UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Introductory Letter
Welcome to the 2014 UCMUN Counter Terrorism Committee. My name is Christopher
Baker and I will be your director this conference. I am looking forward to meeting you all in person.
Terrorism is the national security issue that has dominated our lifetime and threatens to dominate
the next generation. Our two topics are cyber terrorism and drone strikes. As you will soon learn
cyberterrorism is an emerging threat, and one that has not been widely addressed by the
international community. Drone strikes are emerging as the go to tactic for counter terrorism but
their use is mired in controversy. These topics will challenge your critical thinking and test your
ability to communicate. I am excited to see how you will deal with these challenges.
I am a Junior Political Science major and this is my third year in UCMUN. I am also a
member of the Honors Program and Special Program in Law and I will be happy to answer any
questions you have about those programs. I have spent all three years in the Counter Terrorism
Committee first as an Assistant Director, then, as the Director. I am also the Assistant Director
General this year. Outside of UCMUN I am a member of the UCONN competitive Moot Court
team and the UCONN sailing team. I also coach high school fencing in New London and teach
sailing during the summers. After I graduate UCONN I am planning on pursuing my Masters in
Public Administration and a career in Municipal and State Government. I’m looking forward to
meeting you all this is going to be an exciting conference!
Christopher Baker
Director of Counter Terrorism Committee 2014
Christopher.Baker@uconn.edu
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Simulation
Simulation
Role of the Delegate
You the delegates are in control of exactly how much, and what, you get out of this
committee. You will debate using the rules of parliamentary procedure. The delegates will have to
act with courtesy and respect, as well as understanding, if the committee is going to be successful.
Delegates will have to find creative ways to reconcile conflicting opinions. It is also expected that
delegates will faithfully represent their country’s opinion. Equally expected is that delegates
representing their nation will be respected even when representing an unpopular position. By the
end of committee the delegates will be expected to write and pass resolutions helping to resolve the
issues facing the committee. In order to achieve this delegates will need to conduct independent
research and analysis. It is important for delegates to remember that this is an academic event. That
being said I expect all the delegates will have fun and make new friends.
Role of the Dais
The Dais is comprised of the Director and two assistant directors. At times the Dais may be
joined by the committee’s Topic Specialist and Administrative Assistant Director. The Topic
Specialist has prepare an in depth presentation on each of the topics and will be presenting during
debate. The Administrative Assistant Director is in charge of printing and checking the formatting
of Resolutions. The Dais will also be in charge of tending to the flow of debate and enforcing
parliamentary procedures. Any questions about parliamentary procedure should be directed to the
Dais.
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Committee History
Committee History
The Counter Terrorism Committee was created on September 28, 2001 by Security Council
Resolution 1373. The Committee was created in response to the September 11 attacks on the United
States. The committee as it exists in the actual United Nations is comprised of the fifteen members
of the United Nations. The CTC was established to,

Criminalize the financing of terrorism

Freeze without delay any funds related to persons involved in acts of terrorism

Deny all forms of financial support for terrorist groups

Suppress the provision of safe haven, sustenance or support for terrorists

Share information with other governments on any groups practicing or planning terrorist
acts

Cooperate with other governments in the investigation, detection, arrest, extradition and
prosecution of those involved in such acts; and

Criminalize active and passive assistance for terrorism in domestic law and bring violators to
justice. (United Nations)
In September, 2005 the Security Council established the Counter Terrorism Committee Executive
Directorate. The Executive Directorate is a team of 40 experts who help assist the committee in
making informed decision.
Works Cited
Nations, United. "UN Counter-Terrorism Committee." UN News Center. UN, n.d. Web.
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
Introduction
In the thirteen years since the terrorist attacks of 9/11 terrorism has become one of the most
salient issues on the world stage. In these thirteen years terrorist groups have evolved from primarily
regional organizations into sprawling international militias. Countering an international threat
requires international cooperation and that is the reason for the Counter Terrorism Committee. One
of the issues that the committee will be addressing at this conference is Cyberterrorism.
