DISEC Chair Letter

DISEC stands for Disarmament and International Security Committee. The main goals of

DISEC are to reduce the number of weapons and weapon technologies being used around the world, guarantee these weapons don’t fall into the wrong hands, and above all else, protect civilians and innocent bystanders from cross border threats. One of the larger committees in the

UN, DISEC is a forum for the discussion and resolution of all international security topics, these include everything from over spilling civil wars and terrorist activities, to nuclear weapons use and the smuggling of firearms. A good challenge for both new and experienced delegates alike,

DISEC has the flexibility to address broad or pointed topics, and as a result is a good committee for all delegates. Delegates must also remember that DISEC has no power to force countries to adopt its policies, and therefore must rely on its ability to resolve conflict peacefully with ceasefires and peace agreements. However, DISEC can recommend sanctions and harsher measures to the Security Council for approval.

We are particularly excited for this year’s DISEC committee as we will be tackling mostly events that are actively happening and continue to unfold on the world’s stage. This will make the topics both more engaging and more difficult as research will have to be done right up until committee starts. In addition to being current, the topics are incredibly different and complex, this requires that delegates dig deeply into the topics and consider multiple ways to solve these issues while also considering past attempts and why they failed.

The DISEC committee is run resolution style and all delegates should bring in 30-40 copies of each of their three resolutions. For a delegate to be considered for a reward, they must submit a position paper. Please refer to the Delegate Resources section of the website for more information on the expectations for both position papers and resolutions. Your chairs for this year’s DISEC committee will be Adam Oliver and Trilok Reddy. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us and we will respond as soon as possible.

Adam Oliver- [email protected] Trilok Reddy- [email protected]

Nuclear Non-Proliferation in North Korea

North Korea has a long unreliable history of deals with the United Nations and the

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). While these deals often looked like they would lead to positive change, they often achieved very little with North Korea abandoning the treaties to continue its nuclear program no more than a year later. In addition, North Korea claims that it has created nuclear weapons and this is supported by seismograph readings in South Korea. It is still uncertain whether or not North Korea possesses a means of delivery for these nuclear weapons and also whether it has managed to miniaturise the design to fit into a missile. The presence of nuclear weapons and knowledge on how to make nuclear weapons is incredibly distressing especially when it rests in the hands of a country as unpredictable as North Korea. A large amount of international concern has arisen over the fact that North Korea possesses nuclear weapons and still remains in conflict with South Korea. This presents a possibility of a conflict like the one that happened in the Korean War that split the country in two, originally. Previous deals with the UN have been on the grounds of humanitarian aid for steps towards disarmament.

These deals have fallen through and resulted in bursts of effort towards constructing nuclear weapons instead of disarmament. A long term plan is needed to remove nuclear weapons from North Korea and also allow

IAEA inspectors into the country to guarantee disarmament and adherence to IAEA protocols.

Furthermore, steps should be taken to encourage North Korea to adopt the Nuclear Test Ban

Treaty, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty, the latter of which it seceded from in 2003.

These measures are not for the singular purpose of removing nuclear weapons from North Korea, but they are also intended to increase safety in the area and prevent accidents. If such an accident were to occur, the fallout could be immense reaching far into China and possibly all the way to

India. This would result in the death and irradiation of billions of people.

Throughout North Korea’s history they have repeatedly failed to follow through with the treaties they have signed and have continued to research nuclear weapons technology. In 1985, after five years of pressure from the international community, North Korea signed on to the

Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Even after signing the treaty, North Korea still refused to cooperate with the IAEA and its regulations, and in 1993 the IAEA charged North Korea with violating the NPT and demanded that it be given access to nuclear waste facilities. North Korea threatened to secede from the treaty, but ultimately stayed and agreed to inspections. They continued to cause trouble among the international community and took increasingly aggressive actions towards its neighbors. This caused the U.S to attend talks with North Korea for the purpose of curbing its aggression and limiting its missile program. In 2003 North Korea fully seceded from the NPT and removed all IAEA personnel and equipment from its nuclear facilities.

