FUTURE WE WANT

MODEL UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE

MARCH
8-11, 2018

DISARMAMENT AND
INTERNATIONAL SECURITY
COMMITTEE 20
Future We Want MUN
www.fwwmun-nyc.org

© 2018 FWWMUN 18
2 © 2018 FWWMUN
GENERAL ASSEMBLY: SOCHUM
INTRODUCTION

2017 was the 25th year since the Strategic Initiative Limited Talks (SALT 1). SALT 1 was one of the first
treaties that dealt with the issue of nuclear weapons. Since then many actions have been taken by the
international community to reduce, control and stem nuclear weapons. However, the recent actions
by the US, North Korea, and Iran have forced the international community to rethink their nuclear
treaties.
With this study guide, you will be provided with some basic information to start your research regarding
nuclear weapons. The study guide will also cover the current issues involving nuclear powers and
critical issues the world faces.

HISTORY OF THE TOPIC

“I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.” - J. Robert Oppenheimer1

These were the words spoken by the creator of the nuclear bomb after he saw the devastation it
rained. The words are true, more now than ever. With the number of nuclear weapons present today,
the world can be destroyed several times over. A single nuclear attack can destroy a major city like
New York or London in seconds2.
After World War II, nuclear weapons have never been used. During the Cold War, a race to acquire
military supremacy broke out, which included nuclear weapons broke out. By 1949, USSR successfully
tested a nuclear bomb. By 1950, both superpowers, USA and USSR had reached the point of “Mutually
Assured Destruction” (MAD)3. Both sides by then had acquired enough nuclear arsenal to destroy the
other country if they attacked. Each country had enough for a second retaliatory strike.
Since 1945, several countries started building their nuclear weapons, notably the UK, France, and
China. This caused more friction in the international community. The world came to the brink of a
nuclear war in 1962 due to the Cuban Missile Crisis. After the avoidance of nuclear war over Cuba,
tensions slowly started dissipating.

THE SALT TALKS

SALT I was the first of the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks signed by the United States and USSR to halt
the number of missile launchers from both sides, which included the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM)
and the Interim Agreement on the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms. Provisions of the treaty
included regulations of antiballistic missiles that could be used to destroy incoming intercontinental
ballistic missiles (ICBM’s) launched by other countries, and a provision that allowed for the increase in
SBMs as long as the same number of ICBMs were dismantled. SALT I highlighted the number of ABMs
allowed by each side, where both sides were only allowed two missile defense sites, one for the capital
and one for a missile launch site. SALT I allowed for allowing for stable US-Soviet relations4.
SALT II was the second talks between the United States and USSR. This treaty highlighted the decrease
in the manufacturing of nuclear weapons from both sides, which was a continuation of SALT 1. SALT
1 Temperton, James. “‘Now I Am Become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds’. The Story of Oppenheimer’s Infamous Quote.” WIRED, WIRED
UK, 9 Aug. 2017, www.wired.co.uk/article/manhattan-project-robert-oppenheimer.
2 Kirk, A. (2018). How many nukes are in the world and what could they destroy?. [online] The Telegraph. Available at: http://www.telegraph.
co.uk/news/0/many-nukes-world-could-destroy/ [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
3 bomb, S. (2018). Soviets explode atomic bomb - Aug 29, 1949 - HISTORY.com. [online] HISTORY.com. Available at: http://www.history.
com/this-day-in-history/soviets-explode-atomic-bomb [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
4 Arms Control Association. (2016) https://www.armscontrol.org/treaties-strategic-arms-limitation-talks-i [online]. [Accessed 1 Feb 2018.]

3 © 2018 FWWMUN
II included a specific limit on ICBMs and SBMs to 2,250 and a 1,320 Multiple Independently Targeted
Re-Entry Vehicles limit for both sides. However, SALT II was less successful as the U.S Senate did not
ratify the document at first. The year after, USA agreed to follow SALT II until its expiration but moved
to further arms reduction using the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START)5.

