Dear Delegates,
Hello and welcome to the Third Annual Peninsula Model United Nations Conference (PMUNCIII). My name is
Anthony Jackson, and I am the President of your committee, the Middle School Security Council. Julie Miller is
your Vice-President, Marcia Sharp is your Director, and Adam Van Deusen is your Rapporteur. This committee will
be going at a relaxed pace and we will be spending a good amount of time on procedures for the conference.
Now here is just a little about myself. I am in the eleventh grade at Jamestown High School. I have been
in Model UN since the 8th grade when I attended James Blair Middle School. I have attended nine conferences since
then. This is my third year being a part of the Peninsula Model UN Conference. I was a rapporteur one year and
a delegate that helped get a committee going another year. I am looking forward to being President of this committee.
Your topics for the Middle School Security Council are Restructuring the Security Council, the Situation in the
Democratic Republic of Congo, and Nuclear Proliferation: India and Pakistan. We might not get to all three topics,
but it will be in your best interest to know as much as you can about these topics and your country's policy.
When you research your country policy, make sure you take some of these things into consideration: What kind of
government does your country have?; Who are your country's allies (countries that you work with)?; Who are you
country's enemies?; How stable is your country's economy?; Are you a developed nation or a developing nation? and
so forth. Do not limit yourself to knowing only these things about your country. Try to find out as much as you
can.
Once again I can't wait for this conference to begin and I'm excited about being your President. If you have
any questions, you can e-mail me at [email protected]. See you at the conference!
Sincerely,
Anthony L. Jackson
The United Nations has been trying to satisfy the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC.) This
has been difficult because they do not want to change the quality and the independence of the human rights violation
investigations in the country. The UN does not believe the DRC government should be able to control any part of
the investigations.
Thousands of Rwandese Hutu refugees, Congolese (ex-Zairian) citizens, and Burundian Hutu refugees are reported
to have been deliberately and arbitrarily killed by armed fighters since September of 1996.
The Secretary-General of the United Nations would like to replace the Joint Investigation Mission with his own
mission. The Commission on Human Rights set up the Joint Investigation Mission. It investigates "allegations
of massacres and other issues affecting human rights which arise from the situation prevailing in eastern Zaire
(now DRC) since September 1996."
Some member states of the UN are urging the UN to be "flexible" about the investigation. They would
like the United Nations to compromise its own human rights principles by agreeing to the requests of the DRC.
There are numerous obstacles that are still in the way of carrying out a complete, proficient, independent and
impartial investigation. The DRC Government has publicly objected to the participation of the Special Rapporteur
on the situation of human rights in the DRC. The government has also rejected the inclusion of UN security officers
in the UN investigation team.
Other obstacles that are in the way include insistence that it will not accept responsibility for human rights
abuses that were committed before they came into power on May 17, 1997. They may deny the responsibility of bringing
to justice members of the AFDL (Alliance des forces democratiques pour liberation du Congo-Zaire), who committed
abuses before May 17, 1997. DRC government officials have reported that the new government is not obligated to
the international treaties that were ratified or agreed to by the previous government. But international law clearly
places the responsibility on the successor government.
The recommendations for this investigation team needs to be fully implemented, especially those relating to the
bringing to justice of those suspected of committing human rights violations.
RESOURCES
The Internet and Global Agenda are very valuable sources in finding information on this topic, other topics, and
your country’s policy.
OVERVIEW OF NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION
Nuclear proliferation is a serious topic that is a common agenda for the United Nations Security Council. Many
nations are fearful of the spread and use of nuclear technology and feel that a speedy resolution to this conflict
is imperative. The focus of this committee and this topic is on the region of Southern Asia where a nuclear arms
race is progressing.
Nuclear proliferation means the spread or sharing of nuclear technology or weaponry. Peaceful nuclear technology,
such as nuclear reactors, is currently the domain of industrialized nations such as the USA and the UK. Developing
nations would like this capability.
The problem with sharing peaceful nuclear technology is that it allows nations to make nuclear weapons as well.
The used fuel from nuclear reactors can be used in nuclear warheads. The proliferation of nuclear technology
has already occurred in Southern Asia. The nations of India and Pakistan have always been wary of each other and
any quick moves by either country could mean disaster.
HISTORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN
India and Pakistan act in pairs. They are like rivaling siblings: if one does something or has something, the
other does or wants the same.
The relationship between India and Pakistan is ancient. The roots of the bitterness between the nations lie in
religious conflicts between the Indian Hindus and the Pakistani Muslims. Land disputes are also part of the ongoing
conflict especially with the area of Kashmir.
