Disarmament and International Security Committee Committee Guide - Aismun 2018

Altamira International School Model United Nations 2018

DISARMAMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE GUIDE – AISMUN 2018

Dear delegates,

My name is Valentina Jimenez, it is an honor to welcome you to AISMUN 2018 DISEC committee. The topics
which will be debated this year require a great a deal of investigation and preparation, so debate sessions can
be fluid and viable solutions can be achieved.

This year, the topics chosen for the committee are: The use of combat and reconnaissance drones in armed
conflicts (Topic A) and The territorial integrity of the former Soviet republics (Topic B). It is important to keep the
committee’s primary objectives in mind when collaborating and developing brilliant and effective resolutions.

I expect nothing less from you than an outstanding preparation prior to the conference, full commitment and
knowledge of your country ́s position, and an outstanding ability in defending your country´s stance as well as
an ambitious desire of participating in debate.

Do not hesitate to contact me in order to overcome any of your questions or doubts you may have before the
conference.

Sincerely,

Valentina Jiménez- vjimenezj@altamira.edu.co
President, DISEC
Altamira International School Model United Nations

UNmask Corruption

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION TO THE COMMITTEE 3
TOPIC A: USE OF COMBAT AND RECONNAISSANCE DRONES IN ARMED CONFLICTS 4

Key Terms 5
Current Situation 5
Pros and Cons of using UAV technology in armed conflict 6
Bloc Positions 7
Past International and UN actions 8
Guideline questions: 8
Bibliography and additional sources: 9
TOPIC B: TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF THE FORMER SOVIET REPUBLICS 10

Key Terms and Events 10
Current Situation 11
Timeline of Events 12
Previous attempts to solve the issue 13
Guideline questions: 13
Bibliography and additional sources: 13

UNmask Corruption

INTRODUCTION TO THE COMMITTEE

The Disarmament and International Security Committee (DISEC) is the First Committee of the United Nations
General Assembly (GA). It includes all nations that are United Nations Member States. DISEC deals with issues
regarding the promotion, establishment, and subsequent maintenance of global peace, while simultaneously
working to prevent weapons proliferation.
Under the UN Charter, all Member States and observers of the United Nations are automatically part of the First

Committee of the General Assembly and have an equal vote. It considers all disarmament and international
security matters within the scope of the UN Charter or relating to the powers and functions of any other organ
of the United Nations. The general principles of cooperation in the maintenance of international peace and
security, as well as principles governing disarmament and the regulation of armaments; promotion of
cooperative arrangements and measures aimed at strengthening stability through lower levels of armaments.
Documents drafted by this committee require a simple majority to be passed. Like the other committees of the

United Nations General Assembly, DISEC is unable to impose sanctions, authorize armed intervention, or pass
binding resolutions. The Committee works in close cooperation with the United Nations Disarmament
Commission and the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament.

UNmask Corruption

TOPIC A: USE OF COMBAT AND RECONNAISSANCE DRONES IN ARMED CONFLICTS

This year our committee will limit our discussion to the use of combat and surveillance drones in armed conflicts.
This excludes all uses of drones, which are not related to military operations and the acquisition of intelligence.

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), more commonly known as “drones”, are becoming an increasingly
significant element of modern warfare. According to Georgetown University professor Daniel Byman, they have
already become the United States administration’s weapon of choice with other nations soon to follow.

In 1996, the U.S. Secretary of Defence assigned the U.S. Air Force for the operational control over the first
Predator drone systems. Since then, the presence of unmanned drones in current conflicts has steadily
increased. The U.S. fleet of Predator drones has reportedly grown from less than ten in 2001 to 180 in 2007. Not
only the U.S. is equipped with this technology, 43 additional states already possess unmanned flight systems,
others also have or are developing armed ones.

Originally, the drones were designed as reconnaissance aircraft. In 2002, the U.S. added AGM-114 Hellfire
missiles to its systems and expanded their purpose. From 2007 to 2011, the number of drones, Predators and now
also Reapers, performing combat air patrols in Afghanistan and Iraq were estimated to increase from 21 to 54.
At the end of 2010, the drone assaults in Afghanistan and Pakistan reached their highest level to date, with 58
strikes in 102 days.