Cyberterrorism is a new evolution of terrorism. It is a matter of some debate whether or not a true
act of Cyberterrorism has been committed. Nonetheless, the events of 9/11 and subsequent attacks
have shown the international community that it cannot afford to sit back and wait for terrorism to
evolve. The Counter Terrorism Committee is charged with compiling a set of best practices for
nations in order to prevent terrorist attacks. With the world increasingly focusing on cyber security
there may not be a better time for this committee to compile its set of best practices for the member
states of the United Nations.
One of the most important steps in countering a new threat is to define it. One of the
biggest issues facing the committee will be how to define Cyberterrorism. In the academic texts
there are two schools of thought. One group of scholars asserts that Cyberterrorism is identical to
conventional terrorism carried out through cyberspace. There is a debate as to what conventional
terrorism is but it is generally accepted that it involves a catastrophic destruction of life or physical
property for a political or ideological goal by a non-governmental organization. According to this
definition there has never been a Cyberterrorism attack, and those who subscribe to this school
often believe that there never will be. The second school of thought is that Cyberterrorism can also
be an ideologically motivated attack through cyberspace on a target in cyberspace.
There is also a debate about the emergence of “hacktivism”. Hacktivists engage in cyberattacks in order to promote political or ideological goals. One of the most notable of these groups,
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
Anonymous, was responsible for an attack on several credit card companies and Pay Pal because
these companies refused to service Wikileaks. The committee will have to ask itself at what point
these hacktivists cross the line from criminals to terrorists. In order to compile a set of best practices
the committee will have reconcile this issue and synthesize an official definition for Cyberterrorism.
History and Description of the Issue:
Conventional Terrorism
Most people believe conventional terrorism to be a relatively recent phenomena. The reality
is terrorism has been employed as a tactic for well over one hundred years. In the first century A.D.
the Zealots were a group of Jewish insurgents who attempted to overthrow the Romans using
assassinations. The Hashashin in the Middle East during the 11th and 12th centuries. The Shiite group
used public assassinations to discourage their Sunni enemies from aggression. While it could be
argued that these attacks were very precise and lacked the indiscriminate violence of modern
terrorism, the opponents of the Russian Tsars in the 1870’s made no such discrimination. The
availability of gun powder and other explosive chemicals gave rise to a new terrorist weapon, the
bomb. The Russian group Narodnaya Volya (The People’s Will) detonated a bomb in the Winter
Palace killing or maiming 67 innocents. (Simkin) The bomb was detonated with the intent to kill
Tsar Alexander II, and only failed because he was late to
dinner. The bomb is the instrument that brought
indiscriminate violence to terrorism. Assassinations are
still a common terrorist tactic but it is the bombs that
we hear the most about.
The Irish Republican Army, commonly known as the
IRA, is another well-known terrorist organization that fought for Irish independence for much of
the twentieth century. The organization used bombs, assassinations, and armed attacks in an attempt
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
to drive out British forces and officials. The IRA, in various forms, has been active since the 1920’s.
Since the 1960’s alone the IRA was responsible for 1,800 deaths, 650 of those were non-combatants.
(Lavery) Though the IRA has ended its campaign of violence and is now seeking to promote Irish
interests through peaceful means, its use of bombs and guerrilla tactics almost certainly inspired
terrorist groups in the Middle East who would soon come to dominate the discussion of Terrorism.
The terrorist attack of September 11, 2001 stand out as one
of the biggest acts of terror in history. The attack changed the
security climate all around the world and resulted in two wars in the
Middle East. It was not the first time planes had been hijacked nor,
was it the first time they had been crashed into buildings but it was
the first time it had ever been so effective. 2,993 people lost their lives and 8,900 were injured. The
suicide attack began to gain notoriety. The idea of zealots willing to give up their lives to take
countless others with them captured the world’s attention and the definition of terrorism grew again.