Before India and Pakistan became separate, independent nations, Great Britain ruled the area. The British tried
to quell the religious tension in the region by separating the region into three areas: India (which was Hindu),
East Pakistan and West Pakistan (which were Muslim). This movement caused a great loss of life, as the warring
religions would fight while migrating to their respective locations. The countries were set as independent nations
by the 1950s. The tensions of the migration never wore off between India and Pakistan.
Throughout the 50s and 60s, India was secretly pushing for greater bombing capabilities. As India progressed down
the path of nuclear arms capability, Pakistan’s suspicions were raised and tensions grew once more. With the coming
of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968, both nations were pressured to sign the treaty and give
in to peace. However, they both refused to sign it. In 1971, the tensions raised to an uncontrollable level,
and the two nations went to war. This war resulted in the creation of Bangladesh from East Pakistan, which was
supported by India. Pakistan’s defeat led to a desire for a more developed arms program. Therefore in 1972, the
Pakistani government secretly pursued a nuclear program. India, however, was well ahead of Pakistan in this area,
and was the first to demonstrate nuclear capability with a test in May of 1974.
Pakistan, determined to catch up to India in nuclear capabilities, turned to China for assistance. Pakistan acquired
sensitive nuclear technology from China. Pakistan justified their actions by reporting, "Our security and
the peace and stability of the entire region was gravely threatened. As any self-respecting nation, we had no
choice left for us."
Throughout the 80s and 90s both Pakistan and India began perfecting their capabilities. In 1988, India tested
its Prithvi missile, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead into Pakistan. In turn, Pakistan launched a program
to develop two short-ranged ballistic missile systems.
It was difficult to know how much progress each country had made because both refused to sign the NPT and the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) which would have opened their nuclear programs to more international scrutiny.
In the 1990s, repeated clashes between Indian army troops and Muslim separatists in the long-disputed Himalayan
territory of Kashmir further strained relations between the two countries, as India blamed Pakistan for aiding
the Muslims. The series of battles killed an estimated 30,000 people by 1996.
Finally, a climax to the conflict occurred on May 11, 1998 at 3:45PM. India conducted three underground nuclear
tests. Pakistan disliked India’s actions saying, "Pakistan strongly condemns this Indian act and the entire
world should condemn it. It has sucked Pakistan into an arms race." India justified its reasons by saying
that it needed nuclear weapons to prevent what it calls military adventurism by neighboring Pakistan. India’s
action was countered by a series of nuclear tests by Pakistan a few weeks later. The actions brought international
condemnation and economic sanctions from many countries, including the USA.
The international pressure and great losses from fighting in the Kashmir led India and Pakistan to the negotiating
table by October of 1998.
CURRENT INFORMATION
On December 15, 1998, Prime Minister Vajpayee of India rejected three voluntary restraints on strategic weapons
systems proposed by the United States. However, India continues to repeat its promise to embrace a global ban
on nuclear tests before September of 1999. Both countries have been receptive to a proposal that they adopt internationally
accepted controls to block export of technology related to nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. However,
it is unlikely that one country will take peaceful steps without consent from the other.
TIME LINE
1940s
1947
Britain divides its colony into India and Pakistan. Pakistan is divided into two sections, East Pakistan and West
Pakistan. 500,000 people are killed in subsequent fighting.
1948
India establishes the Atomic Energy Commission to explore for uranium ore.
1950s
1958
India begins designing and acquiring equipment for a plutonium reprocessing plant.
1959
U.S. scientists train Indian scientists in reprocessing, handling of plutonium.
1960s
1964
•First plutonium reprocessing plant begins operations at the Bhabha Atomic Research Center in Trombay, India.
•China tests its first atomic bomb in October. 1965
•A U.S.-supplied light water research reactor at the Pakistan Institute of Science and Technology begins operations.
•The second war between India and Pakistan breaks out. It lasts 22 days.
1968
India and Pakistan refuse to sign Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty.
1970s
1971
•Pakistan launches a March attack in the East after an opposition group, aided by India, proclaims the independent
nation of Bangladesh.
•War erupts between India and Pakistan. Pakistani troops surrender in December, ending the war.
1974
•India tests a device of up to 15 kilotons. It calls the test a "peaceful nuclear explosion."
•Following India's test, Pakistan's Prime Minister tells a secret meeting of the country's top scientists that
Pakistan intends to produce nuclear weapons.
1980s
1983
China reportedly provides Pakistan with a bomb design.
1987
Leading Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan says Pakistan has a nuclear bomb.
1988
India tests the Prithvi missile, which is capable of carrying a nuclear warhead into Pakistan.
1990-97
1990
President Bush imposes sanctions on Pakistan for pursuing a nuclear weapons program.
1996
India and Pakistan refuse to sign the nuclear test-ban treaty.
1997
India moves missiles near Pakistani border.
1998
March 19: India installs a new government dominated by Hindu nationalists.