THE NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY

Another important issue when dealing with nuclear weapons is the prevention of it being moved
across the world. This would threaten international peace, security, and stability. This problem
was first tackled in June 1968 with the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In 1968 it was opened for
nations to sign. The primary use of this treaty was to promote international cooperation on restricted
nuclear research. This was created to promote medical research and a quest for cheaper and safer
energy. Today, it is regarded as a long-term treaty used to further the goal of eventual total nuclear
disarmament, consider as cooperation and legal precedent. The treaty is based on three pillars:
• Non-proliferation
• Disarmament
• Peaceful use of nuclear energy
NPT is the only legally binding treaty that all five nuclear-producing nations adhere to. 190 nations have
signed the NPT making it the most success treaty related to nuclear nonproliferation. The facilities are
governed by the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA).
India, Pakistan, Cuba, and Israel are the only states that are yet to sign the NPT. Although India and
Pakistan have not carried out any nuclear tests since 1998, they still are a reason for concern related
to international peace and security. The reason is that they are not legally bound in any way to limit
expansion in nuclear technology. A perfect example of the precedent status of this treaty resides in the
Security Council resolution 2231 of 2015; this resolution allowed the application of the Joint Com-
prehensive Plan of Action. This plan brought Iran to change its ways and to follow some NPT’s policies.
Iran in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions agreed to quit their development of nuclear
arsenals. This treaty is reviewed every five years to keep in mind the changes in the global landscape
and to make sure to adapt it to the growing common needs of the international community6.
As a compliment to the NPT, another major treaty towards nuclear control is the Comprehensive Test
Ban Treaty (CTBT), introduced by the General Assembly in 1996. The CTBT has been signed by 150
Member States. Its primary goal is the complete, unquestioning banning of all nuclear testing in the
atmosphere, underwater or below ground. Efforts toward this treaty have been negotiated since the
1960s. However, like the NPT, it has several major non-signers.
Although the NPT limits the possession of nuclear weapons to certain States, neither of these treaties
limit the number of nuclear weapons, nor have led to a de-escalation or disarmament.

5 Britannica. (2016) https://www.britannica.com/event/Strategic-Arms-Limitation-Talks [online]. [Accessed 1 Feb 2018.]

6 Nikkei Asian Review. (2018). UN disarmament chief says nuke treaty must preserve past gains- Nikkei Asian Review. [online] Available at:
https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/UN-disarmament-chief-says-nuke-treaty-must-preserve-past-gains [Accessed 1 Feb.
2018].

4 © 2018 FWWMUN
TREATY ON PROHIBITION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS

In 2017, after years of negotiations, a milestone was reached towards banning nuclear weapons; which
was also awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. The International Campaign to Abandon Nuclear Weapons
(ICAN) won this prize for being the driving force behind negotiations7.
The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is the first legally binding international agreement
to prohibit further development, construction, and test of nuclear weapons. The treaty aims towards
their total elimination. It was passed by the United Nations General Assembly on July 7th, 2017; with
the following voting count: 122 in favor, one voted against (The Kingdom of the Netherlands), and
one abstained (Singapore). 69 nations did not vote, among them all of the nuclear power States and
all NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) members except the Netherlands. At least 50 national
need to sign and ratify the treaty for it to come in full effect according to international law and Vienna
Conference on Law and Treaties8.
For those nations ratifying the treaty, it has the following implications: prohibition of the development,
testing, production, stockpiling, stationing, transfer, use, and the threat of use of nuclear weapons,
as well as assistance and encouragement to the prohibited activities. It provides a timeframe for
negotiations for verified and irreversible removal of nuclear weapons for nations who already possess
nuclear weapons.
However, to date, only four nations have ratified it: Guyana, Holy See, Thailand, and Mexico. The
enforcement of the treaty is on edge, any obligation (supported on the principle of the Pacta Sunt
Servanda) to any non-ratified country does not exist, and the principle of good faith is an obstacle for
fast ratification of the other 46 states needed.

NUCLEAR WEAPON FREE ZONES (NWFZ)

Even before the Treaty on Prohibition of Nuclear weapons was created, several nations voluntarily
decided to forfeit the creation of non-peaceful nuclear material. Currently, there are 5 major regions
of the world that classify as NWFZ. The authority to create a NWFZ comes from Article 53 of the UN
Charter. Article 53 recognizes regional arrangements and agencies play to protect international peace
and security. Not only does the UN talk indirectly about NWFZ but NPT also foresees it. 112 countries
fall under the NWFZ, and that covers most of the southern hemisphere. The following are the 5 NWFZ
along with the treaty names in which they became NWFZ9:

• The Latin America and Caribbean NWFZ (The Treaty of Tlatelolco)

• The South Pacific NWFZ (The Treaty of Rarotonga)
• The Southeast Asia NWFZ (The Treaty of Bangkok)
• The African NWFZ (The Treaty of Pelindaba)
• The Central Asia NWFZ Treaty (CANWFZ)ù

7 Un.org. (2018). Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons: Signature and Ratification – UNODA. [online] Available at: https://www.
un.org/disarmament/publications/more/treaty-on-the-prohibition-of-nuclear-weapons-signature-and-ratification/ [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
8 Un.org. (2018). United Nations Conference to Negotiate a Legally Binding Instrument to Prohibit Nuclear Weapons, Leading Towards their
Total Elimination. [online] Available at: https://www.un.org/disarmament/ptnw/ [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
9 Un.org. (2018). Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones – UNODA. [online] Available at: https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/nwfz/ [Ac-
cessed 1 Feb. 2018].