The Jewish Zealots and Muslim Hashashin pioneered assassination as a weapon of terror,
the Narodnya Volya pioneered the indiscriminate use of the bomb, the IRA introduced the use of
insurgency, and the modern terrorist groups like Al Qaeda introduced the suicide bomber. The
definition and perception of what is and isn’t terrorism is constantly evolving. Many experts feel that
the next expansion of terrorism will be into cyberspace. There is some debate about whether this
will occur but it is a very real possibility and countries like the United States, China, and Russia are
already moving to head off the next threat.
Defining Cyberterrorism
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
The “narrow” definition of Cyberterrorism states that it is conventional terrorism with
cyberspace as the weapon. While this definition appears to be fairly straightforward the reality is
somewhat more complicated. While this background guide has discussed common tactics and
weapons used by terrorists it has not yet discussed the motives that define terrorism. There is a
difference between a madman who wants to impress an actress
assassinating a public official, and a group that coordinates an
assassination to advance its political or ideological goals.
Motive as a variable opens a large grey area. If there is no
physical harm from an attack but it is intended to make a political statement and inflict economic
damage is that terrorism? Do people need to die or be at risk of dying for a terrorist attack to have
occurred? These are the questions that scholars and policy makers have to grapple with when
defining Cyberterrorism. If an organization of politically motivated hackers consistently shuts down
newspapers’ websites, at great cost to the papers, which publish critiques of the organization is that
terrorism? Or is it just a crime? There can be no doubt that the hacking is a cybercrime but is it also
cyberterrorism? If political motive and economic damage are enough then it is. If there needs to be
physical destruction or harm then it probably is not. Mohammad Iqbal writing for the Journal of
Computer & Information Law has assembled several commonly used definitions.
“1) Cyberterrorism is hacking with body count
2) Cyberterrorism is generally understood to mean unlawful attacks and threats of attack
against computers, networks, and the information stored therein when done to intimidate or
coerce a government or its people in furtherance of political or social objectives
3) Cyberterrorism is any attack against an information function, regardless of the means
4) Cyber-terrorism is defined as attacking sabotage-prone targets by computer that poses
potentially disastrous consequences for our incredibly computer-dependent society
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
5) Use of information technology as means by terrorist groups and agents is cyberterrorism
6) Cyberterrorism can be defined as the use of information technology by terrorist groups
and individual to further their agenda
7) Cyberterrorism is premeditated, politically motivated attack against information, computer
systems, computer programs, and data which results in violence against noncombatant
targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents
8) A bill passed by the New York Senate defines the crime of cyberterrorism as any
computer crime or denial of service attack with an intent to ... influence the policy of a unit
of government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a unit of government”
(Iqbal pg. 406)
The bill and definition passed by the New York State Senate is considered by many to problematic.
Under the statute any nuisance hack, such as website defacement, could be considered an act of
terrorism. It is certainly true that website defacement is a cybercrime but it is questionable whether
or not it is a terrorist action. Balancing the distinction between cybercrime and cyberterrorism will
be very important when the committee debates the definition of cyberterrorism.
Hacktivism or Terrorism?
Most politically motivated actions are not acts of terror. The developed world and the
United Nations recognize citizen’s rights to political speech. Speech is a very broad an encompassing
term. It is well known that speech includes the spoken and written word, but it also includes physical
actions designed to convey a message. This speech is considered just as legitimate as written and
spoken speech and is subject to many of the same protections. There are certain exceptions where
the government may mitigate the disruption by issuing permits for events like marches and parades
but in most cases they cannot withhold a permit.
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
One of the most common examples of “physical speech” are sit-ins. “Sit-ins” are a form of
nonviolent protest where protesters occupy an area to draw attention to their cause. During the civil
rights campaigns of the 1960’s it was common place for groups of African Americans to stage sit-ins
at segregatory restaurants. Sit-ins do cause a disturbance to the location they are occupying but as
long as no laws are being broken they are considered protected speech. In 1942 a sit in was held at a
“whites only” diner in Chicago. When the groups
attempted to order they were turned down and the
police were called. Since there was no law in Illinois
allowing the segregation of restaurants no arrests were
made. In 1939, in protest of a New York City restaurant chain’s discriminatory hiring practices, a
group of union workers sat in at a restaurant ordering five cent coffees. Anyone who came to the
restaurant who was unaffiliated with the sit-in was unable to find a seat.