The use of combat drones started a controversial discussion in the media and the world. Drone program
advocates draw attention to the system’s impressive cost-effectiveness ratio and to its practicality in
counter-terrorism operations. On the other hand, critics highlight the vast number of civilian casualties, usually
categorized as “collateral damage”, brought by drone strikes. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism contends
that 900 civilians were killed in US drone strikes in 2011 alone.

With the eruption of a global debate about the ethical justifiability of drone strikes, a sharp rise in the number of
said strikes and the proliferation of armed drone technology, the matter in hand is more pressing than ever.

The United Nations has a responsibility to foster dialogue regarding this issue and formulate a standardized set
of rules, regulating the use of combat and surveillance drones. The United Nations cannot afford to be
apathetic; it must adapt to the realities of armed conflict in the 21st century. The Disarmament and
International Security Committee must play an active role in this discussion first and foremost by putting forth
guideline recommendations.

Even though the proliferation of combat and surveillance drone technology will not revolutionize international
politics to the same extent as the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction did, drones could act as
destabilizing agents nonetheless. It is upon the international community to prevent the outbreak of a drone
arms race, which would have far- reaching and long-lasting ramifications, specially in regions with overcomed
by political and military turmoil.

UNmask Corruption

Key Terms

● Drone: The word is too ambiguous for our committee’s purpose. This term refers to any aircraft without a
human pilot aboard. That’s why the term “unmanned aerial vehicle” (UAV) is often used synonymously
with the word “drone”. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the US Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) use the term “unmanned aircraft system” (UAS) to reflect the fact that UAVs can
include ground stations and other elements besides the actual aerial vehicles. UAS should be regarded
as the official term. To avoid confusions: the terms “remotely piloted aerial vehicle” (RPAV) and
“remotely piloted aircraft system” (RPAS) refer to drones, which are controlled via remote control. UAVs
and UASs are controlled either autonomously by onboard computers or via remote control.In our
committee, we will focus on unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) and unmanned
reconnaissance aerial vehicles (URAVs). Missiles and cruise missiles shall not be categorized as UCAVs.

● Targeted Killing: According to a UN special report on the subject, targeted killings are premeditated
acts of lethal force employed by states in times of peace or during armed conflict to eliminate specific
individuals outside their custody.

● Combatant: Customary international humanitarian law defines combatants as all members of the
armed forces of a party to the conflict are combatants, except medical and religious personnel. Some
jurisdictions expand the definition of a non-combatant to include individuals, who are part of the armed
forces but do not have a combat mission.

● Civilian: A person is a civilian if he/she is not a member of the armed forces, a militia, or volunteer corps,
or a resistance movement.

● Collateral Damage: The term collateral damage is used when non-combatants are killed during attacks
on enemy targets.

● Peacetime assassination: Defined as the killing of an individual for political purposes in times of peace.

● Double tap strike: When a perpetrator deliberately strikes a target a second time shortly after the first
strike.
Current Situation

Nowadays, ten countries are believed to own UCAVs – with many more having announced plans to develop
such technology. Reconnaissance drone technology is believed to be more widely spread, as it is much more
accessible. Given these prospects, the US monopoly over UAVs could crumble within the next decade,
especially now that the demand for drones manufactured in China is increasing. Proponents praise unmanned
aerial systems for their precision and range. They also note that the use of drones practically eliminates the
human risk associated with targeted killing missions. Meanwhile, critics argue that too many of those killed in
drone strikes are civilians and that the continued use of URAVs could incentive tensions and distrust between
nations. They also fear that military interventions and sovereignty violations will become a more frequent
phenomenon now that the use of drones is becoming a normal issue. It is not surprising that these diverging
opinions have given rise to a heated global discussion about the use and proliferation of UCAVs and URAVs.

UNmask Corruption

Pros and Cons of using UAV technology in armed conflict

● Pro #1 – Financial Cost: UAVs are a low-cost alternative compared to conventional air strikes and land
operations.

