Disarmament and
International Security
2017 Study Guide
Abdullah Khan &
Caterina Milo
Welcome Letter
Dear delegates,
greetings all the way from Pakistan and Italy. We are proud to be your chairpersons for the Disarmament
and International Security, also known as DISEC, Committee at the Catalonia Model United Nations of
2017.
My name is Abdullah Khan and I have been participating in Model United Nations since I was thirteen
years old and have participated in MUNs in the vicinity of a delegate and a chairperson in four different
continents. I love delegates which come with a high degree of research and a can-do attitude, the point of
these conferences is not to win but to make sure that it is a learning experience for all of us. Looking
forward to three days of debates, diplomacy and friendships that last a lifetime.
My name is Caterina Milo and I have been chairing MUNs for the past few years. I have participated as a
delegate and then switched to the positions of Rapporteur and Chair as soon as I had enough experience. I
am really looking forward to C’MUN: this year’s topics offer some great opportunities for debate. I love
delegates that put in lots of work before the conference. Great speaking skills are an incredible asset in
MUNs but, speaking from experience, there is a special quality in the speeches of those who have studied
the topic that makes them stand out. That said, MUNs are fun so it is also important to loosen up when it
the right moment comes!
The delegates should look forward to a high level of debate. We thought of these topics after careful
deliberation and you have to dive deep into the realms of research to grasp the main ideasof the debate.
You have two committee directors who are very by the book but also like keeping the committee
entertained. You will experience an international conference in one of the most beautiful cities in the
world, so look forward to a great deal of speaking experience and a chance to step out of your comfort
zone to interact and understand people from different cultures.
Regards,
The DIAS.
2
Overview of the Committee
The First Committee of the UN General Assembly, also known as the Disarmament and
International Security (DISEC) committee, deals with disarmament, global challenges and threats to
peace that affect the international community and seeks out solutions to the challenges in the international
security regime. Every UN member state is entitled to participate in the committee, where they consider
proposals relevant to the topics covered by the committee, and recommend resolutions for adoption by the
General Assembly.Every year, the General Assembly adopts 40-50 resolutions on disarmament and nonproliferation by a majority vote or by consensus.
The very first General Assembly resolution, entitled “Establishment of a Commission to Deal
with the Problems Raised by the Discovery of Atomic Energy”, was adopted on recommendation by the
First Committee in 1946, after the events in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.These resolutions are not legally
binding, but theycan indicate areas of agreement among states that offer room for negotiation and can
lead to the creation of new treaties and the emergence of international legal norms. Furthermore, they
demonstrate the tendencies of the governments, showing which support peace and security, and which
choose to remain outside of or even impede the development of international security.
The topics tackled by DISEC usually fall within the following categories: National, Regional, and
Global Security; Biological, Chemical, Technological, and Nuclear Weapons; and Arms Trade. The
Committee works in close cooperation with the United Nations Disarmament Commission and the
Conference on Disarmament (CD) and its sessions are structured into three stages: general debate,
thematic discussions and action on drafts. Indeed, DISEC provides space for each state to discuss their
positions on disarmament-related matters,offering the opportunity to build consensus on the issues. This
way, rather than imposing “security” through force, governments can discuss how to best reach
cooperative security arrangements that actually increase global security. This consensus can subsequently
be used in other disarmament fora, such as the Conference on Disarmament, where disarmament treaties
are negotiated.
3
TOPIC A/The weaponization of space: outer space security
Introduction
During the Cold War space became another arena for the competition between the world’s two
great powers –the United States and the Soviet Union.The space age began in 1957 with the launch of the
Sputnik-1 satellite, operated by the USSR and moved forward in 1958, with resolution 1348 (XIII)
entitled “Question of the Peaceful Use of Outer Space”. With this resolution, the General Assembly
recognized the common interest of humankind in outer space. The same day the resolution was passed, a
18-member ad hoc Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space was established and its first meeting,
in May 1959, represented a first attempt at a peaceful development of outer space.
On 12 December 1959, the Permanent Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space was
established, with members Albania, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada,
Czechoslovakia, France, Hungary, India, Iran, Italy, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, Poland, Romania, Sweden,
the USSR, the United Arab Republic, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The same
year, the Soviet space program took a step forward with the launch of Luna 2, the first space probe to hit
the moon. 1961 was the year of the first UN register of space objects and of the first space explorer:
soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, followed in February 1962 by John Glenn, the first American to orbit
Earth. By the end of that year, the foundations of NASA’s lunar landing program –Project Apollo– were
in place.
