UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Introductory Letter
Hello Delegates!
I am Christina and I will be the Director of the Security Council at the University of
Connecticut’s 2013 Model United Nations Conference (UCMUN!) I am a senior this year at UConn,
and I am a Political Science major. This is my final year as a member of Model United Nations at
UConn.
During my first year as a member of UCMUN, I served as administrative assistant and
helped directors and substantive director’s draft, and edit working papers and resolutions, and my
second year I was the Director of the Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. I hope that this year is
just as fun, exciting, and rewarding. Directing at last year’s conference was one of the most
rewarding experiences I have had at UConn, and it will be a pleasure to work among all of you. I
hope you are all excited as I am for UCMUN 2013!
As you may know, this year, my topics are regarding Burmese Human Rights Violations and
the North Korean Nuclear Program since 2012. The inspiration for the Burmese Human Rights
Violations topic occurred during my internship as a Congressional Intern last spring on Capitol Hill.
I had the opportunity to attend a hearing regarding the situation, and heard testimony from
witnesses, members of Congress, and members of human rights organizations. The North Korean
Nuclear Program, I feel, is an excellent foreign affairs topic that expands young delegate’s interest
and activity with brainstorming solutions to global issues.
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Introductory Letter
Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions you may have about the conference, the
nature of debate, and information regarding the topics I have chosen. I look forward to working
with all of you in November!
Christina Barone
Christina.Barone@Uconn.edu
UCMUN 2013 Security Council Director
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Committee History
Committee History
The Security Council held its first session on January 17, 1946 at Church House,
Westminster, London. Since its first meeting, the Security Council traditionally takes permanent
residence at the United Nations Headquarters, located in New York City. The UN Charter
established six main organs of the United Nations, including the Security Council. The Security
Council is comprised of 15 members; each member has one vote, and determines the existence of a
threat to the peace of act of aggression. There are five permanent members with veto power, and
ten non-permanent members, elected by the General Assembly for a two-year term. There is a
rotation presidential chair, and members will take turns at holding the presidency of the Security
Council for one month. It calls upon the parties to dispute to settle it by peaceful means and
recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement. It holds the primary responsibility for
maintaining international peace and security; the Security Council, may meet whenever peace is
threatened around the world.
The Security Council has four purposes, including maintaining international peace and
security. But the Security Council also functions to develop friendly relations among nations, to
cooperate in solving international problems and in promoting respect for human rights, and to be a
center for harmonizing the actions of nations. While other organs of the United Nations make
recommendations to member states, the Security Council has the unique power to make decisions
that member states are then obligated to implement under the Charter. In order to reach an
agreement by peaceful means, the Council may set forth principles for such an agreement, undertake
investigation and mediation, dispatch a mission or appoint special envoys, or request the SecretaryGeneral to use his good offices to achieve a pacific settlement on the dispute. Furthermore, the
council will issue ceasefire directives that can help prevent an escalation of the conflict, and dispatch
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Committee History
military observers or a peacekeeping force to help reduce tensions, separate opposing forces and
establish a calm in which peaceful settlements may be sought. The Council may opt for enforcement
measures that include, but are not limited to; economic sanctions, arms embargoes, financial
penalties and restrictions and travel bans. Included may be a severance of diplomatic relations, a
blockade or collective military action.
During the Cold War, continual disagreement between the United States and the Soviet
Union made the Security Council an ineffective institution. Since the late 1980s, however, the
council’s power and prestige have grown. Beginning in the late 1980s, there was a surge in the
number of peacekeeping operations authorized by the Security Council; between 1948, there were
only 13 missions authorized. However, between 1987 and 2000, there were about three dozen
operations approved, illustrating the Council’s growing power and effectiveness of the Security
Council; operations included those in the Balkans, Angola, Haiti, Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Somalia.
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Committee Simulation
Committee Simulation
The Role of the Delegates
Delegates are the most important part of the conference. It is important that delegates
accurately simulate the stance of their own country during debate. Understandably, personal
perspectives may conflict with a delegate’s stance on an issue, delegates should not settle for an
agreement that their country would oppose.
Furthermore, delegates should accurately form blocs with other countries. Similar to being
stringent to about simulating the stance of their own country during debate, blocs should be formed
with other countries with similar interests, culture and economic backgrounds. For example, the
Security Council is responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security; a bloc may
be influenced by whether or not a country has made many successful mitigation procedures towards
the issue, or whether countries are committed to establishing peace and security. Ultimately, blocs
will be formed in order to put stress on passing resolutions. Leading up to the conference it is
important to research both topics in order to pass resolutions and engage in debate. In the long run,
it will be a more fun and rewarding process.
The Debate
The Security Council will conduct debate very similar to the way in which the Security
conducts debate. During debate, delegates will have equal voting and speaking rights when debating
both topics, “North Korea’s Nuclear Program Since 2012” and “Burmese Human Rights
Violations.”
During the UCMUN conference, debate will be guided by parliamentary procedure. For
those of you not familiar, parliamentary procedure is the rules during formal debate. Formal debate
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Committee Simulation
will be conducted through a speaker’s list and moderate caucus. For a country to be put on the
speakers list, it will raise its placard when the speaker’s list is initially opened. After the speaker’s list
is opened, all those wishing to speak may pass a note to the Dais or raise their placard between
speakers. Moderated caucuses are an effective way to speak on one issue, with countries raising their
placards to be called on by the Dais for an agreed upon speaking time. The Dais will not hesitate to
add country’s to the speaker’s list to initiate debate. Informal debate is then conducted in
unmoderated caucuses, where the committee will have the ability to freely discuss topics.
The Role of the Dais
The Dais is the desk at the front of the committee room where the Director, and Assistant
Directors. The Director initially will introduce both topics, the Assistant Director and then open the
speaker’s list and will set the rules of debate. The Dais is responsible for effectively moderating
debate and encouraging delegate participation.