5 © 2018 FWWMUN
THE NEW NUCLEAR POWERS:

INDIA AND PAKISTAN

On May 11th, 1998, India carried out three underground nuclear tests in the state of Rajasthan10.
This brought the world to realise that nuclear nonproliferation was still an issue. India had, indeed,
carried out a “peaceful nuclear explosion” in 1974 and the world assumed that India was not active in
developing more nuclear devices11. Two days later, India carried out two more nuclear tests12.
Global tensions increased further when Pakistan carried out five nuclear tests just 2 weeks after the
Indian tests13. 2 days later, Pakistan carried out one more test . Pakistan has pursued the production of
nuclear devices since 1972, and it is rumored that the Chinese assisted with the production of these
devices.
The United States placed economic sanctions on both countries, in accordance with 1994 NPT after
the nuclear tests. Both nations agreed to momentarily stop testing new nuclear weapons.
The main reason for concern is due to India and Pakistan hostility towards each other. India and Pakistan
had been 3 active wars since 1947. Each side had carried out the development of advanced weapon
systems that included ballistic missiles. Many feared that a new war between these two nations could
turn into a nuclear war. Both these nations were not part of NPT, and therefore the provisions do not tie
them down. However, after this war, India and Pakistan established a “hotline” phone between them.

ISRAEL
Israel has not a party to the NPT, but it has signed to Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Israel is
considered a de facto nuclear weapon state even though it has not formally acknowledged that it has
nuclear weapons. Israel started its nuclear weapons production in the 1950s in response to the real
or perceived threat to their nation from their Arab or Persian neighbors. Its missile program started in
the 1960s with French assistance. Israel continues to have an extremely advanced nuclear and missile
capability.

NORTH KOREA
Although North Korea signed the NPT in 1985, it pulled out of the NPT in 200314. It still believed that
North Korea pursued an active nuclear program, which violated the treaty. The IAEA was not able
to carry out routine inspections until May 1992. It is widely assumed that North Korea has enough
plutonium for 1-2 nuclear weapons. In 1992, the US and North Korea reached a tentative agreement
regarding their nuclear program. North Korea would suspend all the nuclear programs in exchange for
heating oil and increased aid.
In 2005, the North Korean Foreign Ministry made an official statement that North Korea had
manufactured nuclear weapons. The North Koreans agreed to join into Six-Party Talks in Beijing in
2005. During the talks, the North Koreans agreed to abandon all nuclear production and return to
10 Burns, J. (2018). INDIA SETS 3 NUCLEAR BLASTS, DEFYING A WORLDWIDE BAN; TESTS BRING A SHARP OUTCRY. [online]
Nytimes.com. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/12/world/india-sets-3-nuclear-blasts-defying-a-worldwide-ban-tests-bring-a-sharp-
outcry.html [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
11 ibid.
12 WION. (2018). India’s second nuclear test: ‘Pokhran-II’ on 11th May, 1998. [online] Available at: http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/
indias-second-nuclear-test-pokhran-ii-on-11th-may-1998-15458 [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
13 News.bbc.co.uk. (2018). BBC ON THIS DAY | 28 | 1998: World fury at Pakistan’s nuclear tests. [online] Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/
onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/28/newsid_2495000/2495045.stm [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
14 Ipinst.org. (2018). Cite a Website - Cite This For Me. [online] Available at: https://www.ipinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/pdfs_kore-
achapt2.pdf [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].

6 © 2018 FWWMUN
IAEA and NPT safeguards15. The Six-Party talks were scheduled to meet again.
Additionally, US intelligence showed that Pakistan was providing North Korea materials for the establi-
shment of a highly-enriched uranium-production facility in 200216. The US informed North Korea that
the US was aware of the program. Initially, North Korea denied any such claims before accepting them.

CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS:

REARMAMENT
The current major conflicts; the South China Sea, Russia’s annexation in Crimea and wars in the
middle east are causing uncertainty about armed conflicts. Experts also see a lack of confidence in
international organizations and agencies and see that nations have started to fend for themselves.
Defense spendings have increased due to countries building up their national armies.