Sit-ins are considered by some to be analogous to Denial of Service attacks. DoS attacks aim
to overwhelm the target website’s servers through exceptionally high traffic. A successful DoS attack
can significantly slow or even crash the target website. A traditional DoS attack involves a large
group of computers repeatedly requesting information from a website by refreshing the page or
clicking on links. In the more common DDoS (Distributed Denial of Service) attack, “the initiating
party activates a network of computers under its control, called a botnet, to multiply the power of
the attack, thereby directing an exponentially increased volume of information requests to the target
server.” (Hampson) These botnets can be formed through the spreading of malicious software and
viruses or they can be created by willing volunteers.
One of the most recent examples of a DDoS attack was “Operation Payback” conducted by
members of Anonymous. In 2010, WikiLeaks published thousands of leaked documents. In
response a hacker known as “The Jester” launched a DoS attack that crashed the WikiLeaks website.
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
The Jester did this as retaliation for WikiLeaks “attempting to endanger the lives of our troops,
‘other assets’ & foreign relations.” (Hampson) In order to protect itself WikiLeaks began renting
bandwidth from Amazon. Amazon eventually reneged on the deal after receiving pressure from
Senator Joseph Lieberman. (Hampson) WikiLeaks’ problems were not over as major companies
critical for online payment like PayPal, MasterCard, Visa, and Bank of America all refused to process
online payments to the website. In retaliation Anonymous launched an enormous nine day long
DDoS attack against the companies who were denying donations to WikiLeaks. Their stated goal
was to raise awareness and punish what they perceived to be censorship. (Hampson) The attacks
successfully crashed the Mastercard and Visa websites. PayPal’s website was significantly slowed and
PayPal estimates the damage of the attack to be 3.5 million dollars. Visa and MasterCard did not
disclose their financial damages though during the prosecution of several of the hackers it was
revealed that they believed it to be millions of pounds. (Martin and Duell)
Operation Payback is held up as an example of a new phenomenon called hacktivism.
Because of the laws protecting websites and computers hacktivism is rarely legal. The question
becomes at what point does “hacktivism” cease being a crime and start becoming cyberterrorism?
Anonymous advocates nonviolence but is politically motivated economic intimidation enough to
qualify as cyberterrorism? Or is it just a crime?
Current Status
The strictest definition of cyber terrorism is an act of conventional terrorism carried out
over the internet. Estonia, in 2007, is perhaps the closest our world has come to experiencing such
an attack. The cyber-attack on Estonia had its roots in the tensions between the Russian speaking
minority and the ethnic Estonians. When Estonia was liberated from Nazi occupation by the Soviet
Union a monument called the Bronze Soldier was erected in the main square of Tallinn. In April
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
2007. the Estonian government decided to move the statue to the capital’s military cemetery. The
decision was viewed by the Russian speaking community as a slight against their heritage and
sparked rioting and looting. During the turmoil, distributed denial of service attacks based in Russia
successfully targeted and shut down the website of every government ministry, two large banks, and
several websites of Estonian political parties. (Herzog) Initially Estonia attributed the attacks to the
Kremlin, but analysis of the attacks by NATO (of which Estonia is a member) and the European
Commission did not find evidence that attributed the attacks to the Russian Government. (Herzog)
The Russian speaking community in Estonia used internet forums to drum up nationalist
support inside of Russia and recruit hackers for the DDoS attack. The attack eventually included
computers from a variety of locations including the United States, Egypt, and Russia. (Herzog) The
attack was highly successful and, in addition to shutting down the Estonian Government’s online
presence, blocked ATM and credit card transactions within the country for several days. One of
banks targeted in the attack reported damages of one million USD. (Herzog)
The attack on Estonia served as a wakeup call to the international community and since then
the major powers of the world have redoubled their efforts to secure themselves against cyber
terrorism. In the next two years both NATO and the European Union established protocols for
dealing with cyber-attacks as well as computer emergency response teams (CERT) to help member
states. (Herzog) Individual nations like the United States, Russia, China, and Israel are among the
high profile nations to announce national cyber security initiatives since the attacks on Estonia.
