Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
March 17 – 19, 2017
The Special Political and Decolonization
Committee 2002
Background Guide
Chair
Veronica Buschhaus
Assistant Chairs
Emily Downey, Elvira Kovachevich, Danny Marshall
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
Delegates,
Welcome to the Special Political and Decolonization Committee: 2002 at MSUMUN XVII! We, the
dais, are all incredibly excited for MSUMUN XVII and to meet all of you. The Special Political and
Decolonization Committee (SpecPol) is one of the six main committees of the United Nations, dealing with
topics ranging from decolonization to human rights issues. This committee will start March 1, 2002, focusing
on three major world issues: the situation in Afghanistan, the role of diamonds in fueling conflict, and the risk
of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. In this committee, delegates will have the opportunity to travel back
into time to try to solve issues and prevent them from boiling into the conflicts they are today. These topics are
all centered around human rights and peacebuilding--something that the dais is very passionate about. We
cannot wait to see you work to solve these world issues.
As this is a historical committee, any knowledge and action prior to March 1, 2002 is valid. However,
any history or information past this date is not applicable to this committee as it will not have occurred. We do
encourage you to look at past international action for these topics and draw information from them. Be creative
in your solutions and remember that you do not have to follow history. This is your chance to rewrite history
and solve the issues how you see fit.
Veronica Buschhaus- Chair
Hi everyone! I am a sophomore here at Michigan State majoring in World Politics with a minor in
African Studies. This is my second year with MSUMUN and I couldn’t enjoy it more. Last year, I was an
Assistant Crisis Director for the Under the Double Eagles-Habsburgs and Romanovs Joint Crisis Committee.
Outside of MSUMUN, I am a part of the MSU International Relations Organization, MSU’s competitive Model
UN team. Outside of MUN-related activities, I also fence and watch soccer. I cannot wait to make MSUMUN
XVII an unforgettable experience for you!
MSUMUN XVII
2
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
Emily Downey- Assistant Chair
I am a senior majoring in Political Science. This is my second year as a staffer for MSUMUN; I also
participated in MSUMUN as a delegate. Last year, I was an Assistant Chair for SOCHUM. Outside of
MSUMUN, I enjoy reading and taking naps.
Danny Marshall- Assistant Chair
Hello, my name is Danny Marshall and I am a freshman at MSU and currently majoring in Computer
Science. This is my first experience at all with MSUMUN and Model United Nations in general and so far, it’s
been very interesting learning what the program is like. Outside of MSUMUN, I am part of the Honors College
and frequently attend meetings with Spartan Hackers. I also really enjoy reading (especially ASOIAF), playing
video games, and running. I hope you all have a great experience at MSUMUN this year!
Elvira Kovachevich- Assistant Chair
Hi there! My name is Elvira Kovachevich, and I’m a freshman at James Madison College within MSU. I
will be majoring in either International Relations or Political Theory and Constitutional Democracy with a
minor in French. I grew up in Grand Rapids, so I am excited to explore all that East Lansing has in store for me!
So far I’ve been involved in MSUMUN, the International Relations Organization, volunteering with the Honors
Times Two program where I mentor an elementary student and have pledged Kappa Omega Alpha, the pre-law
and public policy fraternity on campus. I’m so excited to work with you all this year at MSUMUN!
If you have any questions or concerns regarding your research, country, the topics, the committee, or
MSUMUN, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected]. We cannot wait to meet all of you in
March!
MSUMUN XVII
3
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
Sincerely,
Veronica Buschhaus, Emily Downey, Danny Marshall, and Elvira Kovachevich
Special Political and Decolonization Committee: 2002
[email protected]
MSUMUN XVII
4
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
Topic 1: The Situation in Afghanistan
Introduction
While the number of international terrorist attacks declined in
the 1990s, domestic terrorism was increasingly prevalent. In the
Middle East, tension between countries that fostered terrorism or
religious strife and those who did not created a region of tense unrest.