After North Korea restarted its Nuclear program U.S seismographs in South Korea picked up what was believed to be underground nuclear tests in 2006 and 2009, these tests, missile launches and other provocations interrupted talks, most notably the Six Party Talks. Launched in 2003 the Six Party talks were aimed at stopping North Korea’s nuclear program, with pressure from Japan, South Korea, United States, China and Russia. From 2003 to the current day, North Korea have been making deals and then walking out on them, causing Russia,

China and the United States to drag North Korea back to negotiations.

Another problem that arises with countries like North Korea possessing nuclear weapons and the capability to manufacture them is the threat of them selling these secrets to terrorists or unstable nations. While it is improbable that North Korea would actually use a nuclear weapon in anger, lest it bring the wrath of the international community upon it, it is entirely possible that a terrorist or anarchist group with access to nuclear weapons would use them. This also brings up the threat that even if North Korea didn’t sell nuclear weapons to terrorists, a small amount of stolen uranium or plutonium could be used to make a dirty bomb and contaminate civilians and military personnel alike.

Questions to consider:

● What techniques have been used in the past for negotiating the de-escalation of

nuclear programs in North Korea? What have they involved? Why did they fail?

● What is North Korea’s right to nuclear research and development?

● How can it be guaranteed that North Korea will not breach treaties or other

measures of disarmament in the future?

● What incentives can be offered to North Korea to encourage it to cooperate? What

measures can be used to punish it if it breach treaties or does not comply?

● What is North Korea’s actual capability for nuclear weapon construction?

Further Reading:

● Nuclear Threat Initiative ● http://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/north-korea-nuclear-disarmament/

● CNN, North Korea Timeline

● http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/29/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-timeline---fast-

facts/

● NY Times, North Korea hub page

● http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/northkore

a/nuclear_program/index.html

● Council on Foreign Affairs, 6 party talks

● http://www.cfr.org/proliferation/six-party-talks-north-koreas-nuclear-

program/p13593

● Reuters, North Korea missile tests

● http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/18/us-northkorea-missiles-un-

idUSKBN0FM2ES201407

Pro-Russian Rebels in Ukraine

Pro-Russian rebels occupied Crimea in early 2014 and have been campaigning for its release from Ukraine and annexation into Russia. This sparked a referendum within Crimea which overwhelmingly supported the idea of re-joining Russia. This move has been endorsed by

Russia, but heavily opposed by Ukraine. This conflict is one of the worst since the end of the cold war and while unlikely to cause war has still lead to vastly increased tensions and worry. To understand the nature of Crimea, its history of independence and occupation must be traced back over three hundred years.

Crimea has enjoyed long periods of peace, and also long periods of occupation starting with its annexation under Catherine the Great of Russia in 1783. Before this Crimea existed as a separate state known as the Crimean Khanate. During its annexation the leaders of Crimea were allowed to retain their royal status and enjoyed the same status as Russian royalty. This combined status of Crimea and Russia existed for close to two hundred years. During this long period of union, Crimea became more and more Russian, adopting traditions, religion, and lifestyle. Furthermore, many battles of great importance to Russia took place within Crimea. For instance, the Battle of Crimea was a war between Russia, France, and Britain over Russian perceived Russian pressures and expansion. While Russia did lose this war it created a sense of stronger union between the two cultures and peoples. Crimea was also occupied by Nazis during

WWII and the native Tartar population was blamed in part for this resulting to mass deportation under Stalin.

Crimea changed hands during the rule of the USSR, being transferred from Russia to

Ukraine. This was somewhat null however, as Russia controlled the USSR and by extension

Ukraine and Crimea. At the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991, Crimea became a part of a new and free Ukraine. This was not to the liking of many of Crimea’s citizens and diplomats, causing them to campaign and win autonomy from Ukraine. This loose control over Crimea combined by its overwhelming Russian population led to conflict with Ukraine. It wasn’t until the ousting of

Viktor Yanukovych, a leader of Ukraine who had been the popular candidate among most of

Crimea however, that tensions rose high enough for a full scale revolt. This resulted in masses of pro-Russian fighters capturing points throughout Crimea and the surrounding regions.