In December 1963, the General Assembly adopted resolution 1962 (XVIII) entitled "Declaration
of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Uses of Outer Space", thus
laying the foundations of a new body of law –space law. On 27 January 1967, the first international treaty
on outer space –the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of
Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies– opened for signature and entered into force
in October 1967. On July 16, 1969, U.S. astronauts Neil Armstrong, Edwin Aldrin and Michael Collins
set off on the Apollo 11 space mission, the first lunar landing attempt. After landing successfully on July
20, Armstrong became the first man to walk on the moon’s surface.
In March 1972 the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects
was opened for signature and it entered into force in September of that year. Following the landing of the
probe Venera 7 on Venus in 1970, in 1976 the probe Viking-1 landed on Mars. In 1979, the Agreement
Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies was opened for signature and
entered into force in 1984. In 2000 the probe NEAR was the first to orbit and subsequently land on an
asteroid and the first ISS crew was launched, starting a permanent human presence in Earth orbit. In 2007
the Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines were adopted by COPUOS and endorsed by the General
Assembly.
This brief general outline provides useful contextualization for the discussion on the topic the
weaponization of space: outer space security: the space has been the object of a less than friendly
4
competition that, after the cold war, is only less obvious. It should then be clear the role of the first
Committee of the General Assembly (hereinafter DISEC) in the matter, dealing with disarmament, global
challenges and threats to peace that affect the international community.
Discussion of the topic
i.
Key words: weaponization and militarization
The militarization of outer space started when the first communication satellites were launched
and today militaries everywhere rely on satellites and on the Global Positioning System. The so-called
peaceful uses of outer space include the military ones, even when they involve the utilization of satellites
to direct bombing raids. The term “weaponization”, on the other hand, is generally understood as the
placement in orbit of devices that have a destructive capacity. The concept of “space weapons” is,
however, highly debated: some argue for the inclusion in the category of ground-based systems designed
or used to attack space-based assets and of weapons that travel through space in order to reach their
targets. Similar to the militarization of space during the Cold War, the weaponization of it would destroy
the world’s thin balance and stability, interfering with many of the international instruments related to
nuclear weapons and missiles and possibly leading to a new arms race. Even if at the moment there are no
known weapons deployed in space, defense plans and anti-satellites instruments are provoking a growing
instability in the sector.
ii.
Space law
Space law can be described as the body of law governing space-related activities. Space law,
much like general international law, comprises a variety of international agreements, treaties,
conventions, and United Nations General Assembly resolutions as well as rules and regulations of
international organizations. The current international legal instruments concerning outer space prohibit
and restrict the deployment of weapons, use of force as well as military activities in certain parts of space.
However, some States argue that they are inadequate for preventing the weaponization. Below a list of the
five main legal instruments:
-
-
1967, Outer Space Treaty (formally titled as the Treaty on the Principles Governing the Activities
of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial
Bodies).
1968, Rescue Agreement (formally titled as the Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the
Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space).
1972, Liability Convention (formally titled as the Convention on International Liability for
Damage Caused by Space Objects).
1975, Registration Convention (formally titled the Convention on the Registration of Objects
Launched into Outer Space).
1979, Moon Agreement (formally entitled the Agreement Governing the Activities of States on
the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies).
5
Among the mentioned treaties, the most relevant one is the United Nations Outer Space Treaty, that
provides the basic framework on international space law, saying that space should be reserved for
peaceful uses. It came into effect in October 1967. It includes the principle that the exploration and use of
outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the
province of all mankind. Moreover, it provides that outer space is not subject to national appropriation by
claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means and that States shall not place
nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit or on celestial bodies or station them in
outer space in any other manner. It also provides that the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be used
exclusively for peaceful purposes and that States shall avoid harmful contamination of space and celestial
bodies.
Aside from the mentioned five treaties, the UN has developed vast practice on the matter, practice
that will be further addressed in the Past UN actions section.
iii.
Development of space weapon technology: new threats
Nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction are prohibited in outer space: it has been
mutually agreed for many years that outer space should be used for research and purposes that benefit
humankind. However, the present rules offer room for manoeuvres that can lead to a substantially not
peaceful use of outer space. Military satellites are permitted due to the argument that “peaceful purposes”
means the non-aggressive handling of peace and security and since 2000, approximately 70% of all
satellites in space are used for military purposes, such as communication, detection, surveillance, and
tracking.