Iran, Iraq, Syria and Libya are among those who continue to support
radical groups who engage in terrorism, specifically in Lebanon,
while other countries, such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Yemen
(after unification) continue to cooperate with U.S. forces in the fight
against extremist terrorism.
Figure 1
The term terrorism has not been internationally defined. A definition would ensure that there is no
confusion or offense on any country’s part in the collaborative effort to promote peace and global stability in the
Middle East, and especially Afghanistan.
Background
History of Afghanistan and Al Qaeda
Throughout the late 1980s and continuing into the 1990s, strife within Afghanistan intensified. The
divide in the country was the result of many different factions within Afghanistan rebelling against each other,
which produced a civil war with one of the worst refugee crises the world had seen. 1.5 million Afghans fled to
Iran and 3 million to Pakistan. The United Nations contributed to the desperate need for humanitarian aid seeing
as though the economy had crashed without the prospect of amelioration; the school system had been
demolished, industrialization restricted and large irrigation projects badly damaged. Though the United Nations
MSUMUN XVII
5
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
condemned the blatant disregard for human rights, they did not take any significant action to be a conduit for
justice. This lack of intervention successfully permitted a breeding ground for the formation of extremist
terrorist groups. Since 1989, a terrorist group has existed by the name of Al Qaeda, meaning “The Base”.
While al Qaeda’s “base” changed throughout the 1990s from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Sudan, the leader,
Usama (commonly referred to as “Osama”) Bin Laden, remained constant. The purpose of the group was to
oppose, by force and otherwise, any group, organization or community that did not operate under a government
or ideology consistent with the extremist interpretation of Islam or those that supported other “infidel”
governments. Primary examples of such institutions include the United States, the United Nations, the
governments of Saudi Arabia and Egypt and the nation of Israel. Al Qaeda had an initial goal of expelling all
U.S. presence in the Middle East, but especially in Saudi Arabia.
To do so, Al Qaeda created an umbrella network of extremist terrorist organizations. Examples include
the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, the Islamic Group, and smaller jihadist groups globally in nations such as Sudan,
Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Balkan nations, Northern
African nations and the Chechnyan region of Russia, among others. Al Qaeda also enforced and maintained cell
groups in a number of Western countries.
Figure 2 provides a map with information from the United States State Department as to where Al
Qaeda has operated. All cells operate with the
goal of working against perceived common
enemies, primarily Western countries and
specifically the United States. To do so, Al
Qaeda sponsors, manages or otherwise supports
training camps. These training camps are located
in Afghanistan, where Al Qaeda and any affiliate
groups are at liberty to train and use firearms,
MSUMUN XVII
Figure 2
6
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
explosives, chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. It is imperative that the committee
addresses the prevalence of weapons of mass destruction and how accessible they are to terrorist groups, having
the potential to wreak havoc on the international community.
Al Qaeda trains all who pledge allegiance to the organization, even children, which leads the group to
have child soldiers. The training works in the sense that Al Qaeda terrorist attacks are carried out globally, with
the focus on Western nations. Attacks in Yemen centered around hotels where U.S. troops have been staying,
there was an attack at the World Trade Center in 1993, as well as at the American embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania. The intensity and scale of the attacks recently increased, all characterized by their American
affiliation.
The Northern Alliance, officially known as the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan, is
another faction in Afghanistan. It operates primarily in Afghanistan, supported by Iran, Russia, Turkey, India
and Tajikistan, among others, to oppose the Taliban. The Northern Alliance operates to counter the Taliban, an
extremist group that had taken over Kabul. The Taliban was supported by Al Qaeda. The Northern Alliance
fought a mainly defensive government, though its unification did not remain as strong as Al Qaeda’s, which set
the group up for failure.