There have been numerous allegations made by Ukraine and other groups that these pro-

Russian fighters are actually Russian trained soldiers due to their superior training and equipment. This has led to international outrage and threats made against Russia. These threats have been mostly ignored and brushed off by leader of Russia, Vladimir Putin, saying that the soldiers are simply Crimean citizens standing up for themselves. Countries like the United States have suggested sanctions, but have not put any of these in place.

Conflicts between pro-Russian rebels and Ukrainian forces have escalated since the beginning of the conflict with pro-Russian rebels shooting down Ukrainian helicopters and assassinating political figures. Furthermore, attempted cease fires have reportedly failed with rebels firing on Ukrainian roadblocks during these ceasefires. The conflict is further aggravated by pro-Russian rebels occupying airports and other high value locations. The occupation of certain cities by rebels such as Luhansk has the potential to cause massive civilian casualties and damage to infrastructure. This is due to prolonged skirmishes between government and rebel forces in which everything from light arms to tanks are being used.

Crimea is a popular tourist destination for the Balkan region and is also a large port with access to the Mediterranean. While this is important to both countries, it is especially so for

Russia who has only been leasing the right to base fleets there for the past number of years. This strategic importance has the potential to elicit further Russian intervention in the conflict to guarantee its continued fleet basing. This does not necessarily mean military intervention however as Russia also has control over oil and natural gas flow to Ukraine and Europe.

Delegates must remember that DISEC has limited ability in this conflict and must rely on its ability to broker peace agreements and cease fires between the two sides in order to facilitate conversation and discourse. In addition, while DISEC cannot directly impose sanctions upon a country, these sanctions can be recommended to the Security Council. However, due to Russia’s position in the Security Council as a P5, they can and will veto resolutions. As a result of this, delegates are requested to focus on ways to address social and cultural effects of rebellion and conflict in Crimea. This includes how to guarantee civilians are not deprived of their fundamental rights and continue to receive education and other basic humanitarian needs. In addition, delegates should consider how to prevent civilians from being forced out of their homes into places of danger.

● What is Russia’s historical claim to Crimea?

● Is Crimea’s referendum valid? If not what can be done to create a valid referendum?

● What claim does Ukraine have to Crimea?

● What can be done by DISEC to de-escalate tensions in Crimea?

● Does the conflict in Crimea have the potential to spill over into a larger conflict?

● How can DISEC work to ensure the security of civilians in Crimea and Ukraine?

● What is the potential for hate crimes or ethnic based crimes in Crimea?

Further Reading:

● BBC Crimea Profile

● http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18287223

● Seizing of Ukrainian airport

● http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10856406/Ukraine-crisis-

pro-Russian-rebels-seize-Donetsk-airport.html

● Ukrainian helicopters shot down

● http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-2800299

● Putin on the annexation of Crimea

● http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/putin-speaks-at-russian-victory-day-parade-in-

moscows-red-square/2014/05/09/e41230b9-b30c-48c2-b52a-bfdab1170e65_story.html

● Malaysian Airlines flight shot down

● http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28357880 Disarmament of Islamic Militants in Africa

Northern Africa has never been the most stable area, with many nations suffering from rebellions and long term strife. Recently, more trouble has risen in the form of Islamist militant groups, which have been here for a long time and have been increasing their attacks at an alarming rate. There are many different groups that operate all across Africa and have complete control over their own respective areas. Boko Haram has caused Nigeria to declare a state of emergency, Al-Shabaab have caused chaos in Somalia that has spilled over the border into

Kenya, and Al-Qaeda and its offshoots have established themselves in Mali, Algeria, Tunisia and

Libya. All of these groups have been carrying out increasingly large scale and deadly attacks that have gained international attention and caused international outrage. Obama recently promised to wage “total war” on Boko Haram at his speech and West Point Military Academy, and called attacks from Al-shabaab a “terrible outrage”. Many of these groups have been around since the early 2000’s and have recently gained support from Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

Boko Haram is a group that most people hadn’t heard of until April 15th, 2014 when they launched an attack on Chibok, a North eastern town in Nigeria and kidnapped 300 school girls from their dorms and planned to sell them into slavery. This attack gave international attention to

Boko Haram and prompted statements from many world leaders. Boko Haram, However, has been around since 2002 and have only recently turned toward violence and terrorist attacks. Like many other groups Boko Haram had peaceful beginnings in 2002 when the groups founder,

