Nuclear technology for everybody and nuclear weapons for none

Foto: Daniel Martinez

Being session 0, the conference was scheduled to be quiet but as the debate progressed this would not be as expected,the different delegates of the countries positioned themselves between accepting armament or renouncing it to achieve peace.
​
Among the main topics to be discussed are the Regulation of the use of autonomous lethal weapons and their compatibility with International Humanitarian Law, and Challenges towards nuclear disarmament: NTP and the Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty.

The debate would begin by choosing the topic to be discussed where the US just as the UK intended it to be the first aspect already mentioned, while countries such as Pakistan or Syria reacted quickly to these intentions, refering to being an easy subject to avoid by the US.

After the vote, it was decided to discuss the second topic; Afghanistan opened the debate by remembering that she has no weapons against countries with certain power in the world such as the US, China ...(only 9 in entire world). By allusions US justify the presence of nuclear weapons with the idea that without it, insecurities are promoted by upholding what was said by trump two weeks ago about the nuclear capabilities of the country supported by China.

Countries such as Japan, Brazil, India support the idea of not participating in the promotion of nuclear weapons because they, their enviroment and their neightbors countries are affected.

``All countries sames rouls´´ would be justified by Pakistan who wanted to eliminate those weapons that affect all those who do not possess them.

Countries such as Iraq would defend the action of carrying out ``several actions´´to end the excessive power of some in front others, as many countries made reference to the lack of weapons in many of them in front of the excessive power of the great powers.

Faced with the idea of ending armament in the world, Iran responded to the United States with a new concept as ``nuclear technology for everybody´´ puzzling the room as it was not a message that would inspire peace, and as the debate progressed it contradicted asking for dialogue and cooperation towards peace between countries.

The themes transparency and peace were manifested in the committee with the phrase ``nuclear free world´´entering into controversy with the episode between Russia and the USA. whose confrontations affect the rest of countries as Italy argued, also highlights the conflict between USA and Iran where the latter was grateful to acknowledge that they were answered by the USA for a kiss to the Iranian delegate.

In conclusion, the different opinions of the different countries showed the possible alliances and discrepancies between those who promote nuclear weapons against those who seek to stop it to achieve peace, although in this session we saw how the great powers predominated in front of small countries as well as numerous Delegates did not make clear their position.