The Attack on the Twin Towers
In the fall of September 2001, Al Qaeda launched its
biggest terrorist attack on the West with the airplane hijacking
and attack on the twin towers of the World Trade Center and
Pentagon in the United States. This was the first major attack
on US soil since the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor during
World War II as well as the first foreign attack on continental
soil since the formation of the United States. The exact number
dead is still unknown, yet it is nearing 2,800. Over 50,000
Figure 3
MSUMUN XVII
7
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
people per day worked in the twin towers and they had an average of 140,000 visitors per day. The latter part of
fall in 2001 can be categorized by a domino effect: in September of 2001, Al Qaeda assassinated the Northern
Alliance’s leader to ensure that the Taliban remain in power in Afghanistan, further ensuring Afghanistan’s
support of Al Qaeda. Following the U.S.-led invasion and establishment of the Karzai administration in late
2001, the Northern Alliance splintered into multiple political parties and essentially dissolved any influence it
had previously exhibited.
Virtually every nation in the world condemned and/or denounced the terrorist attack in the United States
or offered sympathy to the victims, except for Afghanistan. Taliban leaders did condemn the attack, but
vehemently denied that Osama bin Laden could be the force behind such an atrocity. The rest of the global
community was dubious--the United Nations Security Council repeatedly condemned not only the terrorist
attacks themselves, but the Taliban as well “for allowing Afghanistan to be used as a base for the export of
terrorism by the Al-Qaida network and other terrorist groups and for providing safe haven to Osama Bin Laden,
Al-Qaida and others associated with them,” (Resolution 1378). The United Nations thus continued to pass a
plethora of resolutions, focusing on the establishment of an International Security Assistance Force to ensure
and promote the stability of the region (Resolution 1386). An interim government was placed in power.
Invasion of Afghanistan
The United States invaded Afghanistan following the attack on September 11th, a controversial
decision. President George W. Bush invaded Afghanistan on the premise of dismantling Al Qaeda and
removing its source of legitimization: The Taliban. The Taliban was the group in charge of fueling Al Qaeda,
by providing it a safe base of operations to train combatants and live in peace. U.S. allies and, later on NATO,
supported the U.S. invasion. However, as time went on, it became very apparent that the invasion would not be
as timely as President Bush had believed, nor very effective. The invasion resulted in the further destabilization
of Afghanistan that spread throughout the Middle East, as did a resentment for Western intervention,
MSUMUN XVII
8
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
particularly U.S. involvement. The phenomenon of extremist terrorism increased exponentially after the
invasion.
Questions to Consider
1. How could an intervention to the formation and legitimization of Al Qaeda and the Taliban be done,
preventing the countless lives and global stability lost?
2. If done with foreign intervention, how does one intervene in the conflict without impeding upon national
sovereignty?
3. What are the factors that allow people to live securely and safely in a country with a legitimate
government?
Things to Include in a Resolution
● Role of NGOs in Afghanistan
● Funding for the creation of programs and/or bodies
● Reintegration of former combatants into Afghan society
● Revitalization of economic activity
● Protection of human rights and methods to ensure basic human rights
● Methods to rid Afghanistan of terrorists and drug traffickers
Works Cited
"9/11 and Global Security Threat." Thenicheng.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
Rogers, Tony. "TonyRogers.com | Countries Where Al Qaeda Has Operated." Countries Where
Al Qaeda Has Operated. TonyRogers.Com, 14 July 2004. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
Shah, Anup. "Middle East." Middle East - Global Issues. Global Issues, 6 Dec. 2006. Web. 02
MSUMUN XVII
9
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
Dec. 2016.
Templeton, Tom, and Tom Lumley. "Statistics from 9/11 and the Aftermath." The Observer.
Guardian News and Media, 17 Aug. 2002. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
"United Nations and Afghanistan." United Nations. United Nations, n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
United Nations Security Council. "Resolution 1378." United Nations. United Nations, 14 Nov.
2001. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
United Nations Security Council. "Resolution 1386." United Nations. United Nations, 20 Dec.
