Finally, here we are. Today it is the last day of URJCMUN on its fourth edition and we could see a change in the attitude of some of our delegates. We thought the last party in an Irish pub did not provoke this, but also. They have been so implicated in this model, in its issues, than they do not want to leave these rooms and come back to the reality.
As always, we have 38 delegates, but now they must debate another topic: “Disarmament and reintegration of child after a conflict”. China initiated the debate with a motion about measures to tackle the recruitment of child soldiers. Its principal ideas were preventing the use chemical weapons in wars, facilitating the reintegration into their families and the scholar system. To sum up, as a qualified country, they offered their help.
States, such as France and Russia, are especially committed. For example, the French Republic gave two million euros the last year like Africa and improved a programme including humanitarian and financial assistance. Russia, on the other hand, believed that education is the key. Most of the soldiers are volunteers because they thought their situation could be better if the join the war.
Israel, with its constant attacks, said: “We must work with the agencies in order they were seemed as efficient, transparent and unbiased. That is why they thought the UN is biased against Israel. The
Human Right Watch is concerned about the situation, which is unsustainable. There are too many children. Although they know they are working, it is necessary effort and constancy.
The delegation of Mexico said in order to centre the debate the following statement: “A child associated with an armed force or armed group refers to any person below 18 years of age who is, or who has been, recruited or used by an armed force or armed group in any capacity, including but not limited to children, boys and girls, used as fighters, cooks, porters, spies or for sexual purposes.” In general, many countries have the similar point of view about this topic.
The delegation of Saudi Arabia in order to prevent volunteer children suggested the application of a better education and investments in this field, the immigration of some of these children as a way to get better education and the obtaining of medical personal, such as psychologists.
Mali accused directly the Russian Federation. In its country, there is not a lack of education. All the children under 15 years go to school. The main problem is rebel and terrorist groups. Iran and Nigeria defended a new treaty is not enough to cut down the issue. It is compulsory to fight terrorist groups and impose sanctions for those countries, which do not defend children in their areas.
In other terms, Israel attacked the Human Right Watch. They thought this agency and others are biased and they are not working.
Recreating a famous episode from “The Simpsons”, delegations such as the United States and Russia said: “Children are the future”. However, they defended different points of view. Russia was astonished because of the attitude of the United States because they did not ratify the Convention on the Rights of Children. China asked directly to some countries (Afghanistan, Rwanda) what did they need in order to improve their situation.
Lebanon stated clearly the lack of social recourses increases the possibility of entering in a war. If war ends, soldier children will end too. Congo explained China that they needed equipment, supplies, professionals and financial assistance.
Returning to the General speaker list, Israel accused Palestine of using children to obtain their goals. They begged the rest of the states to join them and stop the biased UN.
Japan introduced a motion about the recruitment of soldier children by terrorist groups. They stood up for more money from UNICEF, like China, including the World Bank. China believed in reinforcing the strength of each nation as a way to get an opportunity to cut down the issue. For this mission, these countries will be given all kind of resources, so they could take care of children.
Mali was against cutting the relations with the countries, which are around their borders. For example, they would die of hunger if they do not receive food from Argelia. Westerns countries supported guns in order to preserve the democracy in some African countries. Japan forced the countries to focus on the topic. Nobody wanted to see children harmed and all the delegations clapped.
After the coffee break, the Russian Federation ask for thirty seconds of silence. After that, the delegations of Russia, United Kingdom, Vietnam, Israel, Syria, Turkey and Algeria must dance the song “International Love” because of being late this morning.
China and France raised a motion to debate the main points of their working paper. In its preamble, they included previous resolutions and their support for the current situation. Japan and Australia offered as signatures because of the objective of the resolution: stopping armed conflicts. Israel wanted to include a clause just to say that agencies, such as UN, must be truly impartial and transparent. South Africa, Egypt and Mali talked about economic sanctions for those countries which take benefits from war, look for medical personal to avoid physiological problems and the implementation of the high level of studies.
At the end, France introduced a motion to raise their draft resolution and read it. With 31 votes in favour and 2 against, the resolution was approved.
As a routine, the chair and co-chair awarded the delegates with some categories. Both “Miss DISEC” and “Most likely to become a dictator” was the delegation of Russia; both “Mister DISEC” and “Best dressed” was the French Republic; Both “Funniest delegation” and “Best Christian Grey” was the delegation of Israel; “Most likely to end under a bridge” was the delegation of North Korea; “Ghost delegation” was Ukraine; “Delegation coming to flirt” was Iran; and, meanwhile the gossip box was read, the table considered that Japan was “The fastest delegation”.
As a tradition too, the Secretariat gave some carnations and we discovered that the Russian Federation and Israel maintain closed relations and Cuba hoards all this flowers.
