ACJC H1 HISTORY

© ACJC 2014 8814/JC2 Preliminary Examinations/14 1 ANGLO-CHINESE JUNIOR COLLEGE Preliminary Examinations JC2 HISTORY 8814/01 Paper 1 International History, 1945-2000 28 August 2014 3 hours Additional Materials: Writing Paper READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS FIRST Write your class, index number, and name on all the work you hand in. Write in dark blue or black pen on both sides of the paper. Do not use staples, paper clips, highlighters, glue or correction fluid. Section A Answer Question 1. Section B Answer any three questions. Begin each question on a fresh sheet of paper. At the end of the examination, fasten all your work securely together. All questions in this paper carry equal marks. This document consists of 4 printed pages. © ACJC History Department 2014 [Turn over

© ACJC 2014 8814/JC2 Preliminary Examinations/14 2 Section A You must answer Question 1. THE UNITED NATIONS AND LAWS AGAINST INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM 1 Read the sources and then answer the question. When answering Question 1 candidates are advised to pay particular attention to the interpretation and evaluation of the Sources both individually and as a group. Source A Prior to the adoption of resolution 1373 (2001) and the establishment of the Counter-Terrorism Committee, the international community through t he General Assembly had already promulgated 12 of the current 16 international counter-terrorism legal instruments. However, the rate of adherence to these conventions and protocols by United Nations Member States was low. The General Assembly has focused on terrorism as an international problem since 1972 and, through the 1980s, addressed the issue intermittently through re solutions. During this period, the Assembly also adopted two instruments related to counter-terrorism: the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents (in 1973) and the International Convention against the Taking of Hostages (in 1979). In December 1994, the Assembly again directed attention to this issue through a Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism. In 1996, a supplement to this Declaration established an Ad Hoc Committee to elaborate an international convention for the suppression of terrorist bombings and, subsequently, an international convention for the suppression of acts of nuclear terrorism, to supplement related existing international instruments, and thereafter to address means of further developing a comprehensive legal framework of conv entions dealing with international terrorism. This mandate continued to be renewed and revised on an annual basis by the General Assembly in its resolutions on the topic of measures to eliminate international terrorism. UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee website, 2010. Source B Those who call us terrorists wish to prevent world public opinion from discovering the truth about us and from seeing the justice on our faces. They seek to hide the terrorism and tyranny of their acts, and our own posture of self-defense. The difference between the revolutionary and the terrorist lies in the reason for which each fights. For whoever stands by a just cause and fights for the freedom and liberation of his land from the invaders, the settlers and the colonialists, cannot possibly be called terrorist, otherwise the American people in their struggle for liberation from the British colonialists would have been terrorists; the European resistance against the Nazis would be terrorism, the struggle of the Asian, African and Latin American peoples would also be terrorism, and many of you who are in this Assembly hall were considered terrorists. This is actually a just and proper struggle consecrated by the United Nations Charter and by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As to those who fight against the just causes, those who wage war to occupy, colonize and oppress other people, those are the terrorists. Those are the people whose actions should be condemned, who should be called war criminals: for the justice of the cause determines the right to struggle. Yasser Arafat, Chairman, Palestinian Liberation Organization, in a speech to the UN General Assembly, 1974.

© ACJC 2014 8814/JC2 Preliminary Examinations/14 3 Source C The UN has struggled since its inception with how to formulate an effective response to terrorism. Its efforts have been ambivalent and produced mixed results. On the one hand, using its norm-setting authority, it has provided a solid international le gal framework for combating terrorism—via the adoption of sixteen terrorism-related treaties adopted by the General Assembly and UN agencies and a number of legally binding resolutions adopted by the Security Council—thus often reinforcing efforts undertaken outside the UN. On the other hand, it has been unable to reach an agreement on a comprehensive definition of terrorism. A further feature of the UN’s counterterrorism effort has been its reactive nature, adopting declarations or treaties or establishing committees or programs in response to individual attacks, without developing a coherent and coordinated response to the overall effort. From a report written for the International Peace Academy, an independent non-profit research and policy development institution, 2007. Source D At the first-ever Summit of Security Council members, in 1992, and at the special commemorative session of the General Assembly, in 1995, heads of State and government agreed to act together to defeat terrorism. The nations of the world, by resolution of the General Assembly in 1994, adopted the Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, a concrete and comprehensive action plan. And terrorism has been condemned by the nations of the world last December, by the General Assembly of the United Nations. These commitments are important, and they are global. But they are still only declarations. The task before us is to take this normative foundation as our platform for rapid and decisive action. The United Nations is ready to se rve this cause – ready to serve as a mechanism for mobilization on a global scale. The United Nations awaits your instructions. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, UN Secretary-General, in a speech at the Summit of Peacemakers, held in Egypt in 1996. Source E The UN sanction regimes were quite effective in the case of Libya and Sudan. The sanction regimes made the support of terrorist activities more costly, and both states were responsive to these changing incentives. More generally, sanctions helped to change the public (declaratory) attitudes of states towards terrorism—particularly, state sponsors of terrorism. Sanctions against the Taliban in Afghanistan were not effective. Afghanistan under the Taliban regime was not an active member of the global aboveboard economy. The most important effect of the UN sanction regimes of the 1990s was to stigmatize terrorist activities and consolidate a growing international consensus that saw terrorism as an illegitimate activity that needed to be countered through collective international actions. By designating terrorist activities ‘threats to international peace and security’, UN sanctions regimes also paved the way for more forceful international responses to terrorism after 11 September 200