2001. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
MSUMUN XVII
10
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
Topic 2: The Role of Diamonds in Fueling Conflict
Introduction
The continent of Africa has a wealth of natural resources, from oil to metals to diamonds. Diamonds,
because of their value, have been a source of and fuel for conflict for many years, most significantly in West
Africa. Diamonds are light, easy to smuggle, difficult to source and highly valuable, making them an ideal
product for the black market. They are the most frequently used form of capital by rebels to purchase weapons
in countries such as Angola, Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Conflict diamonds are
defined as “diamonds that originate from areas controlled by forces or factions opposed to legitimate and
internationally recognized governments, and are used to fund military action in opposition to those
governments, or in contravention of the decisions of the Security Council.” Diamonds can be identified as
legitimate by a Certificate of Origin.
Background
Diamond Mines
Diamonds are the pure form of carbon, formed under extreme pressure and heat 150 km below the
surface of the Earth. Diamonds find their way to the surface by way of magma from underground volcanic
explosions. Once at the surface, diamonds can be found in volcanic pipes of hardened magma or in loose
mineral deposits in river valleys or deltas called alluvial deposits. Alluvial deposits are easily and inexpensively
excavated. Kimberlite pipes, however, are much more expensive and technological challenging. Kimberlite
pipes are formed into carrot-like bodies cutting through older rocks that erode as they, and the surrounding
rocks, face time and weather. Most often, the kimberlite pipes erode more rapidly than the surrounding rock and
form bowl shaped depressions. Weathered kimberlite, known as yellow ground, easily yields diamonds, but
unweathered kimberlite, or blue ground, must be crushed in order to retrieve diamonds. Diamonds in yellow
MSUMUN XVII
11
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
ground often are swept away by rivers and end up as part of alluvial deposits. Diamonds in blue ground can be
discovered in a variety of ways, most commonly by sampling for indicator materials. Mining kimberlite pipes
involves digging a pit, boring up layers of rocks and eventually carving out systems of tunnels and pipes. Most
of the world's diamonds, around 80%, are taken from alluvial deposits and the remaining 20% are taken from
kimberlite pipe mines. Because of the ease in which diamonds are collected through alluvial deposits, most
conflict diamonds come from these sources.
Diamond History
Diamonds were first discovered in South Africa in 1866 by a farmer on the banks of the Orange River.
For the first several years, diamonds were unearthed mostly in rivers and riverbeds. In the next 15 years, South
African diamond mines produced more diamonds than India, the previous world leader of diamond production,
had produced over a 2,000-year time span. By the 1880s, mining was commonplace and the mining town of
Kimberley was home to 95% of the world's diamonds. Diamonds became so ordinary that they were no longer
considered precious and the wealthy moved on to other precious stones, such as emeralds and rubies. It was
then that Cecil Rhodes started syndicating diamond mines and the Kimberley and De Beers companies
transformed the industry “from one characterized by uncertainty to one based on speculation.” By the turn of
the century, De Beers controlled approximately 90% of the world's production of rough diamonds through its
South African diamond mines.
The Role of Diamonds in Different Conflicts
Conflict diamonds leave a trail of damage in their wake. Civil wars in West Africa that began as a result
of the illegal sale of diamonds have led to the loss of innumerable lives, along with leaving thousands homeless
and starving. Children are among those hardest hit. In Angola, about 70% of families live in poverty. The
Revolutionary United Front (RUF), a guerilla group in Sierra Leone, one of the biggest beneficiaries of the
MSUMUN XVII
12
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
illegal diamond trade, frequently attacked innocent civilians, disrupting their life during the civil war. Child
soldiers are often exploited in these wars, as well.
Wars funded by conflict diamonds have cost an estimated 3.7 million lives. Conflict diamonds are
estimated to have made up to 15% of the world's diamond trade in 2000. Terrorist organizations, such as Al
Qaeda, have been known to participate in the illicit trade of diamonds. The organization derived millions of
dollars from its dealings with the RUF, buying the gems for below-market rates and selling them at inflated
prices in Europe. A few months prior to the events of September 11th, Al Qaeda invested greater amounts of
money than usual into the trade, perhaps as an attempt to protect its assets in anticipation of accounts being
frozen in the wake of the attacks.