The Disarmament and International Security Committee achieved two resolutions in just two days, but the most important point was the friendships they gained along these four days. Many of them were old friends, but everyday you can learn something from people you know better.
We have started the third day of our committee and, although we have another day until we finish this URJCMUN 2016, we are assuming that all sweet moments have a happy end. Of course, we are talking about the global village. Some of our dear delegates had long faces and they seemed that they needed a bed urgently. However, the Russian Federation might need a bottle of water because of their presentation at the beginning of the morning: “We are present, hangover and voting”.
Its enemy on this committee, the French Republic, admitted that its federation did not get drink, meanwhile others could not resist the powerful effect of the alcohol (maybe Russian alcohol). In different terms, Mali complained about wasting food in these events.
After the ordinary roll-call, Spain made a great point, as a way to support the France’s idea of the previous day. All the countries involved must reinforce NPT because it has been demonstrated that it is the main tool to stop the nuclear facilities and have an unique opportunity to get the peace around the world. Nine countries had nuclear weapons, plus the ones that have the capability to manufacture them. Bear in mind this situation, which creates insecurity, this state advocated for a Western alliance.
Furthermore, Russia presented today its working paper. Their sponsors were, apart of them, Islamic Republic of Iran, People’s Republic of China and Republic of India; their signatories was composed by Arab Republic of Egypt, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Lebanese Republic, Republic of Iraq, Republic of Rwanda, Republic of Turkey and Syrian Arab Republic.
Norway presented another proposal of working paper too. They were a co-sponsor, next to Australia, Spain and Italy, but the sponsors were France, United Kingdom and Japan. China tried to introduce a motion in order to present its working paper but they could not do so because the chairs did not revise their draft, so it is not applicable.
India proposed an unmoderated caucus to debate the two main draft resolutions. The delegations of Russia and China thanked to India have had also get North Korea’s help. On the other hand, we have got the NATO powers that are trying to stick together, just as Professor Garrido explained them the first day. So, the main objective of both resolutions is to reinforce the NPT.
Libya supported this last position (French and NATO) because they considered they could not join a working paper from countries such as Russia and China since the current problems with the war they lived. In words of Gandhi: “Be the change that you wish to see in the world”.
People’s Republic of China did not stay quiet. In its opinion, France had no plan action in their resolution, whereas they always were willing to aid economical, military and humanitarian to all the regions that needed help. The tension is clear, especially for vital words like “resolution” and “working paper”, because they are not the same.
For Russia, there is more than NATO power and it can be widely seen in their resolution. They had more countries from Asia, Africa and Europe. However, they proposed to join both working papers in order to find common points of action. France replied saying that it was not a NATO resolution when there are other countries, such as Japan, which are guarantying transparency. As Israel said, they supported France, the United Kingdom and Japan because the NPT has proven to be useless.
Although the United States must be an important piece of the play (it is true they support France in their resolution), they did not reply a direct accusation from Syria, which explained that they were not supporting the NATO draft because it was against their leader and it was supporting the war that they are suffering.
Finally, France proposed a motion to introduce its draft resolution. China, as we said before, tried to introduce another one for some reasons: North Korea did not defend their position because they have accepted the reviewers’ entry and, as they have changed the last quote, it has to be checked by the chair all over again. By the way, the chair did not admit it and the motion of France passed.
This country explained their draft resolution all along with the United Kingdom and Japan. In words of them: “Thank all the people who vote to read it, it does not mean that they agree but they are to discuss and read it and that is the spirit”.
Meanwhile they read the draft resolution, Brazil talked about new amendments. They wanted a bank from UN in order to control countries which have nuclear weapons and they are nor in the NPT but they support it. The main objective will be the disarmament.
Some attacks came from China and Russia. They thought the draft was based on transparency as their only argument and about the fact that they do not have the support of North Korea, for example. United Kingdom does not trust in China and Russia after the incident that took place two weeks ago with different tests. Moreover, India attacked Russia: “Too much literature, little acts”.
Countries such as Libya and Congo supported the resolution in every sense. They thought is a chance to develop in democracy. However, Russia said that France’s resolution is nothing new and they only wanted to keep Israel happy. Lebanon spoke about they needed to focus in the action in the Middle East; that is why they are asking for the creation of this zone.
After the lobby, China proposed a motion in order to explain their draft. Its clause 7 is not approved and they had to change it. The main difference between both drafts is that they also focus on problems of the international environment. The Russian Federation told a story to defend their working paper: few years ago, nobody believed in the United States and the Soviet Union in order to leave their weapons and today that is a fact.