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
Introduction
The Rohingya population is a Muslim minority living mainly in the state of Arakan in
Myanmar, which is also commonly referred to as Burma. Approximately 800,000 Rohingya live in
Burma, just as their ancestors have done for centuries. However, the Burmese government to this
day does not recognize the Rohingya population as citizens. In June 2012, a series of violent crimes
in Ramri, Toungop and Maungdaw led to widespread violence, abuse and displacement of Muslim
communities in four townships. In response to the these crimes, Buddhist monks, political party
operatives, and government officials organized themselves to permanently alter the ethnic
demographic of the Arakan state. In late October 2012, Arakanese mobs waged coordinated attacks
against Muslim villages in nine townships throughout the state, committing killings, burning down
entire Muslim neighborhoods and displacing tens of thousands more Muslims. The Rohingya
Muslim population is currently facing ongoing crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing in
Burma’s Arakan State, a coastal geographic region in southern Myanmar. There are a significant
number of Burmese citizens who continue to be brutalized at the hands of military and the military
dominated regime; a thorough examination of the Burmese actions is therefore timely and
imperative.
Topic History
June 2012 to October 2012
The violence in June was sparked on May 28, 2012 by the rape and murder of a 28-year-old
Arakanese woman by three Muslim men in Ramri Township. On June 3, a large group of Arakanese
villagers in Toungop town, southeast of Ramri, killed ten Muslims in response. Violence between
Arakanese Buddhists and the Rohingya population intensified, with mobs on both sides committing
acts of violence and arson. Populations suffered, and thousands fled their homes. Though Security
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
forces initially did nothing to halt the violence, they soon joined the Arakanese mobs in the attack
on, and burning of, Muslim neighborhoods and villages. The deadly violence that erupted between
ethnic Arakanese Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims in early June 2012 began as a sectarian clash in
four townships. The violence continued into the month of October, nine additional townships were
engulfed in the hostility, and a coordinated campaign to forcibly relocate or remove the state’s
Muslims erupted. The October attacks against the Rohingya and Kaman Muslim populations were
organized, incited and committed by the local Arakanese political party operatives, the Buddhist
monkhood, the ordinary Arakanese community members. Their actions were often times directly
supported by the state security forces. The violence was not shy towards whom it would affect;
some were buried in mass graves and their villages and neighborhoods were razed. While the state
security forces were often cited as providing intervention and protection of fleeing Muslims, they
more frequently stood aside during attacks, directly supported the assailants, or committed killings
and other forms of abusive violence. Since the violence has occurred, President Thein Sein has taken
no serious steps to hold the responsible perpetrators accountable or to prevent ongoing forms of
abuse from taking place.
Since June 2012, the violence has displaced at least 125,000 Rohingya community members
and other Muslims. A smaller number of Arakanese have been sent to internally displaced person
(IDP) camps. The conditions in the IDP camps are poor and intolerable; the conditions have been
cited as overcrowded, lacking inadequate food, shelter, water and sanitation, and medical care.
Security forces are regarded as corrupt and counterproductive, in some areas they have provided
protection to displaced Muslims, but have more typically acted as their jailers, prevented access to
markets, and their livelihoods. In the Aung Mingalar area of Sittwe, the Arakan State capital, the
government has imposed serious restrictions on the remaining Muslim residents; as a result, they are
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
effectively locked up in their own neighborhood. The United Nations officials have been denied
access to providing humanitarian access.
The violence in October was amplified, organized and planned. The local Arakanese political
party officials and senior Buddhist monks vilified the Rohingya population and labeled them as a
threat to the Arakan State. During this time, on October 23, thousands of Arakanese men armed
with machetes, homemade guns, Molotov cocktails and other weapons descended upon, and
attacked villages in nine Muslim townships. The state security force similarly failed to intervene or
participated in the violence. The deadliest incident on October 23 resulted in the massacre of at least
70 Rohingya Muslims. With numerous advanced warnings of the attack, only a small number of riot
police and army soldiers were on duty to provide security. Instead of preventing the attack by the
Arakanese mob and providing prevention, they assisted the killings by disarming the Rohingya of
their rudimentary weapons they carried to defend themselves. Satellite images obtained by Human
Rights Watch from five of the thirteen townships that were victimized by violence since June 2012
show 27 unique zones of destruction. For instance, images of affected areas in Sittwe depict
destruction of 2,558 destroyed structures, and four of the nine townships that experienced violence
in October show 2,304 destroyed structures, which altogether covered 348 acres of mostly
residential property.
The Testimony of the Hon. Thomas H. Andrews – “Ominous Warnings of Genocide”
The Rohingya are historically one of the most persecuted minorities in the world. In 1982,
through the discriminatory Citizenship Law, the Rohingya community was stripped of their
citizenship. The Citizenship Law, drafted by the military under former dictator General Ne Win,
identified 135 ethnic groups as eligible for citizenship; however, the Rohingya, the most prominent
group, was excluded for citizenship eligibility, despite living in Burma since the early 1800s. This law
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
overturned a 1948 law, which was instituted at the time of Burma’s independence. The law stated:
“Any person descended from ancestors who for two generations have at least all made any of the
territories included within the Union their permanent home and whose parents and himself were
born in any of such territories shall be deemed to be a citizen of the Union.” As United to End
Genocide and 30 other international NGOs pointed out in a statement last July, the 1982
Citizenship law is “not compatible with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of with Burma’s
legal obligations under international treaties,” and accordingly, “should be repealed, and replaced
with a new law founded on basic principles of human rights.” The law should honor equality and
non-discrimination, which may help create an inclusive and tolerant Burma. There has been little
political will to repeal this law; the government has long restricted their rights to freedom of
movement, education and employment.
