{

The global community has begun to closely observe the Latin American region as unrest unfolds in Venezuela. The public’s discontent with
President Maduro’s government has not only divided the people of the nation, but has begun to disrupt the foundation for civil stability across the
South American continent. For this reason, the question of political instability and civil unrest within Latin America has become more pressing an issue than ever.
March 28 th (2014) – Protests against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro result in 30 deaths, over 500 injuries, and 2,000 detainments by authorities
[Amnesty International]
April 3 rd (2014) – Demonstrators begin to target the UN office in Caracas
(Venezuela’s capital) in response to what was deemed an inadequate international response to the “high human cost” of the protests [CNN]
April 5 th (2014) – Venezuela sentences opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez to 14 years of confinement [CNN]

Venezuela – Despite the rather forceful opposition with which the government has confronted demonstrators, President Mudaro has criticized the media for severely exaggerating the situation within the region. Thus, with respect to political corruption, Venezuela and other Latin American nations should primarily seek to minimally-incorporate intervention by foreign nations.
The United States of America – The US government has been criticized in the past for playing a direct role in the election and disposal of leaders within
Latin America. Nonetheless, the US and its allies will likely pursue measures that will strive to involve outside-action where necessary in order to respond to political corruption.
The World Bank (and other NGOs) – Due to the highly financial basis of corruption and unrest within the Latin American region, the World Bank has adopted the global anti-corruption strategy to combat the root-factors which lead to political instability – placing focus upon the financial problems that must first be addressed in the region.

March 31 st (2014) – The United Nations peacekeeping mission in Sierra
Leone completes its final phase, concluding the work of the UN
Integrated Peace-building Office in Sierra Leone (UNIPSIL)
April 1 st (2014) – Mustafa Dzhemilev, leader of the Crimean Tatars, calls upon the United Nations Security Council to send peacekeepers to Crimea [UN Daily]
April 3 rd (2014) – Despite the remaining presence of multiple armed military groups within the Democratic Republic of Congo, the United
Nations begins to prepare for the gradual withdrawal of forces from the region [Aljazeera]

When considering the question of redefining the role of UN
Peacekeepers, it is often difficult to establish the specific “opinions” of nations with respect to this issue. While the role of the UN’s peacekeeping forces have been called into question on multiple occasions – primarily noting the limitations placed upon the actions of peacekeepers – the majority of criticisms provided by nations are mainly to do with the effectiveness of peacekeeping forces in given situations. As an example, the divided opinions between Russia and
Crimea have produced conflicting views on the involvement of peacekeepers within the region. Another interesting aspect of this topic to note may be redefining the role of peacekeepers with respect to gender-presence (as three all-women peacekeeping units have recently been established by the United Nations). As a final note, questions of abuse and conduct have additionally been noted as a concern pertaining to the topic at hand (and may be considered by delegates choosing to focus on this issue).

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has become notorious in recent years for its seemingly reckless behavior with the testing of nuclear weapons and missile technology. While the United Nations has consistently condemned all attempts at testing said weaponry, the DPRK’s failure to sign the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons) displays its intentions to continue testing these weapons.
March 26 th (2014) – The United Nations condemns a missile test undertaken by the DPRK [UN Daily]
April 3 rd (2014) – The United States, South Korea, and Japan resolve to hold a three-party conference concerning the DPRK’s nuclear program next week in Washington
April 5 th (2014) – North Korea threatens to undertake to a “new form” of testing with its nuclear technology [Daily News]

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea – Naturally when concerning any question of nuclear disarmament, it can be expected that the DPRK will greet the international community with complete reluctance if not outright resistance. Particularly noting the specificity of the topic’s wording, the DPRK and its allies will be at center stage for any debate over this issue.
The United States of America – It is unquestionable that the US has held a primary role in recent years in pressuring the DPRK in it’s decision to proliferate nuclear weapons.
Many nations, however, criticize the attitude the United States for being hypocritical in trying to monopolize nuclear power.
South Korea – While the physical location of South Korea subjects it to constant threats from the North Korean government, outside-support has allowed South Korea to maintain relatively stable despite lacking its own nuclear arsenal (with early attempts failing in the past).
Japan – Interestingly, despite historical tensions between the DPRK and South Korea, the nation of Japan may be a larger target under the nuclear program of the DPRK. As the DPRK wishes not to cause excessive damage to the South for the purposes of claiming the Korean peninsula, Japan is in fact one of the primary targets of the North
Korean nuclear program.