A new threat for peace is also represented by the development of missile defensemechanisms.
Indeed,this systems involvea deployment of new missiles, an increased reliance on military assets in
space and allow countries to develop offensive technologies under the pretense of defense. For example,
Kinetic Energy Interceptors are missiles that are launched into space to take out enemy missiles by
smashing into them, having also potential applications as offensive anti-satellite weapons. Alarmingly,
the United States’ withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 2002 has allowed the U.S.
to move forwards with space-based missile defines systems.
Moreover, anti-satellite weapon constitute a danger for the stability of international relations
regarding outer space. Since the late 1980s, satellites have been vulnerable to anti-satellite (ASAT)
system and there is currently a trend towards launching such systems into space directly. In January 2007,
China tested an anti-satellite weapon against one of its own weather satellites, a similar thing did the
United States in February 2008. Anti-satellite weapons (ASAT) are designed to incapacitate or destroy
satellites for strategic military purposes. In the past both the US and the Soviet Union tested anti-satellite
weapons, but recognized the threat they posed to outer space assets and ceased the tests until China tested
its own weapon in 2007. The main danger is that other States could be to follow China’s example, leading
to a weaponization of space. When, in 2014, China and Russia released an updated draft of their proposed
Treaty on Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force against
Outer Space Objects (PPWT), there was a renewed attention for the topic.
6
The act of destroying a satellite not only damages the space environment (see Possible
consequences: space debris section), but can also quickly escalate a conflict or generate other
unpredictable and dangerous consequences. And short of an actual attack on a satellite, even the targeting
of satellites or the construction of space-based weapons could precipitate an arms race with its own
damaging consequences. If the risk are so evident, why do the States develop ASAT weapons? The
reason can be found in the growing importance of satellites, that play a major role in wartime. So, while
for the moment space is non-weaponised, this situation may soon change since a number of countries,
including Russia, China and the US, are reported to already be developing anti-satellite weapons.
iv.
Possible consequences: space debris
One of the consequences of the weaponization of space would be an increase of space debris, which
can destroy civil and commercial space infrastructure such as satellites. Space debris, resulting from 50
years of space activity, already poses a considerable hazard to spacecraft. The problem would worsen if
space weapons were deployed in orbit, also leaving less room for civilian systems that are nowadays
essential for modern society. Proof of what was just said are the results of the 2007 Chines ASAT test,
that filled the lower earth orbit with an estimated 2500 pieces of dangerous debris, one of which destroyed
a Russian satellite in May 2013.
Action on the matter was already take in 1999, when the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination
Committee (IADC) began developing the U.N. Space Debris Mitigation guidelines. In 2007, the
guidelines were adopted by the U.N. Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) and
endorsed by the General Assembly. The guidelines, that are not binding,outline established codes of
conducts to minimize harmful consequences of space activity. In 2008, the European Union (E.U.)
published a draft for a Code of Conduct for Outer Space activities, in order to minimize accidents that
could harm peaceful space exploration, focusing especially on space debris.
v.
Prevention of an arms race in outer space
Many are the mechanisms that, if implemented, could prevent an arms race in outer space. The most
common ones are transparency and confidence building measures and multilateral treaties.
The first are voluntary protocols that states choose to abide by. These measures are typically not
legally binding, but are quick and easy to negotiate ad implement, especially in treaty negotiations as
codes of conduct or guidelines. Transparency and confidence building measures do not provide a longterm solution, but can help promote dialogue between states. Examples of such measures include the
Hague Code of Conduct for Missile Proliferation and the Incidents at Sea and Prevention of Dangerous
Military Activities Agreement.
The second are legally binding options that provide a more effective long-term solution. Their
downside is that they are not easy to negotiate and implement. The United Nations has adopted a number
of resolutions calling for negotiations to prevent an arms race in outer space and China has proposed the
establishment of an ad hoc committee in the Conference on Disarmament to negotiate a treaty prohibiting
the weaponization of outer space, gaining the support of other countries, including Pakistan. A treaty that
7
provided controls on weapons in space would ban the testing, production, deployment or use of weapons
in space, of earth-based weapons which operate into space and establish monitoring procedures.