Significant numbers of citizens in Burma continue to suffer at the hands of the Burmese
military. Between March 31 and April 4 of last year, the elections secured Aung San Suu Kyi, a seat
in Parliament; however, the election and declaration of reforms meant nothing. In fact, President
Thein Sein’s reformatory assurances meant the contrary and Burmese weapons and violence were
escalating. It was being alluded that, killing, forced disappearances and death from disease because
displaced populations were not having access to humanitarian aid. Aid has been systematically
blocked by the local administration, dominated by the state government, the Rakhine Nationalities
Development Party (RNDP). Aid agencies have warned of a growing humanitarian emergency, but
aid is still not being given to the victims. In Rakhine State in Western Burma, United to End
Genocide, an activist organization in America dedicated to preventing and ending genocide and
mass atrocities worldwide, sounded the alarm on ominous warning signs of genocide. The Obama
Administration was called upon to take strong and immediate steps to stop the systematic violence
and attacks against Rohingya Muslims.
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide defines genocide as any of
several: “acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or
religious group.” Acts of genocide include, “killing members of the group,” “causing serious bodily
or mental harm to members of the group,” and “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of
life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.” The violent attack against
the Rohingya community rise and fall, but it is important to consider that the underlying conditions
remain for ethnic cleansing and genocide. The severe restrictions on travel, marriage, and access to
aid imposed on the Rohingya by the Burmese government raise the question of a deliberate and
systematic attempt to inflict conditions of life to bring about physical destruction to the Rohingya
population. Hate speech, a term used in the context as a precursor of genocide, is regarded as
“speech that offends, threatens or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin,
sexual orientation, disability or other traits.” The hateful rhetoric is reminiscent of the hateful
propaganda directed at the Tutsi population and their sympathizers, which eventually lead up and
occurred during the Rwandan genocide.
In 2012, President Thein Sein proposed ethnic cleansing of the entire area where Rohingya
citizens have been settled for generations. He went as far as requesting assistance from the United
Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to remove all Rohingya people from Burma, or be sent to
camps within the country. Since then, President Thein Sein has altered how he speaks about the
Rohingya population; however, the actions of the Burmese military speak volumes about the
ongoing failures of the government to provide essential and adequate protection, and the
recognition of the fundamental rights of the besieged ethnic minority. The ongoing conditions
facing the Rohingya population have pushed thousands to flee on overloaded boats. It has been
estimated that 1,800 refugees washed up on Thailand’s shores (32) in January, and the United
Nations suggests that 485 refugees are known to have drowned last year. Furthermore, it is
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
estimated that one in ten of the overloaded boats veer off course of disappear; those who do arrive
face further threats as evidenced by January raids in Thailand that rescued more than 800 Rohingya
from human-trafficking networks. Government restrictions on humanitarian access to the Rohingya
community have left tens of thousands in dire need of food, adequate shelter, and medical care. The
authorities have indefinitely suspended nearly all pre-crisis humanitarian aid programs, affecting
hundreds of thousands more Rohingya who were unaffected by the violence and abuse.
Current Status
The human rights violations have taken a dramatic turn and are increasing at an alarming
rate. There are currently disturbing violations against the Rohingya by the Burmese forces and local
authorities. Government restrictions on humanitarian access to the Rohingya community have left
tens of thousands in dire need of food, adequate shelter, and medical care. The humanitarian
situation in Kachin areas remains critical; 364 villages wholly or partially abandoned, and over
100,000 people have been internally displaced. Hardly any aid international aid has been provided to
the 66,000 IDPs. Authorities have indefinitely suspended nearly all pre-crisis humanitarian aid
programs, which is affecting tens of thousands additional Rohingya that would have otherwise been
unaffected by the violence. Rohingya have taken perilous voyages towards Malaysia in their seeking
for asylum. Boatpeople have significantly been affected by the ongoing violence, an estimated 19,000
people have made the journey, and more than 1000 people are missing, or have drowned after
several boats sank. Several people have also ended up in jails and detention in countries within the
larger region.
Detention of Rohingya men and women is common, and is usually incited on false charges
of violence, or often without any justification. There have been both beatings and arrests of the head
of Rohingya households upon the refusal to write “Bengali” in the forms during current verification
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
process. The Rohingya are forced to use the term in identification application forms as their racial
name. Some villagers who opposed the condition were arrested or tortured. Despite international
outcries, the Burmese government is continuing to impose the oppressive “Citizenship Law of
1982” on the homeless Rohingya people while most of their documents were burned or destroyed in
the violence. Authorities have infringed upon Rohingya freedom of worship; they are not allowed to
attend mosques, and the mosques are locked by local authorities. Their restriction on worship
regards no funeral services, marriage restrictions or prayers; the Rohingya often bury the dead under
the darkness of night following secret funeral prayer services. There have been several Rohingya
villagers, and religious persons tortured for performing funeral services.
Findings have indicated that civilian death and injury have also been caused by Burma
artillery attacks. From September 2012 to February 2013, there have been 26 documented killings
and injury of women, children and the elderly, in separate Burmese artillery attacks in four areas. The
heavy fighting is ongoing and spreading in Burma, in the Hpakant jade mining area in western
Kachin State in August 2012, there have been approximately 10,000 displaced people, who took
shelter in churches and monasteries around the town. On September 13, 2012, the Burmese Army
began targeting the outskirts of Hpakant with mortars from a nearby hill, eliciting panic and chaos
among local residents. An artillery shell near a government school caused the death of a 13-year-oldschoolgirl and injured eight other students. Similar attacks have been widespread among Burma. To
name a few, a Burmese military unit at Hpakant Byhakone fired 120mm shells at Tahtechaung
village, causing the death of two civilians and an elderly man. Furthermore, another IDP and 15year-old, was struck by a shell, which shattered his legs, chest and hips; he died on the journey to the
hospital. Perhaps the most disturbing, there have been widespread gang rapes of Rohingya women
by Burmese forces, and continuous harassment of Rohingya families, forced and child labor, and
extortion by Burmese forces and local authorities. Sexual violence and assault has erupted since the
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
Burmese Army broke the ceasefire in 2011; including 64 women and girls in seventeen townships by
Burmese troops from fourteen different battalions.