Libya asked India and Pakistan how Russia is going to help them to get democracy when they are not. That is why the delegation of Russia felt offended by this comment. On the other side of the coin, the United States thought that disarmament could not be achieved in one day; it is impossible until terrorism disappear.
After lots of points of order between Russia and France, the resolution of France was voted first and it passed because of just one vote. With the support expressed by United Kingdom, Japan and the signatures: “We are very much looking forward to an even broader consensus while discussing tomorrow's topic - the situation of children under conflicts and their reintegration to society - and to negotiate to address and effectively uphold the rights of the child”.
Our committee (including delegates, chair and co-chair) were left wanting some more in the previous session, so the table was excited about how to punish to delegates that were late.
India, Iraq, Israel, South Korea and the United States of America had to read parts of Fifty Shades of Greys”, putting all their passion in the lecture.
The co-chair started the session with a phrase by Ban Ki-moon: “Some might complain that nuclear disarmament is little more than a dream. But that ignores the very tangible benefits disarmament would bring for all humankind. Its success would strengthen international peace and security. It would free up vast and much-needed resources for social and economic development. It would advance the rule of law”.
Today we have had 38 countries. Delegations such as China, the Russian Federation, United Kingdom and France are political and economical steady and that is why they were able to help and defend other countries. Furthermore, the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya didn’t believe in the Non-Proliferation Treaty. It considered it as an obsoleted promise.
In other terms, the Russian Federation took into action a motion about the security threat caused by terrorist groups with consequences, with 21 votes in favour. In accordance to this state, the nuclear terrorism threated the security life of the world. China believed that the main problem is transferring nuclear materials and it is necessary to control it. The deal with Iran (in words of Israel) was that this state has supported terrorists groups, such as Hamas.
Iran took the opportunity to attack Israel. They have never supported terrorist groups and they have proved they did not have nuclear weapons. But Israel replied that Hezbolla and Hamas are upholding them. China, as a mediator, reaffirmed that all the countries had a common enemy: all the terrorist groups.
The Russian Federation manifested that it is necessary to secure a specific area, the Middle East, with the support of the Kingdom of Spain. Spain itself, France and Syria confirmed this state: cooperation and solutions are the way to finish the transfer of nuclear weapons. The delegate of France, referring to the last terrorist attack in Paris, said: “We have to work because can be the next one”. Mali finished the motion supporting a free zone in the Middle East. Al-Qaeda and Daesh are presents in the North Western of Africa, where there are lots of mines of uranium.
China proposed an extension of the previous topic. In its opinion, one solution to solve the problem might be a military intervention. Meanwhile, Israel defended that “Nobody knows the fear better than Israel” and they are begging help to European Union in order to join and help them. However, many countries, such as Palestine and Syria, commented that the Israel’s position is not clear: it is the unique state that do not want to sign a treaty to create a free zone in the Middle East.
France opened the floor again. India created a motion about the creation of a free nuclear area and it passed. The United States of America, although this nation should talk more in this topic since Israel is the apple of its eyes, they said they are not dreamers. The disarmament will finish when the terrorism finishes and the NPT is the key.
China demanded solutions from the countries affected by terrorism. In response to this, Syria said that they couldn’t do it alone and that is why they ask for help and dialogue. On the other hand, Libya carried out the weapons and they defended it as an advice to get a solution. Mali could not be as positive as Libya: it could be the first step, but they need more.
Rwanda proposed a motion about widening of NPT. France supported it, next to Norway. NPT needed an implement and measures to reinforce the credibility and ensure the global security. Another position came from India. They are not in the NPT but they earned the trust of some countries, such as China, France and the United States.
Brazil continued discussing about the NPT or a new treaty. France assumed that there are more things that can be done, but always within NPT. Both nuclear and non-nuclear countries must work together, a position reaffirmed by Lebanon. United States thought that another treaty would be a waste of time and resources. Finally, Iran considered that a violation does not mean the treaty is useless since in their case, it was very effective.
Cuba, on the other side of the coin, said that it is time to find a new solution. Rwanda, supporting Cuba, mentioned the article 6 of the NPT, because they thought is the worst part of the treaty: “nuclear-armed states compromise in good faith to initiate negotiations for the reduction and liquidation of their nuclear arsenals”. Pakistan postponed the debate.
During the lobby, we had fourth positions: one composed by countries of the Middle East, with the influence of China, India, Russia, in order to maintain the NPT. If they did not sign the NPT, everything will be OK if countries such as China or Russia evaluate them. Probably this alliance might be reinforce by North Korea since they had compromised not to manufacture nuclear weapons, being revised by the Atomic Energy Agency (AIEA), being eliminated some sanctions and avoid the presence of the United States of America and the Republic of Korea (South Korea).