Timeline of major events
Date
October 4, 1957
December 13, 1958
December 13, 1958
May 6, 1959
April 1, 1960
April 12, 1961
Event
Sputnik-1 launched into Earth orbit
First GA resolution on outer space: resolution 1348 (XIII)
Ad hoc Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space established
First meeting of the ad hoc UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space
First successful weather satellite launched
First manned spaceflight: Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin orbits the Earth in
Vostok 1
September 25, 1961
President Kennedy delivers a speech to the UNGA on the extension of the rule of
law to Outer Space
First woman to orbit the Earth: Soviet cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova
the General Assembly adopts resolution 1962 (XVIII) entitled "Declaration of
Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Uses of
Outer Space”
the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and
Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies enters into
force
First United Nations Conference on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer
Space (UNISPACE)
First humans on the Moon, Neil Armstrong & Edwin Aldrin “Apollo 11”
First probe to land on Venus “Venera 7”
First space station “Salyut-1” launched
First probe to land on Mars “Viking-1”
Second Conference on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space
(UNISPACE 82)
Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial
Bodies entered into force
International Space Year
First probe to orbit Jupiter “Galileo”
Third Conference on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space
(UNISPACE III)
Launch of the first ISS crew and start of permanent human presence in Earth
orbit.
First long range robotic rovers on Mars “Opportunity”
First probe to orbit Saturn “Cassini-Huygens”
Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines endorsed by the UN General Assembly
First probe to orbit Mercury “Messenger”
First probe to orbit and land on a comet Philea/Rosetta
June 16, 1963
December 13, 1963
October 10, 1967
August 14, 1968
July 21, 1969
December 15, 1970
April 19, 1971
July 20, 1976
August, 1982
July 11, 1984
1992
December 7, 1995
July, 1999
November 2, 2000
January 25, 2004
June 30, 2004
December 22, 2007
March 18, 2011
November 12, 2014
8
Bloc positions
When talking about outer space, there is a clear predominance of a few countries, while the others
are only now starting to develop plans for the space. We will, therefore, briefly outline the positions of the
main players since they can be of use for all the delegates. Every delegate – including the ones
representing the US, Russia and China – needs to conduct their own independent research.
i.
United States
The key role played by the United States in this sector can be understood by taking a look at the
history of the topic provided: the competition between the United States and Russia led to big steps
forward in the development of new technologies that could allow men to exploit outer space. The US still
are one of the leading countries, pushing forward and at the same time constituting a risk for the eventual
weaponization of space.
The US’ withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the development of US ground- and
sea- based “missile defenses” increased tensions with Russia and led to increased missile
proliferation.While as far as anyone knows there are currently no weapons deployed in space, the US
policy on outer space is concerning. The 2006 US National Space Policy, passed under the Bush
administration, explained that the US will “preserve its rights, capabilities, and freedom of action in
space; dissuade or deter others from either impeding those rights or developing capabilities intending to
do so; take those actions necessary to protect its space capabilities; respond to interference; and deny, if
necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to US national interests.”
Recently, the Obama administration released the new US National Space Policy, stating that “the US
shall pursue bilateral and multilateral transparency and confidence-building measures to encourage
responsible action in, and the peaceful uses of, space”. It also notes that the US will consider proposals
for arms control measures if they are “equitable, effectively verifiable, and enhance the national security
of the US and its allies.” While there is a neat difference from the precedent policy, the consequences of
this policy are still unknown.
ii.
Russia
Together with the US, Russia (USSR at the time) opened the way for the exploration and exploitation
of outer space during the cold war. After the collapse of the USSR, though, Russia’s state-owned space
industry has struggled to stay alive. To keep it afloat, the Government turned to military space projects
and manned space flights, which are not as scientifically productive as the development of new research
satellites. Indeed, half of the budget goes to space flights and 80 out of Russia's 130 satellites serve
military purposes.
9
The plans to build anti-satellite weapons, abandoned during the Cold war, were restarted in August
2009, as announced by the Russian Air Force. In December 2016 there were reports of tests of a new antisatellite weapon. However, Russia, together with China, is the author of the working paper “Treaty on the
Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or Use of Force Against Outer Space
Objects (PPWT)”, that is currently being discussed in the Conference on Disarmament.
iii.