● Pro #2 – Capabilities: Drone programs proponents are quick to highlight the impressive capabilities of
UAVs. Drone strikes are precise and can be diverted at the last second to avoid civilian casualties. UAVs
can hover over a target for up to 14 hours without refueling, enabling them to gather high-quality
intelligence or strike at the optimal time, it is also highly unlikely that they are spotted from below.
Moreover, UCAVs are very responsive to time-sensitive targets, since they attach missiles to a
surveillance platform; this makes them highly suited to rapid-reaction operations.

● Pro #3 – Superiority Over Alternative Methods: UAVs completely remove the risk of troop death from the
equation. At no point in time are pilots in harm’s way. Supporters claim that drone strikes cause fewer
civilian casualties than alternative methods would, by stating that drones are the most discriminating
use of force that has ever been developed.

● Pro #4 – Reconcilability with public opinion: The use of UCAVs and URAVs in armed conflicts is
compatible with the recent shift in public opinion. In most countries, especially in industrialized ones, the
public’s appetite for long, expensive wars is waning. Drone operations do not require a single soldier on
the ground; the systems can be controlled from nearby bases or from across the globe. Using UCAVs
enables nations to intervene, but at the same time allows them to reduce the size of their military
footprint. This is appreciated by the general public of such nations.

● Pro #5 – Practicality in Counter-Terrorism Operations: UAVs are well-suited to combat guerilla tactics; for
this reason, they are the weapon of choice in counter-terrorism operations. They combine
reconnaissance with attack capabilities, allowing governments to take out key individuals within
extremist groups effectively.

● Con #1 – Ever-Present Risk of Civilian Casualties: Nevertheless, while utilizing modern UCAV technology
may lower the likelihood of civilian casualties, a certain residual risk remains, specially when targets are
located in highly populated areas.

● Con #2 – Negative Impacts on Insurgency Trends: It has been claimed that lethal drone strikes actually
intensify terrorist activity. Reports have surfaced that drone programs of foreign powers are used as a
recruitment tool for extremist organizations. These groups display the perpetrator as the common
enemy, who threatens both their survival and the security of the civilian population. Sometimes this
leads to a radicalization of the public’s views, causing it to align itself with a ruthless dictator or an
insurgent organization in the struggle against the perpetrator. Drone strikes allow authoritarian leaders to
present themselves as the underdog, while the attacker is made out to be the oppressor.

● Con #3 – Military Intervention as Attractive Option to Policy-Makers: The use of UAV technology, as
mentioned earlier, represents a low-cost and low-risk alternative to conventional warfare, thereby
making military intervention a more attractive option for policymakers.

● Con #4 – Possibility of a Drone Arms Race: In the beginning of 2016, the membership of the weaponized
drone club reached double digits. At this moment in time, the following countries are believed to
possess deployable armed drones: China, Israel, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, South Africa, the United

UNmask Corruption

Kingdom and the United States. Two non-state organizations, Hamas and Hezbollah, also make the list.
Several EU countries, India, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Turkey, and the UAE are likely to follow. Currently, a
total of 86 nations own armed and unarmed drones.In 2004, only 41 states had a drone arsenal.The
spread of UAV technology can be attributed to the following factors: increased defense spending,
proven effectiveness of drones, accessibility of sophisticated communications, and the notion that
drones are a symbol of modernity and strength.

● Con #5 - Legal Grey Zone: Currently, there exist no international framework regulating the use of URAVs
and UCAVs. The deployment of such technology is subject to legal ambiguity.

Bloc Positions

Major countries making use of drones: Israel, United Kingdom and United States of America

What links Israel, the United Kingdom and the United States of America is the extent of the armed drone
campaigns that these countries have launched and the size of their arsenals. Israel, the UK, and the US are also
major exporters of surveillance and combat drone technology. For this reason, it is within their interests to
oppose restrictions on the proliferation of UAVs and the creation of an international oversight committee
charged with distinguishing between legal and illegal drone strikes. Israel, the US and UK want to be able to
carry out drone strikes under these conditions: there exists a threat to their national security, they must protect
their interests in another country or they must act in self-defense, regardless of whether a hostile attack already
occurred, is imminent, or is merely anticipated.