11: India sets off nuclear devices.
13: India conducts a second round of tests.
13: U.S. imposes economic sanctions against India.
15: India's premier says the country is capable of making a "big bomb" that would be used to defend the
country.
17: President Clinton issues a fresh appeal to Pakistan to forgo nuclear tests.
18: An Indian cabinet minister warns Pakistan against trying to boost a separatist Muslim insurgency in Kashmir.
19: Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif charges that India has threatened to attack the Pakistani-controlled
part of Kashmir.
21: India announces a moratorium on the testing of nuclear weapons. It claims it is willing to negotiate an agreement
on a formal test ban.
27: India revises its blanket declaration that it would not use nuclear weapons first in any conflict.
28: Accelerating the arms race, Pakistan conducts five underground nuclear tests. President Clinton criticizes
the tests and imposes sanctions.
29: Pakistani officials declare that they would not hesitate to employ nuclear weapons in response to an attack.
30: Pakistan detonates another nuclear device.
31: The mastermind of Pakistan's nuclear program defends his role in developing the country's nuclear capability.
June
01: A newspaper report quotes a top Pakistani scientist as saying that the country has developed a new medium-range
missile for nuclear warheads.
July
01: A former Pakistani nuclear weapons engineer warns that his country's top military and intelligence officials
discussed plans for a preemptive nuclear strike on New Delhi.
30:The Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan agreed to a new round of security talks but appeared as divided as
ever about the disputed territory of Kashmir.
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
As a delegate, you must find out what position your country holds on this topic. Here are some questions you NEED
to know the answers to:
§ Has my country signed the NPT & CTBT?
§ Does my country have nuclear technology or capability?
§ Does my country share and or receive nuclear technology from or to any nation?
§ How did my country respond to the actions of India and Pakistan?
§ Can my country relate to India or Pakistan’s position?
§ Does my country favor either India or Pakistan?
RESOURCES
The Internet:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie has comprehensive reports on the nuclear crisis in South Asia, and background on the global nuclear situation.
http://www.ceip.org/programs/npp/nppind1.htm
Central Command
Read an analysis of the situation in South Asia.
http://www.centcom.mil/new_pages/analysis_asia.htm
Council on Foreign Relations
CFR Report on U.S. policy in South Asia
http://www.foreignrelations.org/studies/transcripts/india.html
Stimson Center
Arms control documents, statements and reports on South Asia
http://www.stimson.org/cbm/sa/resource.htm
Center for Nonproliferation Studies
Read a time line of events in India and Pakistan and get background on the nuclear escalation.
http://cns.miis.edu/india/index.html
Library of Congress: http://lcweb.loc.gov/
•History of the 1965 War.
•History of the 1971 War.
For information on Nuclear Technology:
http://www.isis_online.org/
http://www.enviroweb.org/enviroissues/nuketesting/new/
http://www.nukes.org
http://www.atomicarchive.com/AAInternet.html
http://www.fas.org
For information of the past conflict try news sites like CNN, or MSNBC.
The Washington Post has excellent information on this topic on:
http://206.132.25.71/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/southasia/southasia.htm
Books:
-The Global Agenda is a sacred MUN book; look under nuclear arms proliferation and India and Pakistan conflict
The idea of restructuring the Security Council has been around for quite some years now. There have been several
plans for the restructuring of the Security Council. Currently, the Security Council is made up of the "Big
Five" (United States, France, China, Great Britain, and Russia) and ten other members that are elected by
the General Assembly. The countries of the "Big Five" all have veto power while the other ten do not
have veto power. Also, the "Big Five" are permanent members of the Security Council while the ten elected
members have two-year terms in the Security Council. The "Big Five" were chosen for their nuclear capabilities
after World War II and because they were all on the winning side. They represent the way things used to be than
the way they are now.
There have been some proposals for changes of the Security Council. One of the proposals calls for the creation
of permanent, non-veto members and the increase of the rotating members. Of the permanent, non-veto members, a
couple would be industrialized nations and a couple would be industrializing nations. This would provide representation
from Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
The number of members in the Security Council could also be raised to provide a better representation of the 185
members of the United Nations. The current number is 20 nations in the Security Council.
The veto power of the "Big Five" could be altered somewhat. They could be restricted to using their
veto power only in the most extreme cases that involve the permanent members. Perhaps their veto power could be
taken away altogether.
This is probably going to be your most personally opinionated topic that you will come across. Although there
is not much country policy dealt with in this topic, you still need to know if you are a member of the "Big
Five" or not. That will affect your views on different ideas for the restructuring of the Security Council.
RESOURCES
There are numerous sources out there for you. The most recommended are the Internet and a Global Agenda book. These
two should help you find just about everything you need to know.