General Assembly, First Committee:
Disarmament and International Security
Background Guide
As one of the six main committees of the United Nations General Assembly, the First
Committee (DISEC) deals with issues relating to disarmament, global challenges and threats to
international peace and security and seeks to solve these challenges in the international
security regime. With all UN member states maintaining a presence in the committee, DISEC is
among the largest committees in the United Nations and works closely with United Nations
Disarmament Commission and the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament.
I: Addressing the Risk of Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East
Nuclear proliferation in the Middle East is a complex issue concerning many interests.
Nearly every Middle Eastern country is a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons, also known as the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and none are confirmed to
have nuclear weapons; however, this does not make nuclear proliferation in the region any less
of an issue. Several complicated nuclear situations exist in the Middle East, and they have
significant effects on the politics of the region.
When assessing the risk of nuclear proliferation, political and governmental stability is
an important factor to consider. While Turkey does not possess nuclear weapons, the Incirlik
air base in Turkey houses NATO/American nuclear weapons under NATO’s nuclear sharing
policy.1 Recently, an attempted coup caused the Turkish government to cut power to the
Incirlik air base.2 In the event of a successful coup or takeover, there is always a possibility of
nuclear weapons being seized and proliferated.
Israel has also been intentionally unclear on whether it has nuclear weapons, but it is
widely believed that the country does indeed have a nuclear arsenal.3 Israel is also not a party
to the NPT and doesn’t recognize the international norms and laws of nuclear proliferation as it
results to its unconfirmed arsenal. This has caused significant tensions in a region where Israel
is often at-odds with its non-nuclear neighbors. This has caused Egypt to threaten its
withdrawal from the NPT as well.4 To ease some of these geopolitical tensions, Israel has
agreed to take part in the NPT meetings as an observer, but is still not a party to the treaty.5
1
"NATO’s Nuclear Deterrence Policy and Forces." NATO. December 3, 2015.
Starr, Barbara. "Turkey's Power Cutoff to Incirlik Air Base a Problem for Pentagon." CNN, July 19, 2016.
3
Borger, Julian. "The Truth about Israel's Secret Nuclear Arsenal." The Guardian, January 15, 2014.
4
Borger, Julian. "The Truth about Israel's Secret Nuclear Arsenal." The Guardian, January 15, 2014.
5
Charbonneau, Louis. "Middle East Nuclear Weapons Ban Proposal Stumbles at U.N." Reuters, May 11, 2015.
2
1
While technically part of South Asia, the influence between nuclear-capable Pakistan
and other Middle Eastern states is also quite troubling. Recently, there have been a few
worrisome reports out of a number of intelligence agencies of a potential deal between
Pakistan and Saudi Arabia concerning nuclear weapons sharing. Pakistan, a country not party to
the NPT and which possesses nuclear weapons, is reported to have promised Saudi Arabia the
right to buy five or six warheads if it feels threatened, in exchange for Saudi Arabia paying up to
60% of the Pakistani Nuclear Program.6 Both Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have denied this;7
however, if the deal is in fact real, it would be a violation of the NPT for Saudi Arabia (a party
state to the NPT) to buy these weapons. Nevertheless, an argument has been made that even if
the potential deal were real, it would be a similar weapons-sharing agreement to that of NATO
in which the weapons would belong to Pakistan but be stored in Saudi Arabia, and therefore
legal.8
To understand the potential nuclear desires of Saudi Arabia, it is important to consider
their perceived threat from their geopolitical rival, Iran.9 Iran is widely suspected to be
developing nuclear weapons, despite its ratification of the NPT. There is also evidence to
suggest that Pakistan has been supplying nuclear technology to Iran, and concerns have been
expressed that Pakistan could even transfer weapons to Iran.10 It is hoped that the recent deal
between Iran, the P5 and Germany, and the European Union will delay Iran’s capability to
produce nuclear weapons.