Starting in 1935, Sierra Leone mined its diamonds profitably and legitimately through De Beers, until
independence in 1961. After independence, corrupt rulers manipulated the diamond trade to profit themselves,
providing wealth to the ruling factions and using the funds collected to buy weapons to ensure their rule. Mines
were nationalized and De Beers left. In 1991, the RUF, a was formed in Sierra Leone. The RUF's actions
created instability that eventually led to the overthrow of the government and a long civil war. The group
finances itself through control of the country's diamond resources and has carried out violent attacks on
civilians for the past decade, claiming some 50,000 lives and displacing approximately two million people. The
RUF's complete disregard for human lives and rights are internationally known.
From its independence in 1847, Liberia was a stable and peaceful country. However, in 1979, an army
official named Samuel Doe overthrew the government and proclaimed himself dictator, until he was executed
by rebel groups in 1990. Rebel groups struggled for control of the country for the next six years, until the leader
of the National Patriotic Front of Liberia, Charles Taylor, was elected President. In exchange for weapons from
the RUF, he has been funneling diamonds from Sierra Leone through Liberia.
In the 1950s and 1960s, three rebel groups - Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA),
National Liberation Front of Angola (FNLA) and National Union for the Total Independence of Angola
(UNITA) - formed in Angola aimed at expelling Portugal and its influence from the country. The three groups
worked together, until independence in 1971, after which they turned on each other. The U.S. and the U.S.S.R.
MSUMUN XVII
13
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
funneled money into the groups as an extension of the Cold War. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Sovietbacked MPLA and U.S.-backed UNITA turned to oil and diamonds for their funds, respectively. Led by Jonas
Savimbi, UNITA became one of the largest diamond-smuggling operations in history, using the profits to buy
arms, which supported their conflict efforts. In 1992, Angola held its first presidential elections and they were
won by the leader of the MPLA. Since then, Savimbi has periodically engaged the Angolan Armed Forces in
violent conflict.
In 1997, a civil war in the Democratic Republic of Congo (then known as Zaire) was fueled by the sale
of diamonds between rebel groups. Indirect links between political violence and the illicit diamond trade have
been made in the Central African Republic.
International Response to Conflict Diamonds
In 1993, the UN Security Council imposed an arms embargo against UNITA that was relatively
unsuccessful. Controls were tightened in 2000 and since then, UNITA's sale of diamonds has decreased,
although this can arguably be attributed more to UNITA's loss of control of its mining sites than UN sanctions.
In 1999, the Lusaka Agreements were reached between the countries of Angola, the Democratic Republic of
Congo, Namibia, Rwanda, Uganda and Zimbabwe, aiming to bring an end to the hostilities in the DRC.
In March of 2000, the World Bank released a report on the trade of conflict diamonds. Among its
findings, the World Bank reported a correlation between small-scale diamond mining and HIV/AIDS, due to the
high availability of illicit drugs and sex-workers. Living conditions in these areas are often poor and community
hygiene standards generally very low. Public safety is almost nonexistent, because rebel organizations control
local governments. It was also found that impoverished diamond diggers are common recruits for rebel
organizations, either as diggers or as members of their fighting ranks.
In July of 2000, the World Diamond Congress established the World Diamond Council (WDC) with the
goal of combating illegal diamond trading in Africa. Just recently, in December of 2001, the UN General
Assembly unanimously approved a commitment to the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS), a
MSUMUN XVII
14
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
"joint [government], industry and civil society initiative to stem the flow of conflict diamonds". The KPCS
imposes extensive requirements on its members to ensure that shipments of rough diamonds are truly conflict
free and to prevent conflict diamonds from entering legitimate trade. Under the KPCS, participating states must
meet minimum requirements of import, export and internal controls – for example, every shipment of rough
diamonds across international borders must be in a tamper-resistant container and be accompanied by a
government validated Kimberley Process Certificate that is uniquely numbered, resistant to forgery and
describes the contents of each shipment fully. It is too early to determine the effects, if any, of the KPCS.
