On Thursday October 15, 2014, the 193 member states of the United Nations (UN) Genera Assembly will vote anonymously to give three countries a temporary seat on the United Nations Security Council. Two of the three open seats are already certain, as African nations have agreed to give Angola a turn on the Council and Asian nations have chosen Malaysia[1]. The pressing question is who will be the representative for the Western group of nations. The three contenders are Turkey, New Zealand, and Spain[2].

Turkey’s eagerness to hold a rotating seat on the United Nations Security Council is fostering an air of campaigning between the three nation-nominees and is causing Turkey to present some of its current issues in ways that are not holistic, but rather serve as a public relations campaign meant to embellish Turkeys’ role in the current international arena.

Christian Wenaweser, Liechtenstein’s ambassador to the United Nations, explains that having a seat on the United Nations Security Council makes a nation a “recognized player- you’re a somebody[3]”. New York Times author, Somini Sengupta, expands on this when she writes “ A Security Council seat is considered not just a matter of prestige, but also an opportunity to raise a country’s overall profile and help it gain advantageous bilateral deals down the road[4]”. The incentive for Turkey to hold this coveted seat, even though it had a seat on the Council just four years ago, is now evident.

Although there is no public account of how much candidate countries such as Spain, Portugal, and Turkey, spend on the campaign for a seat in the Security Council; some diplomats estimate that this can be $20 million or more[5]. This assumption raises some serious questions concerning the transparency of this money as well as if there are not better ways to spend such a sum?

Some ways in which Turkey has been campaigning is by presenting a photo exhibition where crab cakes and wine were served. Another way is by sending ambassadors for Turkey, such as Ebru Baructcu who is the Turkish Ambassador to Portugal, on lobbying trips to multiple Western capitals who could sway the vote being taken tomorrow. In reaction to Turkey’s assertiveness, New Zealand gave the General Assembly a bottle of national wine or olive oil and Spanish King, King Felipe VI, was in New York last month to meet with leaders serving on the General Assembly[6]. These two small examples are reflective that Turkey’s eagerness for the seat on the Council are prompting competitiveness and gift-giving campaign strategies in the aims of gaining nation’s votes.

Part of Turkey’s lobbying to attain the Council position decided upon by a two-thirds secret vote, is by embellishing recent events in its country that are complicated and multifaceted into a public relations campaign. One way through which Turkey has done this is by presenting a photo exhibition on the ground floor of the General Assembly. In this exhibition, Turkey stated that as a nation they have done extremely well and should be congratulated for welcoming refugees, many of which are Macedonian and Syrian, as well as helping the United States in the stride against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). These two examples highlight how Turkey is leading a public relations campaign to win the seat on the Council as well as potentially influence how certain countries view them. This photo exhibition simplifies many issues that Turkey congratulates itself upon. How are the refugees being treated? What has the reaction of the Turkish Parliament been to the increasing number of refugees? What has the reaction been socially? How is Turkey’s bombing of a Kurdish militia in Turkey (who were fighting ISIS) relate to Turkey wanting to help the fight against ISIS?

These issues are complex and will not be expanded upon as they delve deeply into other topics. Rather, these examples are meant to illustrate that Turkey it is trying to show its actions in one light while the reality is much more complicated.

How does this relate to security?

The fact that there is serious lobbying, with budgets estimated of 20 million dollars, to attain a seat on the Council is concerning. The Council has an extremely important agenda-setting power and veto power for pressing international issues. If a country is elected, not on fair rotation, but on lobbying and a public relations campaign stunt, then how can we trust these 15 countries to lead international interventions and actions where and when needed? The issues with the Security Council are larger than just this- but Turkey’s campaigning for a seat is very disappointing to individuals such as myself who believe in the capability of international organizations such as the United Nations to work for the greater good. Turkey’s actions are also concerning for smaller nations who want a say in international institutions but do not have the might, influence, or finances, to compete for a seat on the council.

What does United Nations Ambassador Halit Cevik think about tomorrows vote? “ It’s a very tight race, but I am strongly hopeful”[7].

[1]”Hottest Race for UN Security Council Seats This Year Is between New Zealand, Spain and Turkey.” Fox News. Associated Press, 14 Oct. 2014. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.

[2]Sengupta, Somini. “Competition Is Tough for Most Coveted Seat at the United Nations.” The New York Times. N.p., 15 Oct. 2014. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.

[3]Sengupta, Somini. “Competition Is Tough for Most Coveted Seat at the United Nations.” The New York Times. N.p., 15 Oct. 2014. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.

[4]Sengupta, Somini. “Competition Is Tough for Most Coveted Seat at the United Nations.” The New York Times. N.p., 15 Oct. 2014. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.

[5]Sengupta, Somini. “Competition Is Tough for Most Coveted Seat at the United Nations.” The New York Times. N.p., 15 Oct. 2014. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.

[6] Sengupta, Somini. “Competition Is Tough for Most Coveted Seat at the United Nations.” The New York Times. N.p., 15 Oct. 2014. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.

[7]Lederer, Edith. “Turkey in ‘tight Race’ for UN Security Council Seat.” The Times of Israel. N.p., 15 Oct. 2014. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.

In 1997 Barry Buzan published “Rethinking Security after the Cold War”. In this article he identified five realms of security: military, environment, economic, social and political.[1] All these elements can be found in the ongoing issue with landmines in Cambodia. Although this issue is not frequently highlighted in the media, it is a security issue that came about due to military and political struggles and continues to have a disastrous affect socially and economically for Cambodia.