China
China quickly grew to be a fundamental actor in the outer space: the Chinese government spends
billions of dollars annually on their space program, while the US continues to strip funding for NASA.In
2007, China sparked global concern when it successfully tested its first ASAT missile, destroying one of
its weather satellites. However, China has long lobbied against the weaponization of outer space.
iv.
European Union
In 2007, a formal European Space Policy was established after being jointly drafted by the European
Commission and the Director General of the European Space Agency. In 2008, the European Union
(E.U.) published a draft for a Code of Conduct for Outer Space activities, in order to minimize accidents
that could harm peaceful space exploration, focusing especially on space debris. At the same time, the EU
works collectively to create satellite systems to rival those of the United States.
Past UN actions
In 1958 the General Assembly in resolution 1348 (XIII) established an ad hoc Committee on the
Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), composed of 18 members. The Committee had to overview all
the UN resources relating to the peaceful uses of outer space, facilitating international cooperation in this
field. COPUOS was established as a permanent body in 1959 and has been working since then. The work
of the Committee is assisted by two subcommittees, the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee and the
Legal Subcommittee. It is one of the largest Committees in the United Nations. Moreover, the United
Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA), initially created as a small expert unit within the
United Nations Secretariat to service the ad hoc Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, is now
the United Nations office responsible for promoting international cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer
space and serves as the secretariat for COPUOS.The questions related to the militarization of outer space
are dealt by the Conference on Disarmament (CD) that works in close cooperation with DISEC.
The General Assembly has passed a vast number of resolutions on the topic of space law. The
most important ones are the "Declaration of Legal Principles" (G.A. resolution 1962 (XVIII) of 13
December 1963), the "Broadcasting Principles" (G.A. resolution 37/92 of 10 December 1982), the
"Remote Sensing Principles" (G.A. resolution 41/65 of 3 December 1986), the "Nuclear Power Sources"
Principles (G.A. resolution 47/68 of 14 December 1992), the "Benefits Declaration" (G.A. resolution
51/122 of 13 December 1996).
Since the majority of UN member states are concerned that the weaponization of outer space will
lead to an arms race and insist that a multilateral treaty is the only way to prevent such an arms race, each
10
year in the UN General Assembly a resolution on the prevention of an arms race in outer space (PAROS)
is introduced and adopted.Every country in the world votes in favor of negotiating a treaty on PAROS,
except for the US and Israel, which abstain. China and Russia have produced several working papers on
PAROS, which offer suggestions for different confidence building measures together with suggested
verification measures. Some of these suggestions include: exchanges of information, demonstrations,
notifications, consultations, and thematic workshops. In 2008, China and Russia submitted a draft treaty
to the CD entitled “Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space, the Threat or
Use of Force Against Outer Space Objects” (PPWT). The PPWT reiterates the importance of a weaponfree outer space, defines relevant terms such as “weapons in outer space,” and proposes the creation of an
additional protocol to establish “measures of verification of compliance with the Treaty.” A PAROS
treaty would complement the 1967 Outer Space Treaty and would also prevent any nation from gaining a
further military advantage in outer space and hopefully reduce current military uses of outer space.
Questions a resolution must address
Delegates should discuss the potential uses of spaces, focusing on its strategic and military uses,
the risk of weaponization that could result from the actions of States and the way of limiting it.
Definitions about the militarization and weaponization of space will have to be discussed in order to
create a new framework able to tackle the challenges of the future.
Delegates should refer to the following question as a source for ideas, but they are encouraged to
develop their own agenda.
1. Does your country have the means necessary to develop new technologies that could lead to an
arms race in space?
2. What is your country’s position on the possibility of arms in space?
3. Does your country have an active space program? If not, is it affiliated to any space agencies?
4. Does your country have anti-satellite weapons or missile defense systems?
5. What is your country’s history regarding the outer space?
6. What could be the reasons for an arms race in space?
11
Bibliography
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Space Race. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.history.com/topics/space-race
R. (n.d.). United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs. Retrieved from
http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/timeline/index.html
Outer space. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/resources/factsheets/critical-issues/5448-outer-space
T. (n.d.). United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs. Retrieved from
http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/informationfor/faqs.html
Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.acronym.org.uk/old/directory/proliferation-challenges/missile-defencespace
International Legal Agreements Relevant to Space Weapons. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-weapons/space-weapons/international-legal-agreements#.WH74Heh2b8
Arms Control Today. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.armscontrol.org/print/1943
Militarization and Weaponization of Outer Space. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.globalissues.org/article/69/militarization-and-weaponization-of-outer-space
A History of Anti-Satellite Programs (2012). (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-weapons/space-security/a-history-of-anti-satelliteprograms#.WH9_kXeh3-Z
The Role of Diplomacy in Keeping Outer Space Safe, Secure, and Sustainable. (2016, April 14).