Mohammed Yusuf created the group which is commonly translated to “Western education is sin” to attempt to create a fully islamist state in Nigeria. Nigeria is Africa’s largest oil producer and home to the largest discovered natural gas reserves, it is also home to one the most corrupt governments in the world. Yusuf protested against all the corruption and gained a lot of respect and followers, particularly among the lower-middle class. At this time the group was peaceful, and was still peaceful when in 2009 they refused to follow a motorcycle helmet law. The police responded with brutality and this sparked an uprising in much of the northern country, though eventually the uprising was stopped by the Nigerian army and left more than 800 dead. The police also took Yusuf into custody where his execution and that of other senior members was broadcasted to the whole country. Many within Boko Haram, Nigerians and Human rights groups viewed these as “extrajudicial killings” which sparked outrage among those in Boko

Haram. After Yusuf’s killing, Boko Haram split into as many as four factions the largest and most notorious led by Abubakar Shekau. These groups were outraged a Yusuf’s killing and quickly turned to violence and attacks against the government. Ever since 2009, attacks have been growing larger and more frequent until the kidnapping of 300 school girls brought the group into international attention. A state of emergency has been declared in the northern half of the country where attacks in cities and countryside continue. The government, which is largely corrupt, is powerless to stop it despite aid from the United States. This wave of attacks have reached all the way to the capital, Abuja, when in 2011 a suicide bomber attacked a United

Nations building. Much of the anger has stemmed from the corruption of the government and the mistreatment of its followers which largely go unpunished, reportedly thousands have died in the hands of the government. This has gotten so bad, the Human Rights Watch said "corruption is so pervasive in Nigeria it has turned public service for many into a kind of criminal enterprise." and

Nigeria analyst Chris Ngwodo said “the group itself is an effect and not a cause; it is a symptom of decades of failed government and elite delinquency finally ripening into social chaos." Boko Haram has gotten a lot of recent attention because of its controversial beginnings and large scale attacks, but it is not the only islamic militant group in Africa. Al-Shabaab is

Arabic for The Youth and they have been causing chaos in Somalia that has begun to reach

Kenya as well. Al-Shabaab started in 2006 as a radical youth faction of the Union of Islamic

Courts in Somalia. It is estimated that it has somewhere between 7,000-9,000 fighters and it has formed an alliance with Al-Qaeda. In Somalia, the government, which is backed by Ethiopia, has very little control over the nation and even though the African Union has sent forces to try to stop Al-Shabaab, they still control a large portion of the land. Because of Somalia’s ineffective government Al-Shabaab was able to gain a lot of support by promising people security when the government couldn’t provide any. In 2011 Al-Shabaab carried out a series of attacks across the border into Kenya, Kenya responded by sending its forces into Somalia in an attempt to stop Al-

Shabaab. Since then, Al-Shabaab have carried out occasional attacks in Kenya, the most notorious of the attacks was in 2013 when Al-Shabaab fighters attacked Nairobi, Kenya’s

Westgate mall. Kenyan police forces laid siege to the mall and the attack ended 80 hours later when all the gunmen were dead, at least 67 people died in the attack. This attack became known to the world immediately and sparked anger in many because of the police’s slow and ineffectual response.

These large scale attacks have brought international attention to these militant groups, and while each group is different there are a few similarities. The most important of those is that the countries in which these militant groups reside are very unstable and have either a highly corrupt or practically nonexistent government. These nations also have extreme ethnic or religious divisions and extreme poverty. Many experts believe that it is a combination of these conditions that allow militant groups to exist in these areas without facing opposition. These militant groups have multiple factors and because of that they have no easy solution, many people are unsure as to where to start.

● Do the unstable governments form the breeding grounds for militant groups, or do

the militant groups make the governments unstable?

● Can DISEC do anything to end corruption within the governments?

● Should these militant groups be classified as rebels or terrorists? What do each of

those mean?

● How can DISEC help the unstable governments become more stable? Is it

possible for the government to deal with the militants by themselves?

● How can DISEC prevent attacks/fighters from crossing borders? How can DISEC

prevent these groups from accessing weapons?

● Is there anything DISEC can do to help the people that live under the militant

groups?