Bloc Positions
NATO and the European Union
NATO and the European Union have each established strong protections for their member
states. These infrastructures are not available to non-member states but could provide a blue print
for a United Nations program. These states would likely support efforts making it easier to trace and
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
arrest hackers from outside their reach. In the attacks on Estonia there were a few arrests made
domestically but many of the foreign nationals were beyond the reach of reprisals. (Herzog)
States with Strong National Cyber Security
States who have already established strong national programs to protect against cyber-attacks
are less likely to support contributing to a larger international level of protections. These nations
include countries like the United States (also a NATO member), Russia, China, Israel, and others.
These nations also enjoy a distinct military advantage in the field of cyber warfare which could,
hypothetically, be hampered by protections established by the United Nations.
States Vulnerable to Cyber Attacks
All nations are increasingly relying on the internet and networks to develop their
infrastructure. This is especially true for smaller nations as well as developing nations. When Estonia
was attacked 97% of its banking transactions were handled online. (Herzog) This is not unusual
especially in smaller nations, where it is easier to network the much smaller infrastructures. These
nations have a vested interest in creating stronger rules governing cyber terrorism as well as a
framework for international aid in the response.
Committee Mission
Cyber terrorism is widely considered by cyber security and foreign relations experts to be
one the next great terror threats that will face the international community. The Counter Terrorism
Committee is in a unique position to get out ahead of the threat. The committee will meet and work
to define cyber terrorism and consider potential safeguards for member nations. In working to
define cyber terrorism the committee will need to weigh the consequences of accepting a loose
definition of cyber terrorism against those of a strict definition. If the definition is too loose it risks
restricting freedom of speech and the freedom of the internet. If the definition is too strict it may
hurt countries abilities to respond. The committee will also have to weigh the needs of smaller more
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
vulnerable nations with those of large nations who have already established protections. Cyber
terrorism is a new and emerging issue and it will be up to the committee to decide how and if the
international community will protect itself.
Questions to Consider
1. Does your country have cyber warfare capabilities that could be hindered by UN
involvement?
2. Does your country have any experience with cyber-attacks or cyber-activism?
3. How dependent on internet networks is your nation’s infrastructure?
4. Is your country part of NATO or the European Union?
5. How should the UN define cyber terrorism?
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic A: Cyber Terrorism
Works Cited
Herzog, Stephen. "Revisiting the Estonian Cyber Attacks: Digital Threats and Multinational
Responses." Journal of Strategic Security 4, no. 2 (2011): 49-60.
Lavery, Brian. "I.R.A. Apologizes for Civilian Deaths in Its 30-Year Campaign." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 16 July 2002. Web.
Martin, Arthur, and Mark Duell. "Hacker Whose Cyber Attacks Paralysed PayPal." Mail Online.
Associated Newspapers, 25 Jan. 2013. Web.
Mintz, S., & McNeil, S. (2014). Terrorism in Historical Perspective. Digital History. Web.
Mohammad Iqbal, Defining Cyberterrorism, 22 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 397 (2004)
Noah C.N. Hampson, Hacktivism: A New Breed of Protest in a Networked World, 35 B.C. Int'l
& Comp. L. Rev. 511 (2012)
Simkin, John. "The People's Will (Narodnaya Volya)." Spartacus Educational, Sept. 1997. Web.
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic B: The Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as a Counter Terrorism Method
Introduction
Even before terrorism forced itself into global security conversation countries were
developing new means of combatting it. Countries have executed commando raids, air strikes,
invasions, and police actions all in the name of countering terrorists or partisans. The latest trend in
counterterrorism is the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles for surveillance and air strikes. Unmanned
Aerial Vehicles, also known as UAV’s or drones, have existed since World War II, however, it is
only with recent technological advances in aerospace engineering and computer programming that
they have become precise enough for use in countering terrorism.
Part of the Counter Terrorism Committee’s mission is recommending “best practices” in the
field of counter terrorism. No other counter terrorism method is as controversial as drone strikes.