15 Kahn, J. (2018). North Korea Says It Will Abandon Nuclear Efforts. [online] Nytimes.com. Available at: http://www.nytimes.
com/2005/09/19/world/asia/north-korea-says-it-will-abandon-nuclear-efforts.html [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
16 (www.dw.com), D. (2018). Pakistan’s indirect role in North Korea’s nuclear program | Asia| An in-depth look at news from across
the continent | DW | 14.09.2017. [online] DW.COM. Available at: http://www.dw.com/en/pakistans-indirect-role-in-north-koreas-nuclear-pro-
gram/a-40507693 [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].

7 © 2018 FWWMUN
USA
“The United States of America must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until the
world comes to its senses regarding nukes” - President Donald J. Trump, 22nd December 201617.

Since the possession of President Trump on January 2017, the escalation of hostilities between the
United States of America and the Democratic Popular Republic of Korea have increased to levels that
remind of those during the 1962 “Cuban Missile Crisis.” In 2017 North Korea (DPRK) make a show
of their nuclear strength to the USA and the world, as part of what could be considered “hard state
diplomacy policy”; Kim Jong Un said: “The United States should know that the button for nuclear
weapons is on my table.” This was stated during the nationally televised new year’s speech, according
to a provisional translation by The Associated Press. The entire US mainland, he said, “is within our
nuclear strike range.”18 In response to the statements of the North Korean Leader, President Trump
tweeted: “North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un just stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all
times.” Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a
Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!”19. During
the annual State of the Union address, President Trump called for a Nuclear Arsenal “so strong and
powerful will deter any act of aggression.”20 The quest for an “insurance” in case of a real confrontation
between the USA and the DPRK has caused de-stability of international peace and security. The
“doomsday clock” (maintained by the board of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientist from the Chicago
University) is nearly 2 minutes away from a “Nuclear Catastrophe” midnight.

RUSSIA
The Soviet Union and the US decreased their arms race only after both nations signed the ABM treaty,
which was built due to “Mutually Assured Destruction.” However, in 2002, President Bush pulled out
of the treaty, shaking the foundation on which both nations built their strategic arms control. President
Bush pulled out of the treaty to protect itself against rogue or failed states such Iraq, Iran and North
Korea. President Obama carried on this trend, expanding US nuclear arsenal in the US and Europe.
This increase in arms brought around the same Cold War concerns. It’s advanced its ABM capabilities
to the point where it could nuclear blackmail Russia to which Russia would not able to respond.
These concerns came to play when President Putin informed the public about the recent developments
in Russia’s arsenal.
“We need to strengthen the military potential of [Russia’s] strategic nuclear forces,” Putin said, “especially with
missile complexes that can reliably penetrate any existing and prospective missile defence systems.”21
During this statement another piece of information came out, which takes the arms race up a notch.
Russia developed a new type of weapon, RS-28, a hypersonic missile which travels 15 times faster than
light or sound and could evade any type of missile detection program. The US does not have and does
not have the capability to produce one these for decades to come.22
17 Fisher, M. (2018). Trump’s Nuclear Weapons Tweet, Translated and Explained. [online] Nytimes.com. Available at: https://www.nytimes.
com/interactive/2016/12/22/world/americas/trump-nuclear-tweet.html [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
18 NPR.org. (2018). Kim Jong Un Wants The U.S. To Know That His Nuclear Arsenal Is Complete. [online] Available at: https://www.npr.org/
sections/thetwo-way/2017/12/31/574906948/kim-jong-un-wants-the-u-s-to-know-that-his-nuclear-arsenal-is-complete [Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].
19 Tackett, P. (2018). Trump Says His ‘Nuclear Button’ Is ‘Much Bigger’ Than North Korea’s. [online] Nytimes.com. Available at: https://www.
nytimes.com/2018/01/02/us/politics/trump-tweet-north-korea.html [Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].
20 Hayes, C. (2018). U.S. calls for new nuclear weapons as Russia develops nuclear-armed torpedo. [online] USA TODAY. Available at: https://
www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/02/u-s-reverse-obama-decisions-catch-up-russia-china-rapidly-expanding-nuclear-capabilities-rever-
se-oba/302746002/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=amp&utm_campaign=speakable [Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].
21 AP News. (2018). Putin: Russia’s military is stronger than any potential foe. [online] Available at: https://apnews.com/8a1fbfc6599b-
4d5b92ff83cfdda444be [Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].
22 ibid.