Targeted Nations: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria and Yemen

This bloc consists of nations, whose territory has become the site of lethal drone attacks carried out by the
Major Perpetrators. While some of these countries have condemned the strikes more frequently and with
harsher rhetoric than others, all of them have an interest in drafting of a regulatory resolution.

Countries That Have Used Armed Drones in Combat, Possess Armed Drones or Are Developing Armed Drones:

This bloc comprises a number of diverse states, from Nigeria to Italy to Japan to India. The most influential
members in this group are Russia and China. The members of this bloc are reluctant partners, as they
disagree with one another on most other issues. What ties them together is their interest in maintaining or
developing an armed drone arsenal. The motivations for this vary. Some countries view drones as a symbol of
prestige and power. Others are keen to expand their defensive capabilities and again others want to
challenge the superiority of the US and its allies in this area of military technology. While this group’s interests are
most similar to those of the Major Perpetrators, many still favor the imposition of a regulatory system. They would
look favorably upon a resolution, which allows them to acquire drones, but simultaneously clarifies the
circumstances under which it is appropriate to deploy UCAVs.

NAM: The members of the Non-Aligned Movement, also referred to as NAM, are not aligned with or against any
major power bloc. This group currently has 120 members.
It was created during the Cold War, in 1961, in response to the formation of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization and the Warsaw Pact. These countries have an interest in banned extraterritorial strikes and
imposing restrictions on the use of armed drone technology and the proliferation thereof.

UNmask Corruption

Past International and UN actions

➢ SC/RES/2098 (2013)
This Security Council resolution extended the mandate of the UN Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo
(MONUSCO) and approved the deployment of an offensive combat force. This so-called “intervention
brigade” was tasked with carrying out targeted operations to neutralize and disarm Congolese rebels. The
resolution also authorized the use of UASs to monitor the implementation of the arms embargo and in particular
observe and report on flows of military personnel, arms and related material across the eastern border of the
DRC. Never before had surveillance drone technology been utilized in a UN peacekeeping mission.

➢ A/RES/68/178 (2013)
This resolution, entitled Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms While Countering Terrorism, was
passed by the UN General Assembly in December 2013. It urges all UN Member States to ensure that any
measures or means employed to counter terrorism, including the use of remotely piloted aircraft, comply with
their obligations under international law.

➢ A/HRC/25/L.32 (2014)
It calls upon all members to use armed drone technology only in accordance with international humanitarian
law in particular with the principles of precaution, distinction and proportionality. Furthermore, it encourages
states to guarantee transparency in their records on the use of UAVs and conduct independent and impartial
investigations whenever there are indications of a violation of international law.

➢ SC/RES/2252 (2015)
This resolution was passed by the Security Council in December 2015. It extended the authority of the United
Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) and authorized the tactical use of unarmed unmanned aerial systems.
The South Sudanese delegation protested; it had rejected earlier requests by the UN to install drones in support
of the peacekeepers stationed in South Sudan. US Ambassador to the UN, assured her counterparts that the UN
use of drones would not be politicized

Guideline questions:

1. Is your delegation in favor of establishing a regulatory regime for the military use of drones?

2. Will your delegation advocate banning the use and proliferation of armed drone technology?

3. Does your delegation supports the idea of no policy recommendations at all?

4. Is your delegation part of any of the past UN resolutions?

5. Has your delegation made any statement regarding the situation of use of UCAVs or URAVs?

UNmask Corruption

Bibliography and additional sources:

➢ https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/targeted-killings

➢ https://understandingempire.wordpress.com/2-0-a-brief-history-of-u-s-drones/

➢ https://www.thenation.com/article/brief-/

➢ https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/03/world/africa/un

➢ https://www.nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/

➢ http://www.un.org/press/en/2015/sc12161.d

UNmask Corruption

TOPIC B: TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF THE FORMER SOVIET REPUBLICS

The dissolution of the Soviet Union was followed by a severe economic contraction and catastrophic fall in
living standards in the post-Soviet states; including an increase in poverty, crime, corruption, unemployment,
along with decreases in life expectancy. Violent political and ethnic conflicts have also arisen because the
sudden territory division did not take into account the ethnic groups occupying such regions. The majority of
these groups have tried to gain their own official control over the land by initiating separatist movements to
break away from one of the successor states in which they are currently located and have partially
succeeded. Due to this complication, various successor states are left sovereign over the entirety of their
territory in name only, ending the conflicts in dead end. For that reason, they are referred to as frozen conflicts.