The United States and Israel have both set precedents of bombing and spying on terrorist
operations in countries that they are not at war with. In many cases these countries are not consulted
prior to the attack and have not consented to strikes and surveillance occurring within their country.
The General Assembly passed resolution A/RES/68/178 in December 2013 urging nations, in
particular the United States, to follow all existing international laws and respect state sovereignty
when countering terrorism. Despite this drone strikes from the United States in Pakistan have not
ceased. The United States and Israel are not the only nations with drones, as of November 2013 87
nations had drone technology and the number is only growing. (Taylor) So far only the United
Kingdom, United States, and Israel have fired missiles from drones but the rest of the world is not
lagging behind. With the escalation of drone technology the committee will have to look at the ways
in which drones are used and recommend a set of best practices or guidelines.
History and Description of Issue
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic B: The Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as a Counter Terrorism Method
UAV’s have their roots in the German flying bombs used in World War II. Closer to cruise
missiles than modern drones, the V-1 and V-2 flying bombs flew to their targets, guided by radio,
and crashed into them in order to detonate their payload.
The German research and technology that went into these
“flying bombs” proved invaluable to the United States
and Soviet Union during the space race. The first modern
drones were deployed by the United States in Vietnam as
Figure 1: V-1 Flying Bomb
surveillance and intelligence gathering devices. (Hastings)
Vietnam was the beginning of the realization that drones could replace fighter pilots on difficult and
dangerous missions. (Hastings) The loss of a drone is much more preferable than the loss of a more
expensive plane and a pilot in whom the military has invested significant resources and training.
During Vietnam the U.S. military would also develop attack drones but they would not see
action. The first use of drones to carry out an air strike came from Israel which quickly developed a
drone program to help monitor the Gaza Strip and West Bank. These drones were also used to carry
out assassinations. (Hastings) Israel’s development jumped out ahead of the United States’ program
and ended up selling several drones to the United States. These drones would be used to carry out
over 300 missions in the First Gulf War. After 9/11 new emphasis was placed on developing drone
technology as a precise counter terrorism weapon. In 2002, the leader of Al-Qaeda in Yemen was
assassinated by a Predator drone strike. Since then the use of drones for assassinations of terrorist
leaders has become common place.
The United States has two fleets of drones. One is controlled by the United States Air Force.
This fleet operates exclusively in Afghanistan and (while the U.S. was still engaged) Iraq. The strikes
and surveillance by the USAF are not a great source of controversy. The USAF has a team of
independent lawyers that sign off on every strike based off of a series of guidelines that are publicly
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic B: The Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as a Counter Terrorism Method
published. The real controversy about the U.S. drone program comes from the Central Intelligence
Agency’s strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. The key differences are the lack of transparency
in these strikes. There are CIA lawyers who sign off on the strikes but their independence is
questionable. (Hastings) Also concerning their policy on collateral damage from the strikes is
classified.
From 2004 to 2014 there have been 390 drone strikes in
Pakistani territory and 339 of those strikes have occurred since
2008. (Ross and Serle) These strikes have killed somewhere
between 2,347 and 3,792 people of whom 416-957 were
Figure 2: Predator Drone firing a missile
civilians. (Ross and Serle) The difficulty in compiling these
numbers comes from the C.I.A.’s reluctance to reveal
information about the strikes or even confirm that one has happened. This means that the reporting
is left to NGO’s and the Pakistani government which sometimes results in conflicting information.