8 © 2018 FWWMUN
NORTH KOREA
North Korea’s latest successful nuclear test was on September 3rd, 201723. The North Korean’s have
called this major success, a step closer to completely the national nuclear program24. In recent times,
Kim Jong Un has exchanged tense words with US President, with a scare of an attack on US province
of Guam.
North Korea recently opened for dialogue related to the Winter Olympics in South Korea, a first after
many decades.
Only recently, a report was published showing that the UN sanctions had been ignored and North
Korea continues to export in banned products such as coal. North Korea made over a million dollars
through illegal exporting of its good.25

OVERVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL ACTIONS

YEAR TREATY/ACTION PARTIES INVOLVED

Creation of the UN atomic
1946 UN Member States
energy commission
Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT)
1963 to limit testing of nuclear Till today 131 states
weapons
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Till today 191 states joined but India,
1968 to limit the spread of nuclear Israel, Pakistan and North Korea are not
weapons members
SALT I include the Anti-Ballistic
Missile Treaty and the Interim
1972 USA, Russia
Agreement on the Limitation of
Strategic Offensive Arms
Vladivostok Accord to limit
1974 delivery vehicles of nuclear USA, Russia
warheads
SALT II treaty to set upper
1979 USA, Russia
limits on their nuclear arsenals
Intermediate Nuclear Forces
1987 (INF) Treaty to eliminate an USA, Russia
entire class of nuclear weapons
Strategic Arms Reduction
Treaty (START) to limit
1991 USA, Russia
the number of carriers and
warheads

23 BBC News. (2018). The aftershocks of North Korea’s nuclear test. [online] Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42305161
[Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].
24 ibid
25 New York Post. (2018). UN experts: North Korea scoffs at sanctions while earning millions. [online] Available at: https://nypost.
com/2018/02/03/un-experts-north-korea-scoffs-at-sanctions-while-earning-millions/ [Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].

9 © 2018 FWWMUN
 Comprehensive Test Ban
Adopted by the UN GA, signed but not
Treaty (CTBT) banning all
ratified by: China, Egypt, Iran, Israel and
1996 nuclear explosions, for both
the United States; not signed by India,
civilian and military purposes,
North Korea and Pakistan
in all environments
START II limiting strategic
1998 USA, Russia
warheads to 3,500
New START treaty calling for
a fifty percent reduction of stra-
2010 tegic nuclear missile launchers USA, Russia
and a curtailment of deployed
nuclear warheads

Adopted by the UN GA, however all

Treaty on the Prohibition of NATO members (except Netherlands) and
2017
Nuclear Weapons nuclear powers did not vote, Ratified by 3
countries

QUESTIONS A RESOLUTION SHOULD ANSWER

Since the topic of limiting nuclear disarmament offers countless opportunities for the international
community to act upon, the resolution should not be directed towards one specific conflict e.g. North
Korea or Iran, but rather tackle the topic in general. Below you will find a few interesting questions to
make your mind up about.

• Which impact did the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons have 9 months after being
passed in the GA?
• What are the “birth defects” of the prohibition treaty?
• What is the impact of the new US leadership on nuclear disarmament?
• What is necessary to further reduce the global nuclear arsenal?
• How can a new arms race with conventional and/or nuclear weapon systems be prevented?
• What is today’s perception of the military strategy: nuclear deterrence?
• What does the changing role of deterrence imply in terms of numbers and types of weapons?
• What measures can be taken to create an environment of mutual trust, taking into consideration
the current developments?
• What is the link between lack of trust in international institutions to resolve international conflicts
and military spending?
• Is there a way of using modern Internet Communication Technology (ICT) to assist the solution
process?