Since June 2012, there has been approximately 5,000 Rohingya killed, and thousands of
Rohingya community members have been reported missing since the June violence. Thousands of
homes have been destroyed, with 100,000 people being forced to flee their homes. Conditions for
thousands of Rohingya caused the community to feel like refugees in their own country, living
conditions are similar to living in a cage, and many are starving in their own homes and villages.
While not receiving sufficient aid, many are dying of hunger, malnutrition and diseases, as a result of
aid to displacement camps and areas has been systematically blocked. Aid agencies have warned of
“humanitarian emergencies,” as acute malnutrition, skin infections and other ailments caused by
poor sanitation has been on the rise. Women are particularly at risk, there has been a report of 220
pregnant women in one camp in Pauktaw. These women are not permitted to go to a health center
for the delivery of their babies and will be forced to deliver in the mud under below average
conditions, and without doctors. From June 2012, until the present, the Rohingya Muslim detainees
of Buthidaung Prison have been tortured; some have even been beaten to death by the local
authorities. Muslims being tried and convicted in Rakhine state in relation to the recent violence are
not receiving access to legal counsel, which is a violation of their basic human rights. Many of the
Rohingya that were not involved in violence have been detained on improper accusations.
The United Nations Human Rights Council should place Burma on the agenda in Geneva
with a view to adopting a resolution to establish an independent Commission of Inquiry. The United
Nations Commission of Inquiry should be established that covers recent violence in Rakhine and
Kachin state, but other areas that have been affected by the violence. The UN Commission of
Inquiry is the only way facts can be established, those responsible can be held accountable, and
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
recommendations could be made to prevent further violence. The 1982 Citizenship Law, which
deprives the Rohingya community of their citizenship and underpins repression, should be repealed.
The international community must halt all further steps to relax pressure and build closer relations
with the government of Burma. This law should be replaced with a law in line with human rights
principles and Burma’s international legal obligation as a signatory to the UN Convention on the
Rights of the Child.
The ongoing violence is in breach of international humanitarian law; Burmese actions should
be assessed concerning the Geneva Convention and Rome Statute. Geneva Convention (IV) relative
to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, which state in its article 27, protected persons
are entitled in all circumstances to respect for their persons, their honor, their family rights, their
religious convictions, and their manners and customs. They shall at all times be humanely treated,
and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats. Article 8 of the Rome Statute
of the International Criminal Court regards war crimes: willful killing, intentionally directing attacks
against the civilian populations as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in
hostilities and attacking or bombarding (towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings), which are
undefended and which are not military objectives. Furthermore, the Burmese government has
violated The General Assembly Resolution on Human Rights, which was amended in December
1968. It states that the distinction must be made at all times between persons taking part in the
hostilities and members of the civilian population, and that is prohibited to launch attacks against
the civilian populations as such.
Bloc Positions
The ASEAN Bloc is made up of ten member states; its initial formation began with the
Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore and Indonesia. The additional five countries following the
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
bloc’s formation includes, Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar (Burma), and Vietnam. The ASEAN
inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus (AIPMC) is deeply concerned by the reports of violence
between Buddhist and Muslim communities in Burma and urges the Burmese Parliament, ASEAN
and other interested parties to act immediately to respond appropriately and seek a long-term
solution to inter-communal tensions while protecting the communities that remain at risk. The
AIPMC condemns all acts of violence, regardless of the faith or ethnicity of the perpetrators, and is
extremely concerned by the reports of deaths of 13 children in a Mosque fire in Yangon in April
2013. The AIPMC believes that the government must work decisively and justly with the help of
regional neighbors to end discrimination and combat intolerance among religious groups. The
concern also remains with the imposition of martial law and other draconian measures, and urges
the government to investigate the causes and perpetrators of the deadly violence and hold those
responsible accountable. They consider it to be of importance to remain neutral and independent in
its response to sectarian conflict, which must work to promote open dialog among relevant parties
for a just and sustainable solution that is supported by civilian and community agencies. While the
humanitarian aid is a serious issue, the AIPMC encourages the Myanmar government to open access
to international parties to conflict areas so that humanitarian aid can be reached by those in need.
The AIPMC urges the Myanmar government divides between Buddhist and Muslim
communities, and ease the tensions that exists; and believe that it is imperative to investigate those
suspected of inciting violence, and prosecute in line with the rule of law. They are particularly
concerned with the premeditated and orchestrated attacks on Muslim Rohingya communities, which
have included the burnings of homes, schools, business and religious buildings. Opposition parties,
religious and community leaders, and civil society groups all have a role to play in working to easing
the violence. Devastation and violence continues to spread, and the obvious and considerable risk of
further incidents if action is not taken, and measures should be put in place to prevent escalation
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
from occurring. If the Burmese government cannot reconcile and develop a national strategy that
promotes reconciliation, the ASEAN must also engage in this vital mission. The ASEAN believes
that peaceful economic unity cannot be achieved without social justice; human rights must therefore
be incorporated into the agenda for maintaining regional growth.
President Obama, during his visit to Burma in December, declared that there is no excuse
for violence against innocent people. The lifting of most forms of pressure on the regime and a visit
by the President of the United States signals that violence, discrimination, systematic human rights
violations, and disenfranchisement may be perfectly acceptable. President Obama failed to insist on
consequences should Burmese authorities remain on the same course of action; The United States
Congress is a governmental body that is being considered to have the potential of reversing the
conditions. The United States government laid out several preconditions for the lifting of sanctions
in various pieces of legislation including the release of all political prisoners, transfer of national
government legal authority to civilian government and progress towards ending violations of human
rights. Congress is encouraged to renew the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act to ensure that
the remaining ban on gems sales, most closely tied to abuses in ethnic minority areas, are renewed,
and send a strong signal to the Burmese government and add pressure on the Burmese Army to
cease hostilities. The Obama administration is encouraged to extend the International Emergency
Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to validate reporting requirements for U.S. companies, which are
designed to strengthen accountability and transparency of U.S. corporations investing in Burma.