Retrieved from https://www.state.gov/t/avc/rls/255834.htm
Broad, W. J., & Sanger, D. E. (2007, January 17). China Tests Anti-Satellite Weapon, Unnerving
U.S. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/18/world/asia/18cnd-china.html?_r=0
Saperstein, A. M. “Weaponization” Vs. “Militarization” Of Space. Retrieved from
https://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/2002/july/saperstein.pdf
United Nations General Assembly, Seventy-fifth plenary meeting. "International Cooperation in
the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space." A/RES/48/39. 10 December 1993. Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/48/a48r039.htm
United Nations General Assembly, Eighty-third plenary meeting. "Declaration on International
Cooperation in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space for the Benefit and in the Interest of All
States, Taking into Particular Account the Needs of Developing Countries." A/RES/51/122. 13
December 1996. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/51/a51r122.htm
United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs. "Space Law." Retrieved from
http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/index.html
United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs. "Space Law: Resolutions." Retrieved from
http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/resolutions.html
United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs. "United Nations Treaties and Principles on Outer
Space and Related General Assembly Resolutions." Retrieved from
http://www.unoosa.org/pdf/publications/st_space_11rev2E.pdf
Prevention of outer space arms race, Mediterranean security among issues, as disarmament
committee approves seven more texts | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases. (n.d.). Retrieved
from https://www.un.org/press/en/2005/gadis3310.doc.htm
12
TOPIC B/ Stockpiling of Bacterial and Toxic Weapons
Introduction
Germ warfare or biological warfare is the use of biological toxins and infectious agents which
consists of bacteria, fungi and various which are used as a mechanism to cause harm or even the death of
humans, animals or even plants. These weapons consist of living organisms which reproduce or multiply
within the host victims.
While the threat of biological weapons is more of a phenomenon mentioned more in movies, it
has been an ever present threat and the United Nations has been working for around a century to eradicate
the threat that they possess. (UNOG, 2017)
Ever since the dawn of civilizations, man has used poisons for assassination purposes not only
against individual enemies but sometimes also against armies. Lois Pasteur and Robert Koch laid down
the foundation of microbiology and offered new prospects for those who were interested in biological
weapons. Their studies allowed agents to be chosen and designed on a rational basis. Even though the
dangers were soon realized and in 1874 and 1899 there were treaties asking for the prohibition of
poisoned weapons they failed in preventing the developing and usage of poisoned weapons.
During the First World War the German army used biological weapons even though the usage
was on a small scale and not particularly successful, these included covert operation which used both
anthrax and glanders. After the war many countries instigated their own biological warfare programs and
make them a lot deadlier before the second world war.
(Frischknecht, 2003)
Discussion of the Problem
The threat of biological warfare has been present before the 20th century and with the progression of
time it has evolved and taken different forms in which they can cause harm. Biological warfare can take
shape in:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Contamination of food and water
Using various toxins, plants and animals in a weapons system
Spreading infection through infected people
Bacterial agents such as anthrax, brucella, tularemia
Viral agents such as small pox, viral hemorrhagic fevers
Toxins such as Ricin
(USDOL, 2012)
13
(Globalsecurity, 2007)
The Problem with biological weapons and toxins within the real world is that which may be of
significant threat to global security.
The first problem with biological weapons is that they are really cheap to make, one gram of toxin
can kill up to 10 million people. A purified form of botulinum toxin is 3 million times more potent than
Sanin, a chemical nerve agent which is considered dangerous itself. While sophisticated weapons may be
difficult to produce, biological weapons can be made with relative ease. Comparing different forms of
weaponry, it costs approximately $2000 per square kilometer of civilian (unprotected causalities) with
conventional weapons while it takes $1 with biological weapons earning it the nick name of the poor
man’s atom bomb.