10 © 2018 FWWMUN
REFERENCES
(www.dw.com), D. (2018). Pakistan’s indirect role in North Korea’s nuclear program | Asia| An in-depth
look at news from across the continent | DW | 14.09.2017. [online] DW.COM. Available at: http://
www.dw.com/en/pakistans-indirect-role-in-north-koreas-nuclear-program/a-40507693 [Accessed 1
Feb. 2018].
AP News. (2018). Putin: Russia’s military is stronger than any potential foe. [online] Available at:
https://apnews.com/8a1fbfc6599b4d5b92ff83cfdda444be [Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].
BBC News. (2018). The aftershocks of North Korea’s nuclear test. [online] Available at: http://www.
bbc.com/news/world-asia-42305161 [Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].
bomb, S. (2018). Soviets explode atomic bomb - Aug 29, 1949 - HISTORY.com. [online] HISTORY.com.
Available at: http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/soviets-explode-atomic-bomb [Accessed 1
Feb. 2018].
Burns, J. (2018). INDIA SETS 3 NUCLEAR BLASTS, DEFYING A WORLDWIDE BAN; TESTS BRING A
SHARP OUTCRY. [online] Nytimes.com. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/12/world/in-
dia-sets-3-nuclear-blasts-defying-a-worldwide-ban-tests-bring-a-sharp-outcry.html [Accessed 1 Feb.
2018].
Fisher, M. (2018). Trump’s Nuclear Weapons Tweet, Translated and Explained. [online] Nytimes.com.
Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/22/world/americas/trump-nuclear-twe-
et.html [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
Hayes, C. (2018). U.S. calls for new nuclear weapons as Russia develops nuclear-armed torpedo. [online]
USA TODAY. Available at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/02/u-s-re-
verse-obama-decisions-catch-up-russia-china-rapidly-expanding-nuclear-capabilities-reverse-o-
ba/302746002/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=amp&utm_campaign=speakable [Accessed 3
Feb. 2018].
Ipinst.org. (2018). Cite a Website - Cite This For Me. [online] Available at: https://www.ipinst.org/
wp-content/uploads/2010/04/pdfs_koreachapt2.pdf [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
Kahn, J. (2018). North Korea Says It Will Abandon Nuclear Efforts. [online] Nytimes.com. Available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/19/world/asia/north-korea-says-it-will-abandon-nuclear-efforts.
html [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
Kirk, A. (2018). How many nukes are in the world and what could they destroy?. [online] The Telegraph.
Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/many-nukes-world-could-destroy/ [Accessed 1 Feb.
2018].
New York Post. (2018). UN experts: North Korea scoffs at sanctions while earning millions. [online]
Available at: https://nypost.com/2018/02/03/un-experts-north-korea-scoffs-at-sanctions-while-ear-
ning-millions/ [Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].
News.bbc.co.uk. (2018). BBC ON THIS DAY | 28 | 1998: World fury at Pakistan’s nuclear tests. [online]
Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/28/newsid_2495000/2495045.
stm [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
Nikkei Asian Review. (2018). UN disarmament chief says nuke treaty must preserve past gains- Nikkei
Asian Review. [online] Available at: https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/
UN-disarmament-chief-says-nuke-treaty-must-preserve-past-gains [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
NPR.org. (2018). Kim Jong Un Wants The U.S. To Know That His Nuclear Arsenal Is Complete. [online]

11 © 2018 FWWMUN
Available at: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/12/31/574906948/kim-jong-un-wan-
ts-the-u-s-to-know-that-his-nuclear-arsenal-is-complete [Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].
Nytimes.com. (2018). Full Text: North Korea’s Statement of Withdrawal. [online] Available at: http://
www.nytimes.com/2003/01/10/international/asia/full-text-north-koreas-statement-of-withdrawal.
html [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
Tackett, P. (2018). Trump Says His ‘Nuclear Button’ Is ‘Much Bigger’ Than North Korea’s. [online]
Nytimes.com. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/02/us/politics/trump-tweet-nor-
th-korea.html [Accessed 3 Feb. 2018].
Un.org. (2018). Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones – UNODA. [online] Available at: https://www.un.org/
disarmament/wmd/nuclear/nwfz/ [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
Un.org. (2018). Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons: Signature and Ratification – UNODA.
[online] Available at: https://www.un.org/disarmament/publications/more/treaty-on-the-prohibi-
tion-of-nuclear-weapons-signature-and-ratification/ [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
Un.org. (2018). United Nations Conference to Negotiate a Legally Binding Instrument to Prohibit
Nuclear Weapons, Leading Towards their Total Elimination. [online] Available at: https://www.un.org/
disarmament/ptnw/ [Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].
WION. (2018). India’s second nuclear test: ‘Pokhran-II’ on 11th May, 1998. [online] Available at: http://
www.wionews.com/south-asia/indias-second-nuclear-test-pokhran-ii-on-11th-may-1998-15458
[Accessed 1 Feb. 2018].

12 © 2018 FWWMUN
GENERAL ASSEMBLY: DISEC

THE ILLICIT TRADE IN SMALL ARMS AND LIGHT WEAPONS IN ALL ITS
ASPECTS.

INTRODUCTION
60-90% of the 100,00 deaths related to an international conflict are due to the illegal smuggling of
small arms and light weapons. The illegal trade of these arms is now considered an international issue
that plagues most developing nations. Illicit arms are one of the major cause related to civil war. It also
prevents post-conflict states to successfully transition into peacetime. This guide will mostly focus on
small arms and light weapons. Small arms and light arms are usually small personal weapons. These
arms are generally easy to acquire and therefore are the main arms of terrorist organizations. Small
arms and light weapons are often used by child soldiers as they are easy to use. It is now even more
critical that the international community stems the illicit trade of small arms and light weapons.