While the United States Congress is encouraged to take action regarding the issue, the
recommendations are universal to be discussed, and could be implemented to reverse the escalating
conditions. Implementation of constitutional changes would enable a civilian government to hold
the military accountable, including the reformation of the judicial system to ensure independence
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
enabling the provision of legal mechanisms to hold perpetrators of human rights violations
accountable to all relevant international legal standards. The Burmese government authorities have a
poor record of accomplishment in reporting with several required reports; the U.S. Congress should
demand required reports of the administration to Congress regarding past legislation.
Appropriations language should be included that sets parameters for International Financial
Institutions to limit assessment missions, technical assistance, and loans if Burma fails to meet
certain conditions. Encouraged is the unconditional release of all remaining political prisoners, and
the repeal of basic freedom including freedoms of assembly, speech and press. The rule of law must
be established, which includes the creation of an independent judiciary with proper training to fairly,
and transparently adjudicate legal cases. Decreasing military spending should be negotiated with
national stakeholders to develop an appropriate national budget, which includes sufficient
expenditures on essential social services and basic needs for the population. Importantly, these
needs should regard humanitarian access to people in areas of conflict, including the unhindered
access for humanitarian agencies. It is critical for those responsible of United States foreign policy to
be aware of the harsh realities in Burma; the United States has played a key leadership role in
generating and sustaining the international pressure that has been instrumental in making the
changes that are being witnessed in Burma possible.
The European Union has taken a different track compared to the United States. Europe
lifted almost all investment sanctions unconditionally, without imposing reporting requirements or
any performance standards on investors. It has also announced its intention to reinstate GSP
benefits and to enter into negotiations with Myanmar over long-term trade and investment
cooperation, including a potential Free Trade Agreement of Bilateral Investment Treaty. The
European Parliament adopted a resolution in May, calling on large European companies investing in
Myanmar to report on their human rights, workers’ rights, and environmental due diligence policies
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
and procedures, but this resolution is non-binding. There are still a number of opportunities to
manage the human rights impacts of its economic reengagement with Myanmar. In June 2013, the
European Parliament adopted a resolution condemning the persecution and violence targeting the
Rohingya and other Muslim minorities perpetuated by or with the complicity of the Burmese
authorities.
The European Union has urged the Burmese authorities to put an immediate end to human
rights abuses, to make a full and independent investigation into allegations of security forces’
participate in the violence, prosecute perpetrators of the violent attacks and other related abuses and
to open the access to humanitarian aid. The resolution passed by the European Parliament also calls
for the establishment of an OHCHR office in the country. The OHCHR is the Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights. The European Union also recommends the revocation of the
discriminatory policies, rules, regulations or laws, with specific reference to the 1982 Citizenship
Law and the reintroduction of the two-child policy for Rohingya. The European Union has insisted
that the situation be held at the highest level with regular reassessments of the situation, based on
precise benchmarks and reports, which would outline an indication and development of relations to
actual progress.
Committee Mission
Violence is daily for the Rohingya population in an impoverished area. Riots erupted last
year between the Rohingya Muslims and ethnic Rakhine people at the Rakhine State of Burma;
according to the United Nations, 170 people have been killed, approximately 140,000 people have
been displaced. The ethnic violence in the Arakan state is having an impact throughout the region,
because Rohingya fled Burma and Bangladesh last year. Clearly, there may be evidence that the
underlying tensions are caused by ethnic and racial discrimination, causing thousands of Rohingya to
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
flee deprivation, dispossession and violation. Their citizenship is being slashed without
reconciliation and peace between them and the ethnic Rakhine. The Rohingya Muslim population is
currently facing ongoing crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing in Burma’s Arakan State;
Burmese citizens who continue to be brutalized at the hands of military and the military dominated
regime.
Research Questions
1. Could the ASEAN bloc work alongside other concerned nations, such as Australia, the United
States, Bangladesh and others to demand that the Burmese government recognize the Rohingya as
citizens?
2. Are there underlying racial tensions, which attribute to discrimination that has been related to an
escalation in violence?
3. There are growing concerns of “ethnic cleansing” and genocide in Burma. How could genocide
be prevented among the Rohingya population? Could peaceful nations in neighboring countries, and
blocs work together to ensure that the human rights violations are placed at ease, and are not
grown?
4. How could humanitarian aid improve in the region? Could neighboring countries reach out to
Burma, or are their organizations better suited to provide aid for the Rohingya population?
5. How could the refugee problem, and displaced persons numbers be curtailed and adequately
dealt with?
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic A: Burmese Human Rights Violations
Works Cited
""All You Can Do Is Pray"" "All You Can Do Is Pray" (2013): 1-19. Web.
Franks, Congresman Trent, The Honorable. "Tom Lantos HUman Rights Commission Hearing."
Human Rights in Burma Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission Hearing. Cannon 334,
Washington D.C. 28 Feb. 2013. Testimony.
Khin, Maung Tun, President of Burmese Rohingya ORganisation UK. Ongoing and Egregious
Violations of Human Rights Targeting the Rohingya of Burma. 27 Feb. 2013. Tom Lantos
Congressional Human Rights Commission. Washington D.C.
Testimony by S Hkawng Naw of the Kachin Women's Association, United States Congress Cong. (2013)
(testimony of S Hkawng Naw of the Kachin Women's Association). Print.
Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission Hearing, U.S. Campaign for Burma, Congress Cong. (2013)
(testimony of Jennifer QUigley, Executive Director, U.S. Campaign for Burma). Print.
Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, United States Congress Cong. (2013) (testimony of The
Honorable Thomas H. Andrews, President and CEO of United to End Genocide). Print.
UDDIN, Wakar, Dr., Director General, Arakan Rohingya Union. Statement. 27 Feb. 2013. Statement
for the TLHRC Hearing.
Gonzales, Iris. "Burma Must Address Its 'Rohingya problem'" New Internationalist All Posts RSS. New
Internationalist, 21 Aug. 2013. Web.
"U.S., European Economic Policy on Myanmar Pulled Between Two Extremes." EarthRights
International. N.p., n.d. Web.
FIDH. "The European Parliament Stresses That Warming Relations between EU and Burma Should
Not Become a Blank Check for Persecution of Rohingya." Burma : The European Parliament
Stresses That Warming (...). N.p., n.d. Web.
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
Introduction
Suspicion regarding the North Korean Government and their growing nuclear program
heightened in 2013. The United Nations Council ordered stricter economic sanctions against North
Korea for its third nuclear test. The sanction unanimously approved a resolution that the United
States negotiated with China, North Korea’s greatest protector, and a powerful player in the
forthcoming advances of the North Korea’s growing nuclear program. The sanction places
potentially painful constraints on North Korean banking transactions, trade, and travel industries.
The sanctions additionally pressure countries to search suspicious cargo that is both being received,
and exported from North Korea. Included within the provisions of the sanction is new enforcement
language absent from previous measures. However, the provisions are in some ways less important
than China’s participation in writing them, suggesting that China has lost patience with the neighbor
it supported in the Korean War. The entire world appears to be losing patience with North Korea’s
Nuclear Program. Over time, their program has become more advanced than Iran’s and they have
participated in repeated nuclear tests. It is essential to examine the history of negotiations reached by
North Korea and their neighboring countries, and to study the impact, and trend, of broken
promises and ambiguity in negotiations.
Topic History
The North Korean nuclear weapons program and its development of long-range rocket
systems have angered many in the West. Beginning in December 1991, the two Koreas agreed on a
nuclear ban from the Korean Peninsula regarded as the agreement of Reconciliation, however, the
North and South did not settle on measures to ensure compliance. Explicit compliance would
promote either side to follow through with the agreement. According to the written agreement, the
two Koreas will be allowed to inspect “objects” on the other’s territory “in order to verify the
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.” Procedures and methods for these inspections were
undecided by a nuclear committee, and were left ambiguous. This pact was referenced as no more
than “an expression of principles,” even while South Korea and the United States regarded explicit
inspections as key to easing their concerns that North Korea could become a nuclear power. In a
second agreement was with regards to the the December 1991 accord, both Koreas pledged to use
nuclear energy solely for peaceful purposes and undertook to never possess nuclear fuel
reprocessing plants, which could be used to make material for a bomb. However, the clause on
mutual inspections became even more vague than the initial clause proposed by the South Koreans.
The United States and South Korea, during the time of the 1991 negotiations, were
suspicious that North Korea held nuclear weapons in Yongbyon, a heavily guarded nuclear complex
60 miles of north Pyongyang. After years of ambiguous activity, in January 1992, North Korea
signed an agreement to permit inspections of its seven sites at Yongbyon. American intelligence
agencies had monitored activity at Yongbyon during the 1980s, and evidence had been growing that
North Korea was preparing to convert waste from the reactor into weapons-grade plutonium. North
Korea had formally entered a nuclear non-proliferation treaty, a landmark international treaty whose
objective was to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote
cooperations in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of achieving global
nuclear disarmament. This treaty is an example of the only binding commitment in a multilateral
treaty to the goal of disarmament by the nuclear-weapon States. North Korea in 1993 withdrew
from the extensive treaty, claiming that the action is to defend its supreme interest. In May 1993,
North Korea performed their first successful test of the country’s homegrown missile. It was
suspected that the missile was in development for several years, therefore suggesting that North
Korea was resistant to former negotiations.
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
In October 1994, the United States and North Korea signed a pact, agreeing to freeze and
then dismantle the nuclear complex in Yongbyon and open up two secret military sites to open up
to the inspection. In exchange, an international consortium would replace North Korea’s current
graphite nuclear reactors with new, light-water reactors, which are considered less dangerous as they
produce low levels of weapons-grade plutonium. In addition, the United States and its allies also
agreed to provide fuel oil to North Korea. Kang Sok Ju, North Korea’s Chief Negotiator, described
the agreement as a very important milestone to resolve the North Korean nuclear dispute with the
United States once and for all. The agreement would resolve all questions of Nuclear weapon
development, and that North Korea had neither the intention nor the plan to develop nuclear
weapons. Coincidentally, in August of 1998, North Korea fired a two-stage missile over Japan and
into the Pacific Ocean. North Korea has greatly increased the range of its missiles. In a few short
years, North Korea exhibited evidence of testing, and developing stronger nuclear technology. In
October 2002, North Korea was confronted officials from the Bush Administration with evidence
that it had cheated on the 1994 agreement. This was hastily agreed to by North Korea, admitting
that they had been conducting a major clandestine nuclear program using enriched uranium; thus
declaring it has nullified its agreement with the United States to freeze all nuclear weapons
development activity.
In July 2006, North Korea fired seven missiles over the Sea of Japan. This incident
prompted the United Nations Security Council openly condemned the tests. The United States,
North Korea and four other nations participated in negotiations in Beijing. They signed a draft
accord in which, North Korea promised to abandon efforts to produce nuclear weapons and readmit international inspectors to its nuclear facilities. Foreign powers also said they would provide
aid, diplomatic assurance and security guarantees. In the past, North Korea stood down from the
nuclear non-proliferation treaty, claiming that it had been against their supreme interests, in 2006
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
they agreed to resume nuclear disarmament talks. In the wake of the nuclear testing incident,
Associates at the Center for Strategic and International Studies were concerned over the dangerous
possibility that North Korea will take its seat at the table, and claim themselves as a nuclear state.