The nonaligned countries (Cuba, Venezuela, Brazil, Mexico, Pakistan and Vietnam) wanted to create an effective multilateral resolution, but there are few countries in order to pass a motion (they need the thirty per cent). The other two sides are the France’s group (including Japan, Australia, United States of America, United Kingdom), that promote the NPT, and, on the other side, the African countries (Libya, South Africa).
The French Republic accompanied the last session of the day. Russia, talking about its working paper, urged the support of other countries. A motion is promoted by France to discuss the results of the lobby. China emphasized that North Korea “is working really hard” in order to achieve a stable situation and Russia supported the idea of some countries must have the opportunity to “re-think and change for the better”. As we can see, the tension among China, France and Russia is palpable.
Although this situation could be ideal, Norway believed that it is not the first time that North Korea cheated in a treaty. Moreover, Japan stated that Pakistan did not sign the treaty because India did not do it too. The icing on the cake was possible thanks to Brazil. They said that they cannot understand why a country like China would leave the NPT, but China told that they wanted to modify it. Finally, the last part of the session is dedicated to a general consultation promoted by Russia in order to find some common points among all the working papers.
After Iran suspended the debate, the Committee of Disarmament and International Security received the visit of the Staff. They distributed carnations and motivated delegates to come to the social event: the Global Village.
We are on the campus of Móstoles, on the first day of URJCMUN 2016, on its fourth edition. After all the formal events, such as the delivery of the Participant’s Credentials, the Opening Ceremony and the General Conferences, the delegates were ready to start this new model. In our case, we will talk about DISEC: the Committee about Disarmament and International Security of URJCMUN.
The Committee Conference has started with Vicente Garrido, a teacher of the International Relations degree in Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, specialised in Security and Defence. He is part of the Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters of the General Secretary of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moom, since 2014 until 2017.
Our dear delegates must take into account, in the words of Garrido, that their own resolutions in this committee will have a considerable impact on the General Assembly. This is because their resolutions will be the basis for future measures.
Normally, in this committee, everybody should know that NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) states always vote together and that is a very sensitive issue. But they are not the only one. There is another example: the European Union states always vote together too, except Ireland, Austria, Malta and Cyprus. In fact, Austria, although it is not represented this year, it is a vital country for the reason that it proposes a new successor to the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty).
In other terms, when we talk about violations of NPT, one of the main topics of this year, we only refer to two cases: Iran and North Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea). The consequences about the sanctions to North Korea can be seen nowadays. There was not a fulfilment of the NPT when the Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances was signed. When the Russian Federation split up, this led to four new republics: Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Byelorussia. In case that the security of these three new republics was in danger, Russia will assume the security of them. But Russia should prove its own security first.
The problem with North Korea is that this state signed the NPT in 1895. When they signed it, they had an obligation: they will be evaluated by the rest of the United Nations States if they were manufacturing nuclear weapons, directly or indirectly. In case you want to produce nuclear materials, you need uranium or plutonium (specially Iraq, who has a reactor which separate uranium from plutonium). But if you are able to sign it, you are really willing to open your facilities or let robots look for radioactivity in the water and analyse it.
Garrido emphasized that all the delegates must bear in mind that the main problem was that they have to promote resolutions, but no more sanctions. They have to follow the Iran’s example. This country was agree to put into operation a plan of action with several points, which ended as an agreement comprehensive plan of action. The Committee eliminated partially the sanctions, especially in economic terms. After all, it was established that Iran would be continued reporting all his activities. Moreover, they have to prove in the next ten years that the will not develop nuclear weapons.
After all this long speech, the chair, Sofía Barahona, and the co-chair, Nieves Turégano, introduced themselves in a colloquial way. This edition is the first time for the majority of the delegates and it is a really strange committee because Germany is not participating. Russia opened the debate and the Roll-Call started.
On the one hand, Israel proposed the Violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty as the first topic to discuss about. To defend it, Israel said that it was ready to work with the rest of its partners because it was really important preventing humanity from nuclear weapons. On the other hand, France thought that that is a paralysed area and the children after a conflict need more attention, protection and reinforce the efforts to integrate into the community. 28 states were in favour with the topic A (Violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty), so this motion passed.
The General Speakers List started to increase its volume when the first delegates started to talk, such as the Russian Federation, Norway, Lebanon, Israel, Brazil, Venezuela and Iran. Some of the main states (United States of America, China, India) showed their disagreement with North Korea because they believed this country did not take it seriously this topic. Nevertheless, North Korea defended that its nuclear program was legal; its use is justified in case of self-defence.
The rest of countries finished the first day of this committee, in which we can announce that the words “tension” and “alliances” will be in our daily vocabulary.