In that same year, the UN banned exports of rough diamonds from Sierra Leone in an attempt to prevent
rebels from using them to finance weapons. In 2001, it placed an embargo on the sale of guns-for-diamonds as a
result of the RUF and NPFL's actions in Liberia.
Questions to Consider
1. How can your country monitor the diamond trade?
2. How can your country assist in efforts to ensure the diamond trade is conflict free?
3. What can the United Nations do to ensure the diamond trade is conflict free?
4. How can the United Nations assist in conflict zones?
5. What should the United Nations’ role be in this conflict?
Things to Include in a Resolution
● Role of NGOs in combating blood diamonds
● Methods to combat the illicit diamond trade
● Analysis of prior UN policies and their effectiveness
● Enforcement policies for nations directly affected by the trade of illegal diamonds
● Ways that inhibit the use of diamonds in conflict while not curbing the development of the legal
diamond trade in developing states
MSUMUN XVII
15
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
Works Cited
Anyu Ndumbe, J., and Babalola Cole. "The Illicit Diamond Trade, Civil Conflicts, and Terrorism in Africa."
Project MUSE. Johns Hopkins University, Apr.-May 2005. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
Cook, Nicolas. "Diamonds and Conflict: Background, Policy, and Legislation." CRS Report for Congress, 16
July 2003. Web.
"De Beers Group." De Beers Group. N.p., 2016. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
"Diamond Prospecting and Mining." Queenborough Community College, n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
"Diamondfacts.org - Home Page." Diamondfacts.org. N.p., 2016. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
Farah, Douglas. "Al Qaeda Cash Tied to Diamond Trade." Global Policy Forum, 2 Nov. 2001. Web. 02 Dec.
2016.
Goreux, Louis. "Conflict Diamonds." Governance Ecosystems (n.d.): n. pag. Africa Region Working Papers
Series. Working Paper Series, Mar. 2001. Web. 2 Dec. 2016.
Johnson, Eric. "Blood Diamonds: The Conflict in Sierra Leone." Standford.Edu. Stanford University, 6 Dec.
2002. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
"Lusaka Agreement." United Nations Peacemaker. United Nations, 23 July 1999. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
"The Truth About Diamonds." Global Witness, Nov. 2006. Web. 2 Dec. 2016.
World Diamond Council. World Diamond Council - Home. World Diamond Council, 2016. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
MSUMUN XVII
16
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
Topic 3: The Risk of Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East
Introduction
Nuclear Proliferation is defined as the spread of nuclear weapons and weapon-applicable nuclear
technology and information to nations not officially considered Nuclear Weapon States, by the Treaty on the
Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons, also known as the NPT. As of recently, the NPT recognizes eights states
as Nuclear Weapon States including, in order of the number of nuclear weapons they own, the United States of
America (USA), the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom (UK), France, China, Israel, India, and Pakistan,
with a combined estimated total of 31,448 nuclear weapons owned between them. The most obvious danger of
these weapons is that, should they be used, they have enough destructive power to destroy the planet multiple
times over.
Although some of the countries that have a large stockpile of nuclear weapons, including the USA,
Russia, and the UK, have all been making an effort to decrease the number they have, Israel, India, and Pakistan
have only been increasing their inventories. When considering this with the increasing instability in the Middle
East, the presence of nuclear weapons in the area creates a large problem in the future for the citizens of this
planet. That is why the United Nations has taken an active stance for nuclear nonproliferation and the
disarmament of nuclear weapons.
Background
The Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)
One of the longest standing and most important international agreements in preventing the spread of
nuclear weapons and weapons technology is the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons, or NPT.
The NPT also stands as the only binding commitment between the Nuclear Weapon States to disarm their
nuclear weapons. The NPT was developed in 1968, as a way to promote peaceful cooperation in the
MSUMUN XVII
17
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
advancement of peaceful uses of nuclear energy and
disarmament of nuclear weapons. The treaty was
then signed into effect in 1970 by over 190 different
countries and later reinstated indefinitely on May
11, 1995.