These strikes in Pakistani territory are almost universally condemned by the Pakistani government
and rarely involve any cooperation between the two governments. (Hastings) Pakistani Prime
Minister Awaz Sharif has repeatedly called for an end to the strikes, “The chapter of daily drone
attacks should stop. We respect the sovereignty of other countries, but others should also respect
our sovereignty.” (Walsh and Masood)
The drone strikes are occurring primarily in North Waziristan, a “loosely governed”
province and a Taliban stronghold. (Amnesty International) The argument from the U.S. is that it is
protecting itself from forces that wish to do it harm and are not truly under the control of the
Pakistani government. This has not however reduced concerns that the U.S. is conducting
extrajudicial executions and potentially committing war crimes with the strikes. (Amnesty
International) Pakistanis argue that the drone only serve to stoke anti-western sentiment and bolster
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic B: The Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as a Counter Terrorism Method
the Taliban’s cause. There is concern in the international community that a precedent for drone
strikes is being set by the United States. Many security experts are worried that the precedent of
striking within uncooperative nation’s borders could become a frequent tactic of superpowers like
Russia and China, both of whom are rapidly developing their drone programs. Strikes, like the ones
occurring in Pakistan, becoming mainstream counter terrorism tactics could result in a significant
degradation in the strength of sovereignty for the targeted nations and international law.
The drone strikes in Pakistan are not the only precedent that the U.S. has set. In Yemen
between 2002 and 2014, the United States has conducted between 162 and 193 drone strikes with
the full cooperation of the Yemen government and
in coordination with Yemen ground troops.
Yemeni president Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi says
he allows and cooperates with the U.S. drone
strikes because his country lacks the technology to
carry out "these precise military missions." (Ghobari) With the Yemeni government committed to
ousting Al-Qaeda cooperation with the United States offers a cheap and easy way to bolster their
counter terrorism capabilities. The success of U.S. drone strikes in Yemen demonstrate that
cooperation can be a viable option in the fight against terrorism.
The U.S. is not the only nation heavily employing drones in a combat role. The United
Kingdom and Israel have also launched drone strikes. In particular, Israel has made extensive use of
drones for strikes and surveillance in Gaza and the West Bank. In November 2012 Israel launched
Operation Pillar of Defense and struck 1,500 targets in Gaza. The UN report on the incident found
that there were 165 Palestinians killed despite Israel having no boots on the ground. (Dobbing and
Cole) This is made possible by intensive surveillance and surgical strikes from drones. Despite the
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic B: The Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as a Counter Terrorism Method
advantage in precision drones have over conventional airstrikes it is a recurring trend that civilians
are getting caught in the strikes and Israel is no different. (Dobbing and Cole)
It is important to understand that as drones are becoming more and more commonplace
nations are struggling to find the best ways to use them and to conceptualize the differences
between drones and conventional airstrikes. How much of a difference does seeing the target from
thousands of miles away make to a drone operator making a decision? How do you reconcile
neutralizing dangerous targets with risk to the civilian population? All of these questions are still
being decided and the committee will have to keep them in mind when devising a recommendation
of best practices.
Current Status
In December 2013 the United Nations General Assembly passed resolution
A/RES/68/178. The resolution deals with the legal and human rights concerns that have arisen
from the use of drones. The resolution does not regulate or directly oppose the use of drones
instead it urges nations “to ensure that any measures taken or means employed to counter terrorism,
including the use of remotely piloted aircraft, comply with their obligations under international law,
including the Charter of the United Nations, human rights law and international humanitarian law,
in particular the principles of distinction and proportionality.” (Haider) Distinction and
proportionality are important words to highlight. They refer directly to the scale of the drone attacks
and the distinction between civilians and terrorists.
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic B: The Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as a Counter Terrorism Method
The rebuke from the General
Assembly has curbed the scale of
drone strikes in Pakistan but it has
not ended them. As of September,
2014 35 people have been killed in
U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan. An
attack in June broke a period without
drone strikes dating back December
25, 2013. This lull comes after the
General Assembly Resolution but it also corresponded to peace talks between the Pakistani
government and the Taliban which broke down shortly before the strikes began again. (Serle) In
Yemen, however, the attacks continue unabated and on a larger scale. While the attacks are
coordinated with the Yemeni government there is still the question of “distinction and
proportionality” as casualty rates per strike in Yemen have jumped to 8.3 compared to 4.7 in
Pakistan. (Serle)
Committee Mission
The Counter Terrorism Committee is charged with developing sets of “best practices” for
counter terrorism methods. Drone Strikes have emerged over the last ten years as the go to counter
terrorism tool for several nations and are being developed by others. Their use has been
controversial in Pakistan where the government opposes it. The United Nations has shown the
potential to influence the deployment of drones with resolution A/RES/68/178 and the Counter
Terrorism Committee can now expand on that work. The committee will meet and attempt to
devise a list of recommendations for the use of drones and find a resolution to the controversy in
Palestine.
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic B: The Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as a Counter Terrorism Method
Bloc Positions
The Drone Powers and their Allies
The United States, Israel, and the United Kingdom have all adapted drone technology into
their national defense strategies at great expense. International restrictions on drones may be seen as
meddling or weakening the internal security of these nations. The United States and Israel in
particular benefit from securing their ability to strike targets in countries that are uncooperative.
France also joined the United States and United Kingdom in a Human Rights Council vote
(A/HRC/25/L.32) against a probe into the legality of drone strikes. (Goodman) The Republic of
Korea as well as Japan also joined this coalition. Some countries who abstained are traditionally close
allies of the U.S., U.K., and Israel. These countries include Italy, Germany, and Estonia. Delegates
representing these countries and other countries abstaining on the vote will have to decide whether
or not to support their traditional allies.
Pakistan, Yemen, and Allies
Pakistan, not unexpectedly, has led the charge against drone strikes. It sponsored
A/HRC/25/L.32 and has made repeated floor speeches calling for the end of U.S. drone strikes
within its borders. Yemen, which has been cooperating with the United States cosponsored the
resolution. While the government is cooperating with the U.S. on drone strikes it does not believe
that the U.S. should be able to strike to without permission and is preparing for a day when
cooperation with the United States will no longer be necessary to combat Al-Qaeda. (Ghobari)
Pakistan and Yemen were also joined in voting for A/HRC/25/L.32 by the Russian Federation,
China, Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, and other states who may have different reasons for opposing
the three drone powers ability to strike freely. These motivations may be the fear that drones will be
expanded to the United States’ war on drugs, principles of sovereignty, strong ties with Pakistan, or
some other reason. It will be up to the delegates to discover their country’s positions.
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic B: The Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as a Counter Terrorism Method
Questions to Consider
1. Does your country possess drone technology?
2. Is it capable of offensive actions?
3. Does your country have a reason to fear strikes within its borders?
4. Is your country buying drones from another country or producing them independently?
5. Has your country’s sovereignty ever been threatened?
UCMUN 2014 Counter Terrorism Committee
Topic B: The Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as a Counter Terrorism Method
Works Cited
Dobbing, Mary, and Chris Cole. "Israel and the Drone Wars." (n.d.): n. pag. Drone Wars UK,
Jan. 2014. Web.
Ghobari, Mohammed. "Yemen Asks U.S. for Drones to Fight Al Qaeda." Reuters. Thomson
Reuters, 22 Aug. 2013. Web.
Goodman, Ryan. "United Nations Human Rights Council Adopts Resolution Calling for Drone
Transparency and Accountability." Just Security RSS. NYU School of Law, 28 Mar. 2014.
Web.
Hastings, Michael. "The Rise of the Killer Drones: How America Goes to War in Secret." Rolling
Stone. Jan Wenner, 16 Apr. 2012. Web. 18 Sept. 2014.
International, Amnesty. "Will I Be Next? US Drone Strikes in Pakistan." (n.d.): n. pag. Amnesty
International, 2013. Web.
Serle, Jack, and Alice K. Ross. "Six-month Update: US Covert Actions in Pakistan, Yemen and
Somalia." The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 1 July 2014. Web.
Serle, Jack. "CIA Drones Kill at Least 13 in Pakistan: The Bloodiest Strike for More than a
Year." The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. N.p., 16 June 2014. Web.
Taylor, Guy. "U.S. Intelligence Warily Watches for Threats to U.S. Now That 87 Nations
Possess Drones." Washington Times. The Washington Times, 10 Nov. 2013. Web.
Walsh, Declan, and Salman Masood. "Pakistan’s New Premier Calls for Drone Strike Halt." The
New York Times. The New York Times, 05 June 2013. Web.