An aspect that fuels these frozen conflicts is Russia’s constant involvement. Russia often appears to be active in
separatist movements as unofficial sponsors or mentors. Since the Russian population is diffused all over the
land, the country intervenes in other states’ conflicts with the claim that is trying to “protect the Russian
population” in the area by methods that violate the states’ territorial integrity and undermine their sovereignty.
Although the principle of territorial integrity is established by the international law, the UN has not been able to
interrupt or even reduce Russia’s illegal interventions due to the country’s constant use of veto power in the
Security Council.
Key Terms and Events

● Territorial Integrity: Principle under the international law that states the imposition by force of a border
change in an act of aggression and that nation states should not attempt to promote secessionist
movements or border changes in other nation states.

● Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR): European-Asian communist federation that lasted from 1924 to
1991 and comprised of 12 main republics (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan) and three Baltic republics
(Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania). Then also called Soviet Union, it was the largest state in the world and
had a population of some 300 million.

● Former Soviet Union (FSU) States or Successor States: The 15 independent states that emerged from the
dissolution of the Soviet Union

UNmask Corruption

● CIS: Commonwealth of Independent States

● Russo-Georgian War: The Russo-Georgian War was a war between Georgia, Russia and the Russian-
backed self-proclaimed republics of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The war took place in August 2008
and although it started as a domestic conflict of Georgia, with the rebel groups South Ossetia and
Abkhazia fighting for freedom, it evolved into a violent war between Georgia and Russia. Russia
recognized the legitimacy of the two states and sent peacekeeping operations in both areas.

● The Crimean crisis: In December of 1991, Crimea was passed to the newly independent state of Ukraine.
In early 2014 Crimea became the focus of “the worst East-West crisis since the Cold War”. In February
2014 the leader of the Pro-Russian Party, after months of popular protests toppled his government. Due
to the fact that ethnic Russians constituted a majority of the population in the Crimea, Kremlin-backed
forced seized control of the Crimean península, allegedly to protect the ethnic Russian population living
in the region. As Russian and Ukrainian forces maintained a delicate standoff, the Crimean parliament
voted unanimously to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation. Putin signed a treaty
incorporating Crimea into the Russian Federation, a move that was formalized days later after the treaty
ratification by both houses of the Russian parliament. Most of the international community, except for 6
states including Russia, do not recognize the annexation and consider Crimea to be Ukrainian territory.
On June 20th, a peace plan was proposed. However, insurgency broke out the next month in southern
Ukraine. Although another ceasefire was initiated by the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, Germany and
France, heavy fighting continued. Ukraine insisted that the domestic conflicts were triggered by Russia,
accusing the Russians to be regular forces in the fighting in Ukraine.

● First Chechen War: The first Chechen war was a rebellion by the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria against
the Russian Federation, fought from December 1994 to August 1996. After the initial campaign of
1994–1995, culminating in the devastating Battle of Grozny, Russian federal forces attempted to seize
control of the mountainous area of Chechnya but were set back by Chechen guerrilla warfare and
raids on the flatlands despite Russia's overwhelming advantages in manpower, weaponry, combat
vehicles and air support.

Current Situation

The passage from the USSR to the CIS, called the “civilized divorce” or “political suicide”, was not so smooth
and is characterized by a democratic deficit, and in the eyes of former Soviet citizens was not only illegitimate,
but also treasonous. The creation of the CIS did not correspond to the people’s will; in March 1991 a popular
referendum, held in the nine republics, found that 76% of voters supported maintaining the federal system
under the name of The Union of Sovereign States. Therefore, the CIS organization from the very beginning had
a low legitimacy status. Nevertheless, it was a political compromise between the personal ambitions of the
leaders of the new states and an objective reality, the existence of the constructed over-the-years architecture
of the interdependence between countries.