There has been considerable UN action to address nuclear proliferation. The Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty, while not perfect, has been extremely successful in curbing the rapid
spread of nuclear weapons that took place before its establishment. All but five UN member
states are signatories, and nuclear proliferation has significantly slowed since its ratification. It’s
key principal is to request that nuclear states not transfer their weapons to non-nuclear states,
and that non-nuclear states refrain from receiving or creating their own weapons.11 However,
this does not stop non-state actors (such as terrorist groups) from creating or acquiring nuclear
weapons. This is why the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1540, which aims to prevent
non-state actors from acquiring weapons. This resolution requires states to refrain from
providing non-state actors with weapons or aiding in the development of nuclear weapons and
to be accountable for nuclear materials and materials that could be used in the production of
nuclear weapons within their territory.12
6
Borger, Julian. "Pakistan's Bomb and Saudi Arabia." The Guardian, May 11, 2010.
Ibid
8
Deming, Kyle. "No Price Is Right: Why the BBC Is Incorrect about a Saudi Arabia-Pakistan Nuclear Weapons Deal."
Project on Nuclear Issues. November 13, 2013.
9
Borger, Julian. "Pakistan's Bomb and Saudi Arabia." The Guardian, May 11, 2010.
10
Goldberg, Jeffrey, and Marc Ambinder. "The Ally From Hell." The Atlantic, December 2011.
11
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, New York, 1 July 1968.
12
S/RES/1540 (2004)
7
2
Nuclear proliferation in the Middle East is complicated by the many interests and actors
in the region, as well as by rumor and rumored secret deals and treaties. In order to address
this issue, member states will have to come together to make nuclear non-proliferation a
priority, and perhaps to alleviate political tensions in the region.
Questions to consider: What are the geopolitical tensions and rivalries associated with an
increased desire to acquire nuclear weapons? How can nations promote transparency in their
peaceful use of nuclear energy to alleviate tensions and suspicion? In what ways can the UN
address the potential for unlawful transfer of nuclear technology to non-state actors?
II. The Role of Commodities and Natural Resources in Fueling Conflict
Natural resources play a huge role in creating and prolonging conflict in the world. In the
past 60 years, at least 40% of civil wars have been tied to natural resources.13 Almost a third of
UN peacekeeping operations over the past 20 years have been related to conflicts prolonged
because of revenues from natural resources.14 The United Nations has a duty to prevent and
ameliorate conflict; therefore examining the role of commodities and natural resources in
conflicts is an essential one that could more quickly resolve many conflicts around the world.
There are many commodities and natural resources over which different nations and
organizations fight, but some of the most common include diamonds, conflict minerals, water,
drugs, and oil. The Global Policy Forum defines conflict resources as “natural resources whose
systematic exploitation and trade in a context of conflict contribute to, benefit from or result in
the commission of serious violations of human rights, violations of international humanitarian
law or violations amounting to crimes under international law.”15 No matter which of these
resources and commodities are being fought over, the issue remains the same: control over the
resource and therefore the revenue stream derived from the resource. This means that
commodities and resources fund whichever forces control them.16
While some resources may be considered more than others, there are many natural
resources which have been directly tied to conflict. One such situation is the Taliban control of
opium in Afghanistan. The United Nations believes that the Taliban derives much of its budget
from the narcotics trade in Afghanistan17 and that the Taliban has taken control of large opiumproducing regions for this purpose. Another highly lucrative resource is diamonds. Known as
conflict diamonds or blood diamonds, this multi-billion dollar trade has provided funds to
13
United Nations Environment Programme, From Conflict to Peacebuilding
– the Role of Natural Resources and the Environment, 2009.
14
Lessons UNlearned. Report. Global Witness. 2010.
15
"Definition of Conflict Resources." Global Witness. August 2007.
16
Lessons UNlearned. Report. Global Witness. 2010.
17
Shah, Taimoor, and Mujib Mashal. "Bountiful Afghan Opium Harvest Yields Profits for the Taliban." The New York
Times, May 4, 2016.
3
purchase arms for warlords and rebels in Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Côte
d'Ivoire, Liberia, and Sierra Leone.18 The Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, however, has
been successful in addressing this issue, as well as Security Council sanctions on UNITA in
Angola, the RUF in Sierra Leone, and Liberia for its support of the RUF. 19 A number of UN
resolutions have been particularly effective including S/RES/1689, S/RES/1647, S/RES/1343, and
S/RES/1521 which impose bans on diamonds from Liberia; S/RES/1643 which imposes
prohibition on the import of diamonds from Côte d’Ivoire; S/RES/1306 and S/RES/1171 which
imposed embargoes on Sierra Leone; S/RES/1295 and S/RES/1173 which prohibit import of
diamonds from Angola not controlled by the government; and finally S/RES/1459 which
officially endorsed the Kimberley Process.