SMALL ARMS AND LIGHT WEAPONS (SALW)

Small arms are loosely defined as a small, lightweight weapons that are usually personal property.
These can be used by humans or also be mounted on a vehicle or an animal.

Small Arms: Small arms are usually hand held, small caliber firearms. This group of arms usually include
handguns, rifles, shotguns, manual, semi-automatic, and fully-automatic weapons and man-portable
machine guns.

Light Weapons: This group of arms includes a wide range of medium-caliber and explosive ordnance. It
includes man-portable and vehicle-mounted antipersonnel, antitank and anti-aircraft rockets, missiles,
landmines, antiaircraft guns, mortars, hand grenades, and RPGs, etc. Many of these weapons are small,
light, and therefore easy to transport across international borders.

One of the biggest concerns of the trade of SALW is the blurred line between legal and illegal trade of
the weapons. There are few existing policies regarding these matters and therefore many loopholes.
Due to these many loopholes and blurred lines, these small arms fall into the hands of paramilitary
and terrorist organizations. In several countries, mostly developing, the institutional checks are weak
and unreliable. Due to corruption and general misinformation, arms that are meant for legitimate
government military fall into the groups who want to incite violence. To combat the illicit trade of
SALW, one must truly understand and define what is legal, and illegal trade of SALW is.

The Small Arms survey defines legal trade of SALW as when the trade follows international law
along with the exporting and importing country laws. A trade is considered illegal if it breaks either
international or national laws. This simple division is what causes the blurring of the line where trades
often exploit the loopholes in policy. Another grey area or an area of controversy is when trade follows
the protocols, that is international law and national laws but break international human rights law.

13 © 2018 FWWMUN
OVERVIEW OF SALW
The issue of SALW is most prevalent now, post the break up the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold
War. After the Cold War, the major conflicts turned into intra-state conflicts rather than remaining
interstate conflicts. These conflicts are mainly fought with small arms and light weapons rather than
heavy artillery and weapons of mass destruction. Today’s war are more ethnic or religious wars than
those of political or ideological wars of the 20th century. Most of these wars are fought by small rebel
groups or groups that have originated from the citizens who use small arms.

Though SALW is prevalent in conflicts, they are also used for other things. Small arms are also used in
criminal violence, disruption of development efforts to prevent aid from reaching its said location. The
advantages of these weapons are clear. These weapons are easy to use, lightweight, easy to conceal,
durable, portable and lethal. These arms also have significant civilian, military personnel and military
uses which makes them easy to transfer over international borders, legally and illegally. This is one
of the main reasons why it is hard to stem the illicit trades of SALW. Any solution must address the
complex issue regulation in the target country along with the socio-economic situation of both nations.

SUPPLY OF SMALL ARMS/LIGHT WEAPONS:

There are nine ways in which the arms can enter the illicit market. The following are the nine ways:

• The first and the most serious way is when sanctions and embargoes are not observed. The illicit
trade of SALW fuel the conflict in the already war-torn nation. There are multiple cases of regional,
national and international circles where the embargo is not closely monitored, for example, Angola
and Liberia.
• Another big cause of the illicit trade is corruption. Countries like Russia and India often allow the
transfer of weapons when officials are bribed to do the illegal trade. Often these workers are not
paid enough or paid meager salaries and therefore due to having little incentive enforce the law.
• Once weapons become outdated, they are stocked in major stockpiles. These stockpiles are
monitored or managed well. These legal weapons often make their way to the illicit market.
• The management and monitoring of weapons are often linked to the leaking of weapons to the
black market. For example, in Albania, over half a million weapons flowed into the arms of Albanian
citizens due to terrible monitoring of the weapons. Another more serious example is when all the
weapons in Iraq were taken, and this caused the destabilization of the entire country.
• Some weapons which reach the black market are stolen or lost from the military stocks.
• There are some cases where the military sells these weapons in the black market. These are how
legal weapons reach the black market.
• In certain countries like the US, where it is legal to own a firearm, it can be stolen from a legal
owner.
• Vague and blurry laws often are the culprit for people buying many weapons and then selling them
in the black market.
• Lastly, there are many organizations that operate in the black market that produce their own
weapons.
One the key components to fighting illicit trade it the management and monitoring of weapon caches.
Correct management and destruction of weapons no longer in use a way to prevent these weapons

14 © 2018 FWWMUN
reaching the black market. This would greatly reduce the chance of legal weapons that are bought for
national security leaking into the black market.