However, currently three UN member states
that have either declared to have nuclear weapons or
Figure 4
are thought to have nuclear weapons have not
accepted the terms of the treaty: Israel, Pakistan,
and India. Not only does this pose a problem with their refusal to cooperate in the treaty, but each of these
countries have decided not to release accurate information on the sizes of their nuclear programs, leaving much
of the information about them mere estimation. One of the main reasons for this is perhaps the fact that a key
point of the NPT is preventing the signatories that did not yet have any nuclear weapons from creating nuclear
weapons or developing the technology to create nuclear weapons, and all three of these states stockpiling
nuclear weapons right before or while the NPT was signed into effect.
The Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Within the Middle East-Israel, Pakistan, and Iran
The presence of nuclear weapons within the Middle East first began in Israel between the 1960s and
1980s. The state’s development of nuclear weapons was mostly caused by the hostile relationship it has with its
Arab neighbors, along with the fact that Pakistan also decided not to sign the NPT, and that countries like Iran
and Libya have shown intentions to develop nuclear weapons. This left Israel with the idea that the policies of
the NPT would not prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the Middle East, causing them to develop
their own nuclear weapons secretively. Although Israel has been consistently ambiguous with their nuclear
program, the first explicit news of nuclear weapons within the country was in 1986 when Mordechai Vanunu,
an Israeli scientist, said that Israel had stockpiled around 200 weapons, some of which were nuclear weapons.
MSUMUN XVII
18
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
Since then Israel has continued its policy of being ambiguous on the state of their nuclear stockpile, by neither
refusing nor denying the existence of it.
The only other country within the Middle East that has been known to develop nuclear weapons so far is
Pakistan. Pakistan’s development of nuclear weapons can be seen as a direct reaction to India’s development of
nuclear weapons within the late 1960s. After India performed public tests of 15 kilotons of nuclear weapons in
1974, the Pakistani Prime Minister declared his intention to develop nuclear weapons with the top scientists
within the country. Pakistan also proposed multiple joint agreements to decrease the proliferation of nuclear
weapons during the 1970s, but at the beginning of the 1980s there were multiple reports of Pakistan receiving
technology and atomic bomb designs from China. Reports of Pakistan furthering their nuclear capabilities
continued, and in 1998 Pakistan successfully detonated five nuclear devices. Since then, both Pakistan and India
have been increasing their stockpile of nuclear weapons.
Iran is also worth mentioning when considering nuclear weapons within the Middle East. Despite being
a signatory state of the NPT and the state’s nuclear program being in its infancy, there is still concern from UN
countries, specifically the United States. The country’s main cause for concern is Iran obtaining the necessary
materials and information for nuclear weapons from Russia. Currently, Iran has already been granted a nuclear
reactor in the province of Bushehr from Russia, and the information gathered from that can lead to future
nuclear weapons. Iran’s desire for nuclear capabilities may include the desire for nuclear weapons, which
opposes the UN’s desire for nonproliferation.
Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones
The establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones is another one of the ways nations are committing to
nuclear nonproliferation. Beginning in 1959 with the Antarctic Treaty, multiple States have already committed
to being completely free of nuclear weapons. However, the lack of a nuclear-weapons-free zones within the
Middle East presents a potential risk to the stability within the region.
MSUMUN XVII
19
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
The current importance of establishing a nuclear-weapons-free zone within the Middle East is
highlighted by the instability of the region. The deeply rooted political tensions within the region makes it
difficult to prevent military conflict between the States of the region, which could lead to nuclear weapons.
Creating nuclear-weapons-free zones could prove to be a good forward step towards peace and stability within
the region, however there are many obstacles that lie in the way of that.
The idea of a nuclearweapons-free zone was first
introduced to the United Nations
General Assembly by Iran and Egypt
in 1974, but Israel abstained on
every annual vote on the idea until
1980. After that every State in the
region agreed on creating a nuclearweapons-free zone, yet the actual
Figure 5
implementation of this was made impossible by the refusal of the Arab states to end their state of war with
Israel and Israel’s urging for negotiations face-to-face. The issue was pressed further in 1991 during the Middle
East Peace Conference in Madrid, which lead to the creation of multiple groups to provide a way for the
countries to negotiate, but the absence of Iran, Libya, Iraq, and Syria limited the ability of these groups to make
any progress. As it stands currently, every State within the Middle East has agreed that creating a nuclearweapons-free zone would be beneficial, and yet this has yet to be accomplished.