Conflict diamonds are not the only material states have tried to limit the sale of within
their borders. Conflict minerals, namely tantalum, tungsten, tin, or gold mined from ore, which
are extracted in the Democratic Republic of Congo and its surrounding countries, are intimately
tied to the long civil war in the DRC.20 These minerals can be found in mobile phones,
electronics, light bulbs, balloons, and even jewelry commonly sold throughout the world.21
While civil penalties have been brought against companies that do not remove conflict minerals
from their supply lines, the process is surprisingly difficult and involves collecting data from
processing centers across the world.22
Oil is one of the most discussed natural resources in conflict. The most famous oil
conflicts are in the Middle East, but conflicts involving oil are prevalent in the Niger Delta,
southern Thailand, Algeria, Colombia, Sudan, Iraq, and Kuwait.23 Oil production can be highly
lucrative, so governments and rebels alike are liable to vie for control of its production and sale.
Water, as one can imagine, is also a highly valuable commodity. About three fifths of all
water flowing in rivers is shared by two or more countries; disputes can arise quickly in such an
environment.24 A recent, highly publicized incident involved Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia.
Ethiopia planned to build Africa’s largest hydroelectric dam but Egypt opposed the project
citing concerns that it would worsen water shortages in Egypt. While Egypt stopped short of
18
"Conflict Diamonds." Amnesty International.
"Security Council Diamond Sanctions and the Kimberly Process." Security Council Report. September 28, 2006.
20
Browning, Lynnley. "Companies Struggle to Comply With Rules on Conflict Minerals." The New York Times,
September 7, 2015.
21
Browning, Lynnley. "Companies Struggle to Comply With Rules on Conflict Minerals." The New York Times,
September 7, 2015.
22
Ibid
23
Ross, Michael L. "Blood Barrels: Why Oil Wealth Fuels Conflict." Foreign Affairs, May/June 2008.
24
Levy, Barry S., and Victor W. Sidel. "Water Rights and Water Fights: Preventing and Resolving Conflicts Before
They Boil Over." American Journal of Public Health 101, no. 5 (May 2011): 778-80.
19
4
threatening war, the threat was implied.25 Finally in March of 2015 the leaders of Egypt, Sudan,
and Ethiopia signed a deal to end the dispute, avoiding an armed conflict.26
The United Nations has passed several resolutions on the role of natural resources in
conflict, including S/RES/1625. In this resolution Article 6 states that the Security Council
“[reaffirms] its determination to take action against illegal exploitation and trafficking of natural
resources and high-value commodities in areas where it contributes to the outbreak, escalation
or continuation of armed conflict.”27 Another resolution, S/RES/1653 (2006), begins by
expressing the Security Council’s awareness of the “link between the illegal exploitation of
natural resources, the illicit trade in those resources and the proliferation and trafficking of
arms is one of the factors fuelling and exacerbating conflicts in the Great Lakes region of Africa,
and especially in the Democratic Republic of the Congo” and goes on to call upon the countries
of the African Great Lakes region to “combat cross-border trafficking of illicit small arms, light
weapons and illicit natural resources.”28
Natural resources and commodities can provide a revenue stream to fund armies and
governments, making them incredibly valuable. This value causes a great deal of conflict, where
civilians might be caught in the fighting between forces vying for control of this revenue
streams. The United Nations must continue to examine the ways in which natural resources and
commodities affect and prolong conflicts in order to resolve them more quickly.
Questions to consider: How does the control and trade of commodities shape international
and domestic conflict? Have there been any successful mechanisms created that can be
replicated for other commodities? In what ways can the United Nations address national and
international conflict tied to natural resources?
25
"Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan Sign Deal to End Nile Dispute." BBC News, March 23, 2015.
Ibid
27
S/RES/1625 (2005)
28
S/RES/1653 (2006)
26
5