The estimated number of anti-personnel landmines scattered throughout Cambodia ranges. Some sources say one mine per person[2], which would equate to ten million landmines, while other sources claim that there are six million landmines in the country of ten million inhabitants. In total, 6422 villages in Cambodia are classified as “suspected hazardous area” because of landmines. This is 46.2 percent of all villages in Cambodia. So what military and political conditions in Cambodia led to this high number of landmines? The use of landmines in Cambodia began during Cambodia’s thirty-year period of war that ranged from 1970 through 1998. These years of war, and the landmines brought along with them, can be divided into five phases:

1)    The Cambodian civil war, 1970 -1975[3]. This conflict began when the Cambodian Communist Party of Kampuchea, known as the Khmer Rouge, and their allies the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (North Vietnam) and the Viet Cong fought against the existing Republican government force in Cambodia. During this time, Vietnamese soldiers set up about ten percent of the total landmines that can be found today in Cambodia. The Civil War ended with the victory for the Khmer Rouge[4].

2)    The rule of the Khmer Rouge 1975-1979. The Cambodian communist party was lead by notorious leaders such as Pol Pot, Nuon Chae, Ieng Sary and Khieu Samphan. This period is often known as the “Cambodian Holocaust” because government troops and child soldiers killed two million civilians [5]. The Khmer Rouge regime is responsible for bringing in fifty-five percent of all landmines into Cambodia[6]. Furthermore, mines arrived to Cambodia through military aid packages for resistance fighters against Pol Pot. These mines came from Vietnam, the United States, the USSR, China, Israel, Belgium, Yugoslavia, Germany and Czechoslovakia[7].

3)    Vietnamese invasion and occupation of Cambodia, 1979 – 1989. This invasion removed the Khmer Rouge from power but further distributed landmines in Cambodia by Vietnamese forces. These account for thirty percent of all total landmines in Cambodia.

4)    Second Cambodian Civil War, 1989 – 1993. During this time, Cambodians raised against the occupying Vietnamese government. Involvement of landmines.

5)    Infighting among competing political factions, 1993-1998. Involvement of landmines.

As can be seen through the above information, landmines came to Cambodia through various military and political issues. The turbulent thirty years claimed 2.5 million lives and introduced over thirty-six different types of landmines into Cambodia[8]. Although these events happened in the past, the landmines in Cambodia still represent a security issue because of the social and economic impact that is still felt today. Between the years of 1979 and 2011, landmines in Cambodia killed 19,608 people and further maimed 44,346 people. Sixty-one percent of these victims went into debt to pay for their medical treatment[9]. The majority of those injured by landmines are children. Currently, Cambodia has 40,000 living amputees due to landmines. This is two hundred times the rate of the United States[10]. Besides the social difficulties of being scared where to walk, as there is always a chance a landmine could be hidden, and the difficulties of finding good treatment if affected, Cambodia’s economy has also suffered. Sixty percent of Cambodians are farmers. Many farmers, however, are unable to work on their fields as they have been claimed “hazardous” but have not been cleared by landmines. This prevents many farmers from earning their income and feeding their family[11]. Without mines, it is estimated that Cambodia could at least double its agricultural productions[12].

The daily terror of landmines for locals in Cambodia is not the current highlight on BBC, CNN or Aljazeera, but it is a security issue. The infiltration of landmines in Cambodia came about due to military and political struggles and continues to have social and economic effects. At the current rate of clearing landmines, it will take another decade before Cambodia can rid itself of landmines. This is a daily and ongoing security issue for Cambodians[13].

[1] Lecture Slides Professor Aim Sinpeng. Poli 360, September 11, 2014.

[2]M. Buvinic, M. Das Gupta, O. N. Shemyakina, (2013) Armed Conflict, Gender and Schooling. The World Bank Economic Review.

[3]Merrouche, Ouarda. “The Long Term Educational Cost of War: Evidence from Landmine Contamination in Cambodia.” The Journal of Development Studies. no. 3 (2011): 399-416.

[4]Dmitry Mosyakov, “The Khmer Rouge and the Vietnamese Communists: A History of Their Relations as Told in the Soviet Archives,” in Susan E. Cook, ed., Genocide in Cambodia and Rwanda (Yale Genocide Studies Program Monograph Series No. 1, 2004),

[5]Locard, Henri, State Violence in Democratic Kampuchea (1975-1979) and Retribution (1979-2004), European Review of History, Vol. 12, No. 1, March 2005, pp.121–143

[6]Merrouche, Ouarda. “The Long Term Educational Cost of War: Evidence from Landmine Contamination in Cambodia.” The Journal of Development Studies. no. 3 (2011): 399-416.

[7]Chapman, Jean. “The Political Economy of Landmines: View from a Minefield in North-Western Cambodia.” Economic and political weekly. no. 36 (2010): 67-74.

[8]Merrouche, Ouarda. “The Long Term Educational Cost of War: Evidence from Landmine Contamination in Cambodia.” The Journal of Development Studies. no. 3 (2011): 399-416.

[9]”World’s largest anti-landmines conference kicks off in Cambodia.” Xinhua News Agency, 11 27, 2011.

[10]”Landmines in Cambodia; Past, Present, and Future.” Reference and Research Book News 26, no. 5 (10, 2011), http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/docview/894456538?accountid=14656 (accessed October 2, 2014).

[11]Jenkins, Mark. National Geographic, “Cambodia’s Healing Fields.” Last modified January 2012. Accessed October 2, 2014.

[12]Peerman, Dean. “THE KILLING FIELDS STILL KILL.” The Christian Century. no. 10 (2007): 8.

[13]Jenkins, Mark. National Geographic, “Cambodia’s Healing Fields.” Last modified January 2012. Accessed October 2, 2014.