Questions to Consider
1. How should the Middle East develop a nuclear-weapons-free zone?
a. How expansive and where should this zone be?
b. What should be done to allow the States within the Middle East to agree on the terms?
MSUMUN XVII
20
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
2. How should the nuclear de-proliferation of the Middle East be accomplished?
a. How should future development of nuclear weapons be prevented?
b. How should the current Nuclear States within the Middle East go about disarmament?
c. How will the future spread of nuclear technology within the Middle East be prevented?
3. How can the non-signatories of the NPT be convinced to sign the treaty?
What to Include in a Resolution
● Answers to the questions above.
● Methods to stop and prevent the Nuclear Proliferation within the Middle East.
● Strategies to prevent the use of nuclear weapons within the Middle East.
● Specific measures for the nuclear states within the Middle East.
Works Cited
Carus, Seth, and Michael Eisenstadt. "Iran's Nuclear Weapons Program: Status and Implications." The
Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 8 Mar. 2000. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
First Committee. "Multilateral Disarmament Setbacks, Middle East Nuclear Proliferation, Nuclear Waste
Transport In Caribbean Among Issues Raised In First Committee Debate." United Nations. United
Nations, 7 Oct. 2002. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
First Committee. "Risk of Unauthorized Nuclear-Weapon Use, Middle East Security Among Issues Addressed
In First Committee's General Debate." United Nations. United Nations, 16 Oct. 2001. Web. 02 Dec.
2016.
"Iran: Nuclear Suspicion Grows." Wisconson Project on Nuclear Arms Report, Sept. 1995. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
Korb, Lawrence. "The Quiet Bomb." Books. New York Times, 1 Nov. 1998. Web. 2 Dec. 2016.
Maron, Ran. "Israel's Position on Non-Proliferation." The Leonard Davis Institute for International Relations
(1986): n. pag. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Web. 2 Dec. 2016.
MSUMUN XVII
21
Michigan State Model United Nations | Session XVII
McDowell, Steven R. "IS SAUDI ARABIA A NUCLEAR THREAT?" Diss. Naval Post-Graduate School,
2003. Print.
Norris, Robert, and Hans Kristensen. "Global Nuclear Weapons Inventories, 1945–2010." Sage Journals.
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 2010. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
Nuclear Posture Review Report. Ft. Belvoir: Defense Technical Information Center, 2010. Http://imionline.de/download/Nuclear_Posture_Review.pdf, 8 Jan. 2002. Web. 2 Dec. 2016.
"Nuclear Proliferation." Brooklyn College. Brooklyn College, n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
"Nuclear Proliferation Law & Legal Definition." US Legal, 2016. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
"Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones." United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. United Nations, n.d. Web. 02
Dec. 2016.
"Pakistan Special Weapons - A Chronology." Federation of American Scientists, 3 June 1998. Web. 02 Dec.
2016.
Sinha, Shreeya, and Susan Campbell Beachy. "Timeline on Iran’s Nuclear Program." The New York Times. The
New York Times, 19 Nov. 2014. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
Steinberg, Gerald. "Peace Security and Deterrence in the Middle East: The Obstacles To a Nuclear Weapons
Free Zone." Professor Gerald Steinberg. Bar-Ilan University, 28 Nov. 1996. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
"Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons." International Atomic Energy Agency. International
Atomic Energy Agency, 22 Apr. 1970. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
"Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT)." United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs.
United Nations, n.d. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
United Nations General Assembly. "56/24. General and Complete Disarmament." United Nations. United
Nations, 10 Jan. 2002. Web. 02 Dec. 2016.
MSUMUN XVII
22