The talk serves as an example of concrete steps toward ending the North Korean nuclear program;
in the following months, the United States and four other nations reached an agreement. Outlined in
the agreement, an estimated $400 million in fuel oil and aid would be given to North Korea, in
exchange for the dismantling of its nuclear facilities and allowing nuclear inspectors back into the
country. Unfortunately, two years after this agreement, the North Korean administration appeared
to renege on its deal. Pyongyang moved to resume the processing of plutonium due to the Bush
Administration’s failure to remove North Korea from a list of state sponsors of terrorism.
Stricter 2009 Security Council Sanctions
Since April 2009, North Korea has launched numerous rockets over the Pacific. While they
claimed it was to propel a satellite into space, the United States viewed their actions as proof of it is
edging toward the capability to shoot a nuclear warhead on a longer-range missile. In 2009, The
United Nations Security Council voted unanimously on an enhanced package of sanctions that calls
upon United Nations members to inspect cargo vessels and airplanes suspected of carrying military
material in or out of the country. In Resolution 1874, the sanctions were considered tougher than
previous versions, because China and Russia China and Russia, the c losest things North Korea has
to allies, agreed to a mixture of financial and trade restrictions designed to thwart military
development. Concerning the arms embargo, there was a ban on all arms transfers from the DPRK,
and a ban on all transfers to the DPRK, with the exception of small arms and light weapons.
Included in this embargo was the requirement that states notify the DPRK Sanctions Committee
before transferring small arms and light weapons to North Korea. With regards to inspections, states
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
were called on to conduct inspections on their territory, where there were “reasonable grounds” to
believe banned cargo was being transported on a ship. There are new transparency requirements for
states to report on their inspections and to report when other states deny permission to inspect
ships. States have an obligation and authorization to seize and dispose of banned cargo and to refuse
lending support to such as fuel and water, to vessels suspected of carrying banned cargo, unless it is
necessary for humanitarian purposes. Concerning economic sanctions, states were asked to not
provide grants, assistance, loans or public financial support for trade if such assistance could
contribute to North Korea’s proliferation efforts. States are expected to deny financial services, by
actions that include freezing assets, where such assets could contribute to prohibited DPRK
programs.
Current Status
In December 2010, the Obama administration concluded that North Korea’s new plant to
enrich nuclear fuel, was considered to be using technology that was more advanced than what Iran
had struggled to develop. The first major policy move of North Korea’s new supreme leader, Kim
Jong-un was to agree to suspend nuclear weapon tests and uranium enrichment, and to allow
international inspectors to verify and monitor activities at is main reactor. As an incentive, the
Obama administration pledged to ship food aid to the nation to benefit the impoverished. Shortly
after the proposed freeze, North Korea launched a rocket, but it failed moments after liftoff.
Regardless of its success, the test drew swift international condemnation, and resulted in the
suspension of food aid to North Korea. Again, their actions are an example of how North Korea
consistently enters agreements and reneges by acting against peaceful negotiations. The United
States and neighboring countries can enter agreements with North Korea, while imposing stressful
sanctions to thwart their developing nuclear technology, but what is important is that North Korea
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
follow through with the sanctions. Over time, what is also important to consider, is that as they
come to more agreements, the sanctions have become stricter and limiting for the DPRK.
In 1953, the United States, North Korea, China and South Korea agreed to an armistice,
ending the Korean War. Whether or not Eisenhower’s threats of nuclear attacks helped, by 1953 all
sides involved in the conflict were ready to sign an agreement ending the bloodshed. Importantly, a
new border between North and South Korea was drawn, which gave the South some additional
territory and demilitarized the zone between the two nations. In March of 2013, North Korea
declared the 1953 war truce nullified, and that they will no longer abide by the 1953 armistice that
halted the Korean War amid joint military drills conducted dually by the United States and South
Korea. This resulted in imposed sanctions on a North Korean bank that specializes in foreignexchange transactions; again, an example of how the North Korean administration reneges on
agreements, but the United States and other countries are always present to backfire and to impose
restricting sanctions.
Resolution 2094
In March 2013, the United Nations Security Council ordered more sanctions on North
Korea. The unanimous decision was to adopt a far-reaching resolution based on a failed nuclear test
in April 2012, the construction of a nuclear reactor at Yongbyon and a second and third successful
nuclear test. Resolution 2094 imposes an additional sanction, which builds upon, strengthen, and
significantly expand the scope of the strong sanctions [Resolution 1874] that had already been in
place. Resolution 2094 shows that the international community condemns the expanding North
Korean Nuclear Program, and that North Korea had continued to violate Security Council
resolutions. The sanctions significantly impede North Korea’s ability to develop further illicit nuclear
program—this resolution demonstrates that there are real costs for its continued violations of its
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
international obligations. In the strongest terms, the resolution condemns North Korea’s ongoing
nuclear activities, including its uranium enrichment program, and reaffirms the obligation on North
Korea to abandon all existing nuclear, other weapons of mass destruction and missile programs. The
resolution strengthens the state authority to inspect suspicious cargo and deny port and over flight
access to North Korean affiliated shipments when warranted. With regards to financial sanctions,
the resolution requires states to block transactions related to illicit DPRK activity; which includes, a
crack down on bulk cash transfers, and restricts ties to North Korea’s financial sector if the link to
illicit activity exists. Moreover, states are called upon to prohibit the opening of North Korea bank
branches on their territories if there is a link to North Korea’s illicit programs or a violation of the
resolutions. States are recommended not to provide public financial support for trade with North
Korea, such as export credits or insurance, if there is a link to North Korea’s nuclear program.