CURRENT RESPONSE TO ILLEGAL TRAFFICKING OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS

The international response to this crisis is unplanned and weak. The US is currently in the lead in the
fight against the disarmament of SALW by trying to destroy the surplus and obsolete arms. However,
that is not enough. Since 2001, the State Department has facilitated the destruction of over 800,00
surplus small and light weapons and 80 million rounds of ammunition in 23 countries.

However, the international response hasn’t been as great. While the international community takes
measures to curb landmines and biological weapons, they haven’t taken strong measures to prevent
the illicit trades of SALW. The UN has passed several resolutions condemning the proliferation of
SALW such as United Nations Program of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in
Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects (UN Program of Action, or POA), these resolutions
have been too vague for any actual disarmament to take place. Instead, an effective way to curb the
transfer of SALW is to address the problem in specific countries and of specific weapons.

TOP FIVE ARMS EXPORTERS (WORLDWIDE, 2004)

• United States ($18.55 billion)
• Russia ($4.6 billion)
• France ($4.4 billion)
• United Kingdom ($1.9 billion)
• (Source: Congressional Research Service)

NUMBER OF KNOWN SMALL ARMS-PRODUCING COUNTRIES

(WORLDWIDE, 2003):
• 92 (estimate)
• (Source: Small Arms Survey 2004, p. 9)

BLOC POSITIONS:

AFRICAN BLOC
As the region with high conflict occurrence, this bloc understands the effects of the proliferation and
use of SALW’s. The illicit trade of SALW has destabilized many African Nations, economically and
politically. Though few nations thrive peacefully through the effects of SALW’s, many other nations
have been impaired by the conflicts the arms have brought. The long-lasting conflicts in Rwanda,
Somalia, and Darfur have been prolonged because of the available access to the arms. As such, the
African Bloc has been establishing preventive measures for keeping the SALW’s away from rebel
parties and paramilitary groups to protect the fragile peace that most African Nations enjoy.

15 © 2018 FWWMUN
ASIAN BLOC
There many conflicts in Asia, especially in South Asia. The armed conflict in Thailand was destabilizing
as Thailand is considered as one the major tourist attractions in South Asia. The Asian Bloc has been
careful to negotiate its position on Arms regulation. South Asia is one the world’s biggest suppliers
of SALW and therefore care must be taken to impose regulations. One must consider not to impose
on the country’s autonomy on legally supplying arms. The Association of South-east Asian Nations
has been working to control the illicit trade of SALW, by regulating, tracking and working together.
However, they still need to do much more to curb the illicit trade.

MIDDLE EASTERN BLOC

The Middle East has seen its share of armed conflicts and has seen the destabilizing nature of SALWs.
However, the Middle East also has one the highest military expenditure budgets and has a large
customer base for legitimate arms sales. Infighting is one the major causes of destabilization in the
Middle East. This prevents any effort to build peace from sticking.
Latin American Bloc

Latin American states have experienced many uprising involving SALW. SALW is also prevalent in drug
cartels and criminal gangs that disrupt peace. Many of these rebellions have come with a great human
cost. Between 1979-2003, Brazil lost 500,000 due to SALW. The illegal trade has also been attributed
to the widening gap between the rich and the poor. The Organization of American States has taken
significant measure to control the illicit trade of SALW.

WESTERN BLOC
This bloc is the largest producer of SALW. They also are mostly developed nations and therefore need
to consider several viewpoints. Most of these countries support disarmament, but they should also
remember that their economies are heavily dependent on the sales of these weapons.

CONCLUSION
The illicit trade of small weapons is reaching a critical point. Strong measure must be taken to regulate
the production and distribution of SALW. With a few hundred dollars, a terrorist organization can
purchase a small arm that is capable of killing thousand of people. For a few thousand dollars, a missile
launcher which can bring down a civilian plane. A resolution must be passed that addresses this problem
with a long-term solution that combats the repercussions faced by illegal trade of SALW. There should
stricter border control, legal enforcement and management of weapons caches. Weapons should be
removed or placed in a secure location in worn torn countries to prevent another crisis. Restricting
access and having better regulations will help in providing a safer environment for the world.

16 © 2018 FWWMUN
POINTS TO CONSIDER
How can the UN stem the illicit trade of Small Arms/Light Weapons and their flow into armed conflicts?
How can past effective solutions be expanded into current situations?
How will the international community enforce the solutions proposed?
What is your country’s policy on Small Arms/ Light Weapons?
How will Small Arms/Light Weapons be dealt with regarding those in post-conflict regions?
What can be done to ensure legally traded arms reach their designated destination?

17 © 2018 FWWMUN
CONTACT: Follow us on:
www.fwwmun-nyc.org
E-mail: info@fwwmun-nyc.org
Phone: +1 (212) 710 1344