, students dive into the actual situation they will be trying to solve in their simulation. At the beginning is a clear decision point: the question that students will debate during the role-play. This is followed by detailed background material and a discussion of the role that the United Nations plays.

Preparation and Role-Play includes details on the various roles students could take on, guidelines for the draft resolution clauses they will write, as well as an outline of how the discussion will flow during the role-play.

The Wrap-Up is an important part of the project and includes reflection questions and guidelines for reflecting in a class discussion and in a second memorandum. For historical cases, this section also includes a short description of how the decision point was addressed by policymakers in real life.

The simulation also includes Student Resources, which include a reading list to support research, additional directions and exemplars for writing assignments, and other tips students may find helpful.

Once students have read the simulation and prepared their draft clauses, here is how we recommend structuring the role-play:

Tips for the President of the UN Security Council
In Round 1, you will chair a formal session. Make absolutely sure that every country gives their opening statement before any country is allowed to speak a second time. You will also have to use your judgment about when to move into the more informal meeting of Round 2. Give enough time for students to flesh out their positions and to identify potential allies, but do not wait too long—the most productive negotiations happen in informal meetings, so you want to save time for those in Round 2.

In Round 2, you will call on speakers one at a time. The time limits on speeches are a little looser, so pay close attention to make sure everyone is included and no one dominates. Deciding whether to grant a break for negotiations is a matter of balance. Negotiations can be advanced in small-group discussions, but it is also important for the whole body to be updated on what goes on during the breaks. You will want to strike a balance between breaks for negotiating, and informal meeting time for giving updates and rounding up support for resolutions. It is often helpful to set a deadline for the end of Round 2 to encourage negotiators to come to agreements in a timely manner.

In Round 3, completed draft resolutions will be presented, discussed, and voted on. Before starting, make sure you are clear on the order in which the resolutions were submitted and who is sponsoring each one. When it comes time to vote, it will be helpful to remind everyone of the unique voting rules of the Security Council. If none of the resolutions passes, you can allow further debate and attempt to vote again, or you can move on and guide the council through debate on a presidential statement. Use your judgment about which process is more likely to be successful.

Tips for Online Classes

We suggest conducting the role-play in three rounds and that three-round structure is a helpful way to approach chunking the role-play for online learning as well. You can conduct each round synchronously or asynchronously.

In round one, participants present their positions.

In round two, participants debate the various policy options.

In round three, debate begins to coalesce around the draft resolutions that have substantial support.

To add spice or challenge to the role-play, partway through the discussion throw in one of the following flashpoints—additional hypothetical developments that fit within the case’s existing decision point—or create your own.

After introducing a flashpoint, you might want to help students refocus their discussion by considering critical questions such as these:

Each CFR Education extended simulation involves writing assignments that help students think through policy options and reflect on their learning experience.

In UNSC cases, there are two types of writing assignments.

Simulations have instructions for written assignments (found under the Student Facing Simulation), rubrics, and samples for each of these writing exercises. 

Samples:

Below are sample rubrics for your use in assessing the writing students will do as part of this extended simulation.

These are single-point rubrics. Jennifer Gonzalez, who writes the blog Cult of Pedagogy, has a great explainer, but the bottom line is that single-point rubrics are relatively easy for students to digest but still have all the advantages of giving structure to instructors’ feedback.

UN Security Council Draft Clauses Rubric

UN Security Council Written Reflection Rubric

Downloadable rubrics are available here: