-----
Dear Delegates,
It is my distinct pleasure to welcome you to the Disarmament and International Security Committee at Harvard World Model United Nations 2012. My name is Dominik Nieszporowski and I am absolutely thrilled to be you committee chair during the fantastic week that you will spend in Vancouver next year, debating and learning from people from diverse backgrounds and with different points of view. Originally from Warsaw, Poland, I have participated in Model United Nations since high school, both as a delegate and committee chair at several conferences throughout Europe, Asia, and North America. Even though my primary areas of interest focus on business and economics, I have always thoroughly enjoyed the opportunity to meet interesting people from all around the world that MUN offers. My other passions include international development and public service – I have been particularly involved with programs creating educational opportunities for children in Africa. Sports also play an important role in my life – being brought up as a staunch Chelsea London supporter, and having tried almost all major disciplines from rowing to fencing, I settled on regularly practicing tennis and swimming.
At Harvard, I am currently a senior in the glorious Kirkland House, concentrating in Applied Mathematics and Economics. On campus, I am mostly occupied serving as Secretary-General of Harvard National Model United Nations 2012, an annual college model UN conference held in Boston in February, and coordinating HNMUN’s expansion abroad in the form of our new international conference – HNMUN Latin America 2012 (to be held in Buenos Aires in January 2012).
This year at WorldMUN, DISEC will be debating two of the most important contemporary issues concerning international security – the militarization of the Arctic and the safeguarding of nuclear materials. As you embark on your research into these topics, I hope you will find them both interesting and thought-provoking. While these issues are extremely multi-dimensional and complex, I am sure you will appreciate the subtleties of these problems and that you will come excellently prepared to effectively contribute to discussion and resolution writing during the conference. Please feel free to e-mail me to ask any questions you might have or just to introduce yourself. I am certainly looking forward to an exciting debate and meeting many great people at WorldMUN 2012!
Sincerely,
Dominik Nieszporowski
Chair, DISEC
World Model United Nations 2012
disec@worldmun.org
-----
Topic Area A: Militarization of the Arctic
The Arctic region is one of the most politically contested areas in the modern world. As global warming makes it easier to explore the region’s potentially valuable natural resources - it is estimated that the Arctic could hold up to 25% of the world’s undiscovered oil and gas reserves - several major nations are lining up to claim their rights to this territory. The conflicts of interests between such world powers as the USA, Russia, Canada, Norway and Denmark exert a pressure on the UN to take an appropriate stance. As of now, the only effective international treaty that regulates territorial claims in this region is the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Upon its ratification, a country gains rights to a 200-mile economic zone beyond its land borders, which gives extraction and drilling rights. This Treaty has been signed by Russia, Canada, Norway and Denmark, but not by the United States, which together with the European Union officially regard the whole region as international waters.
Faced with Canada’s plans to build two military bases relatively close to the North Pole, Russian long-range strategic bombers frequently flying over the area (often shadowed by NATO aircraft), and all surrounding Arctic states expanding their patrols and sending expeditions to find evidence supporting their claims to this territory, the United Nations has to address the issue of military presence in the Arctic. What should be the status of the Arctic and its surrounding waters? Should any nations be allowed to station weapons and military personnel in the region? How should territorial claims be handled by the international community? How to prevent illegal trafficking of weapons as the Arctic waters become more easily navigable?
Topic Area B: Safeguarding Nuclear Materials
A 2004 report by Harvard University’s Project on Managing the Atom establishes that a nuclear attack would be among the most difficult types of attacks for terrorists to accomplish, but simultaneously states that a capable and well-organized terrorist group plausibly could make, deliver and detonate at least a crude nuclear bomb capable of incinerating the heart of any major city in the world. The same group, in its earlier report, estimated the effects of detonation of a 10-kiloton nuclear bomb at Grand Central Station in Manhattan on an average workday. In its “conservative” estimation, the group predicts over a half-million immediate victims, hundreds of thousands injured (burned, battered, irradiated), destruction of the entire lower Manhattan, direct costs of over $1 trillion, indirect costs several times that (from loss of value in the stock market to all the myriad changes in the lives of Americans that would follow such a catastrophe), and a worldwide panic and economic chaos if the terrorists claimed to be ready to detonate another bomb in another city. This prospect sounds like a screenplay of a poor apocalyptic science-fiction movie, but the risk is real.
The threat of nuclear terrorism has existed for several decades, but it seems to have significantly escalated in the most recent years. With more countries now having access to the nuclear technology, serious concerns are being raised regarding the level of security of nuclear arsenals and civil storage facilities. In addition to the risks constituted by state-sponsored terrorism, the increased determination of many fundamentalist groups in pursuing their political agenda and the new resources available at their disposal further exacerbate the threat to international security. In view of this escalating threat, it is critical that the United Nations First Committee presents a comprehensive resolution that would address all of the questions that arise. Does the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty fulfill its role in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons? What is the role of the various UN bodies in assisting the member states in safeguarding their nuclear arsenals and weapon-grade materials? In what capacity should nuclear technology be shared with the developing world to ensure its proper use? How to assist the member states in their efforts to prevent smuggling of nuclear materials through their borders?