While only a few countries in the world possess nuclear weapons, biological weapons can be
produced by any country with reasonable advanced pharmaceutical and medical industry. Even a piece of
fruit can be used to deliver a biological weapon to a particular target and only certain organisms can start
an infection which can easily lead to an epidemic. With a few particles of Hanta virus many thousands of
people can become carriers which can lead to infecting thousands of more people. To add on to the
severity of the threat developing nuclear weapons can be easily found in undergraduate courses in
colleges and universities worldwide.
(WILPF, 2017)
So while lesser countries have used biological weapons, it does not shy away from the possible
harm it can cause and in great numbers. Iraq and North Korea have been recently accused to trying to
establish biological weapons and due to the relative ease of making these biological weapons can be used
by non-state actors to spread widespread damage. While there have been multiple conventions that have
been signed to prevent the establishment and storage of biological weapons, they haven’t been completely
eradicated and still pose a threat to global security.
14
Timeline of major events
There have been numerous events of germ warfare over the years, some of them are;
Year
1155
1346
1495
1650
1675
1736
1797
1863
Event
Emperor Barbarossa poisons the water wells with Human bodies, Tortona, Italy
Bodies of Plague victims are catapulted over the city walls in Caffa (Crimean) by
Mongols
Blood of leprosy patients is mixed with wine by the Spanish and sold to the French.
Naples, Italy
The Saliva of rabid dogs in fired towards their enemies by the Polish
First treaty between the German and French Forces to not use poison bullets
The British distribute blankets from small pox patients to native Americans
The plains around Mantua, Italy is flooded by Napolean to enhance the spread of
malaria
The Confederates sell clothing from Yellow fever and small pox patients to Union
troops in the United States.
(EMBO, 2003)
Even though the usage of biological weapons has significantly reduced over the passage of time,
we still see numerous incidents relating to biological weapons. Here is another table that shows recent
incidents that took place regarding biological weapons.
1995
1997
2001
2004
In a Tokyo subway, the AumShinrikyo cult used biological gas to kill 12 passengers
and injured more than 5000
Cuba files a complaint against article 5 of the BTWC accusing USA of releasing a plant
pathogen
The United States witnessed anthrax attacks which killed 5 people
The US accuses Iraq of using biological weapons
Bloc Positions
European Union: The European Union is completely against the use of biological weapons; all the 27
member states aim to eradicate the threat that exists to ensure peace within the region.
The United States: In 1970, the US renounced the usage and storage of biological weapons. As it can be
derived the US now opposes the idea of biological weapons
.
The Russian Federation: In 1992 the Russian Federation shut down its biological weapons facilities and
even submitted a report to the United Nations giving details of its prior biological weapons programs.
15
The People Republic of China: China strongly opposes the production and stockpiling of biological
weapons and it has signed both the Geneva Protocol and the BTWC to ensure that biological weapons
aren’t used. China has opened communicated channels with the UN and submit a report each year
explaining the objectives achieved as set by the BTWC review committee.
Japan: The Japanese even though have had a history of using biological weapons now an aim to eradicate
the use of biological weapons and it supports the BTWC.
North Korea and Iraq: These two countries are accused to testing and developing their bio-warfare
program. North Korea unlike Iraq has signed the BWC in 1987 however it has not completely followed it.
Iraq has been involved in a discrete biological weapons program during the reign of Saddam Hussein
however their where abouts remain uncertain. (Alex, 2015)
Past UN actions
On the 10th of April 1972 the first treaty which banned the development, production and
stockpiling of an entire category of weapons of mass destruction was signed, this treaty was called The
Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) and came into force on the 26th of March 1975.
This was followed by the Second Review Conference in 1986 which asked the State Parties to
implement a certain degree of confidence building measures to reduce the usage of biological weapons
and to improve international cooperation to establish peaceful biological activities.
The Confidence Building Measures (CBM) were expanded by the Third review committee in
1991.This conference required every country to submit an annual report on activities which were related
to the the BWC which included the research centers, the vaccine production facilities and information on
the biological defense research amongst others.
In 1994, a Special Conference was held in which the formation of Ad Hoc Group of the states
parties was agreed upon in order to negotiate and develop a legally binding verification regime for the
convention
The Ad Hoc Committee was further strengthened by the Fifth Review Committee which was held in 2001
however this was unable to finalize the negotiations in relation to the formation of the draft legal
resolution. This legal resolution was formed in the meeting that followed in the Fifth Review Conference
in November 2002.