In all CIS countries there are serious political conflicts related with corruption, which unfortunately is nothing
more than a systemic problem inherited from the USSR. The typical phenomenon for all CIS states is the
increasing gap between the rich and the poor, oligarchy class, forming of governing inner circle of national
leader, clan economy. All these features have made it possible to speak of the existence of so called “the post
Soviet syndrome”.

UNmask Corruption

Ever since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, a certain number of people have expressed a longing for the
Soviet period and its values. The level of post- Soviet nostalgia varies across the former republics. For example,
certain groups of people may blend the Soviet and post-Soviet experience in their daily lives. All CIS countries
are similar by a failure in attempts to build democracies.

Timeline of Events

➢ 1922- Declaration and Treaty on Formation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

➢ 1991- The Soviet Union dissolved into fifteen succession states

➢ 1991-1993- Georgian Civil War

➢ 1992- Transnistria War

➢ 1992-1997- Civil War in Tajikistan
- Conflict between the government and underrepresented ethnic groups

➢ 1994- Budapest Memorandum

➢ 1994-1996- First Chechen War

➢ 2008 -2009- Multiple insurgencies emerge in the North Caucasus region (including Russo- Georgian War)

➢ 2010- South Kyrgyzstan ethnic clashes

➢ 2010-2011- Fighting breaks out between the rebels and the Tajikistan government

➢ 2014- Ukrainian Revolution
- Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation

➢ March 2014- Crimean Referendum
-Adoption of General Assembly Resolution 68/2

Previous attempts to solve the issue

The Budapest memorandum on security assurances (1994), was a political agreement providing security
assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine,
Belarus and Kazakhstan. As part of this agreement, by which Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons, the United
States, Britain, and Russia committed to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the former states.
Russia’s illegal (in the eyes of western nations) seizure and annexation of Crimea and its support to separatists in
eastern Ukraine constitute a gross of violation of its commitments under this document.

The United Nations General Assembly Resolution 68/262 was adopted on March 27, 2014 in response to the
Russian annexation of Crimea. This resolution affirmed the General Assembly’s commitment to the territorial
integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders.

UNmask Corruption

All previous attempts to solve the issue of the Russian involvement in the FSU (former Soviet Union) states have
proven to be ineffective. Sanctions placed by the EU and members of the states of NATO along with the United
States not only failed to limit Russia's intervention of post-Soviet states but also led to even more detrimental
relationships between Russia and the West.

Guideline questions:

1. How is your delegation involved in the territorial integrity issue?

2. Does your delegation support any of the previous attempts to solve the issue?

3. Has your delegation had similar confrontations with neighbor nations revolving around historical
disputed territory?

4. Was your delegation involved in any of the conflicts from the FSU states territorial integrity?

5. What is your country’s position towards Russia’s intervention of post Soviet states?

Bibliography and additional sources:

➢ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/09/-sp-profiles-post-soviet-states

➢ http://www.geopolitica.info/the-post-soviet-space/

➢ http://www.ips.org.pk/global-issues-and-politics/1024-russia-and-the-former-soviet-states-

➢ https://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/new-minorities-post-soviet-states

➢ https://www.dailysabah.com/europe/2014/09/29/russia-threatens-exsoviet-states-territorial-integrity

UNmask Corruption

Disarmament and International Security Committee Committee Guide - Aismun 2018

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Disarmament and International Security Committee Committee Guide - Aismun 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Altamira International School Model United Nations 2018

DISARMAMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY COMMITTEE

COMMITTEE GUIDE – AISMUN 2018

TOPIC A: USE OF COMBAT AND RECONNAISSANCE DRONES IN ARMED CONFLICTS 4

TOPIC B: TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF THE FORMER SOVIET REPUBLICS 10

INTRODUCTION TO THE COMMITTEE

Under the UN Charter, all Member States and observers of the United Nations are automatically part of the First

Documents drafted by this committee require a simple majority to be passed. Like the other committees of the

TOPIC A: USE OF COMBAT AND RECONNAISSANCE DRONES IN ARMED CONFLICTS

Pros and Cons of using UAV technology in armed conflict

Past International and UN actions

Bibliography and additional sources:

TOPIC B: TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF THE FORMER SOVIET REPUBLICS

Key Terms and Events

Previous attempts to solve the issue

Bibliography and additional sources:

You might also like