What followed was the Sixth Review Conference in 2006, which was successful in forming a
comprehensive review of the Convention and forming a final document. The formation of the
Implementation Support Unit (ISU) was completed which assisted States parties which allowed for the
implementation of the Convention.
The Following Resolutions have been passed in the General Assembly tackling the biological warfare
16
issue;
• A/RES/70/74 — 2015
• A/RES/69/82 — 2014
• A/RES/68/69 — 2013
• A/RES/67/77 — 2012
• A/RES/66/65 — 2011
• A/RES/65/92 — 2010
• A/RES/64/70 — 2009
• A/RES/63/88 — 2008
• A/RES/62/60 — 2007
• A/RES/61/102 — 2006
• A/RES/60/96 — 2005
• A/RES/59/110 — 2004
• A/RES/58/72 — 2003
• A/DEC/57/516 — 2002
• A/DEC/56/414 — 2001
• A/DEC/55/40 — 2000
(UNODA, 2017)
How can biological weapons be defended against?
There are five steps that take place in order to establish a suitable defense mechanism against biological
weapons;
•
Prevention; this takes various forms, the international disarmament and inspection regimes try to
deter production and dissemination of biological warfare agents. Their combined intelligence acts
upon indicating threats and make protective measures to be taken in the near future.
•
Protection is the second step that can take place however there is no permanent solution against
biological warfare. Short term solution are inclusive of but not limited to protective suits,
clothing, gas masks and filters.However there are various agents that little can be done about eg
Anthrax remains active and potentially harmful for upto 40 years. A good health system and
vaccines for biological weapons are other mechanisms which can be used to prevent the spread to
biological weapons, although there is little prevention against genetically engineered variants of
these weapons
•
Detection; Detection mechanisms for biological weapons were established after the gulf war. It
can take anything from a few hours until a few days to detect exposure to a biological weapons,
with the passage of time it takes smaller amounts to time to detect these biological weapons. If a
particular biological infection is not identified, a large number of antibiotics are given to the
17
person in hopes that something might work. The key to detection of infections leads back to a
good healthcare system.
•
Decontamination; One of the biggest threats of biological weapons is that they may grow and
multiply over time. As stated before Anthrax remains active for at least 40 years in the soil and is
highly resistant to eradication. However in the United Kingdom Anthrax was decontaminated,
this was however after it had caused substantial damage (WILPF, 2017)
Questions to consider
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Does your country have the capacity to produce biological weapons? If yes, how can they ensure
that they don’t cause harm to other countries?
Does your country have a history of using biological weapons and toxins and have they taken
active steps to ensure that they don’t do so in the future?
What additions can be made to the Review Conferences to make sure that the process of
eradicating biological weapons is hastened?
Till what extent should a country be allowed to have biological research which can be used for
medicinal purposes?
What active steps can countries take to defend themselves from biological weapons?
How can the UN ensure greater cooperation from the countries that aren’t a part of the BTWC?
What is included in the BTWC and how can the countries work upon achieving their goals as
highlighted by the resolution?
18
Bibliography
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
UNOG – 2017 - The Biological Weapons Convention – Web – Retrieved from
http://www.unog.ch/80256EE600585943/(httpPages)/04FBBDD6315AC720C1257180004B1B2
F?OpenDocument
Friedrich Frischknecht- 2003- The history of biological warfare- Web- Retrieved from
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1326439/#b31
United States Department of Labor- 2012- Biological Agents- Web- Retrieved from
https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/biologicalagents/index.html
Women’s International League for Peace and Freeom- 2017- Biological Weapons- WebRetrieved from http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/resources/fact-sheets/critical-issues/4579biological-weapons
EMBO – 2003- Examples of biological warfare during the past millennium – Web- Retrieved
from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1326439/table/t1/
Dennis Alex – 2015- Limiting the Development and Usage of Biological Weapons- WebRetrieved from http://diamun.org/2010/GA1Limiting_the_development_and_use_of_biological_weapons.pdf
United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs – 2017 – The Biological Weapons ConventionWeb – Retrieved from - https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/bio/
Women’s International League for Peace and Freeom- 2017- Biological Weapons- WebRetrieved from http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/resources/fact-sheets/criticalissues/4579-biological-weapons
Global Security- 2007 – Weapons of Mass Destruction- Web- Retrieved from
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/policy/army/fm/8-10-7/Ch2.htm
19