Furthermore, the Security Council urges states to implement guidance from the Financial Action
Task Force, a multilateral organization, involving proliferation finance.
Resolution 2094 has extended measures from the original 1874 resolution. If a state has
reasonable grounds to believe the cargo contains prohibited items, states are required to inspect
cargo on their territories. States are thus required to deny port access to any North Koreas vessel
that refuses to be inspected, and should deny permission to any aircraft take off, land in or overfly
their territory if the aircraft is suspected of carrying prohibited items. States are promoted to provide
information to the Security Council’s North Korea Sanctions Committee regarding activity by
vessels or aircrafts to evade sanctions, such as by renaming or registering. Interesting sanctions that
have been applied include that prohibited luxury goods are banned to transfer to North Korea,
which includes certain kinds of jewelry and precious stones, yachts and luxury vehicles. States are
urged to exercise enhanced vigilance over North Korean diplomats to prevent them from
contributing to North Korea’s nuclear program, and direct the Sanctions Committee to update
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
annually the lists of nuclear and ballistic missile technology that is prohibited for transfer to or from
North Korea.
While extended sanctions are put into place on behalf of Resolution 2094, implementation
of such resolution is required. States are called upon to report to the Security Council within ninety
days on steps taken to implement these sanctions, and to supply information regarding sanction
violations. States must follow through with their obligations to reduce repeated broken promises; a
global preview of an additional North Korean missile test would cast a negative light on the Security
Council, the resolution and the global commitment to nullifying the North Korean nuclear program.
The main goal of the resolution, is the commitment to a diplomatic solution. It welcomes efforts by
other states to facilitate such a solution through dialogue, and reaffirms support for the Six-Party
Talks. The Security Council does not intend for such sanctions to be a permanent restriction; as
North Korea will be under continuous review, measures will be adjusted as appropriate. In the event
of another North Korean launch or nuclear test, the Council is determined, and prepared to take
“further significant measures.”
Bloc Positions
The United States & China
The United States, as of April 2013, with moderate confidence believed that North Korea
has learned how to make a nuclear weapon small enough to be delivered by a ballistic missile.
Secretary of State John Kerry claimed that the United States is prepared to reach out to Kim Jongun if he makes the first move to abandon his nuclear weapons program. Secretary Kerry, on behalf
of the United States, has warned the North Korean leader not to proceed with a test launching of its
missile, and has underscored that North Korea would be defeated if a conflict broke out. In April
2013, North Korea warned that it is on the brink of nuclear war with the South, and took measures
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
to warn foreigners that it might be smart to leave the country as they near war. The United States
and South Korea have placed a new focus on offering talks after weeks of meeting North Korean
provocations with harsh warnings that included the deployment of nuclear-capable stealth bombers
on a practice run over South Korea. The United States is determined, as John Kerry states: “to get to
talks” to reach negotiations. The Obama administration has even demanded that Pyongyang commit
to giving up its nuclear weapons; this has been a starting point to decades of animosity that has been
rejected repeatedly.
The United States and China have opposing positions regarding the achievement of normal
diplomatic relations. The United States believes in using pressure to influence North Korea to
change its behavior, while the Chinese diplomats and scholars have a much more negative view of
sanctions and pressure tactics. China and the United States share common interests, including the
containment of North Korea’s nuclear program and preventing South Korea and Japan from
becoming nuclear; a regional partnership involving the United States and countries of Northeast
Asia, including China, may perhaps be the best vehicle for building stable relationships on and
around the Korean peninsula.
China is North Korea’s most important ally, their biggest trading partner and main source of
food, arms and fuel, and largely contributed to sustaining Kim Jong-un’s regime. However, their
patience with North Korea is weakening since the third nuclear test; similar to the United States, the
latest nuclear test has complicated North Korea’s relationship with China, which has played a central
role in the Six Party Talks, the multilateral framework aimed at denuclearizing North Korea. China,
with other nations, agreed to the imposition of stricter sanctions after Pyongyang’s second nuclear
test in May 2009, and in February of 2013, China summoned the North Korean ambassador to its
foreign ministry to protest Pyongyang’s third nuclear test, and issued a call for a calm reaction to the
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
denuclearization talks. China speaks on behalf of their country and the globe and insists that, “The
denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and lasting peace on the peninsula is what the people want
and also the trend of times.”
Despite their long alliance, China believes that their influence over North Korea has been
overestimated; but at the same time, China has too much at stake in North Korea to halt or
withdraw its support entirely. The Chinese do not intend to “turn their backs on North Korea,” in
fact; China’s trade with North Korea has steadily increased in recent years and only agreed to
Resolution 1718 after revisions removed requirements for tough economic sanctions beyond those
targeting luxury goods. China has received economic gains from relations with North Korea. There
are a growing number of Chinese firms that are investing in North Korea and gaining concessions
like preferable trading terms and port operations. Chinese companies have made major investments
aimed at developing mineral resources in North Korea’s northern region. Trade between China and
North Korea is critical, bilateral trade between the two nations reached nearly $6 billion in 2011; the
enforcement of United Nations resolution sanctions is ambiguous. Moreover, China has priorities
within North Korea. Their support for Pyongyang ensures a friendly nation on its northeastern
border, and provides a buffer zone between China and democratic South Korea, which is home to
around 29,000 United States troops and marines. This allows China to reduce its military
deployment and will allow them to increase their focus more directly on the issue of Taiwanese
independence.
The Chinese marks their top priorities as the avoidance of war and stability; Pyongyang
could trigger a war on its own. Securing their stability is essential, the prospect of hundreds of
thousands of North Korean refugees flooding into China is a huge worry for China, and the collapse
of the North could result in chaos on the shared border. If North Korea provokes a war with the
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
United States, China and South Korea would withstand the worst of any military confrontation on
the Korean peninsula, which is why both these countries have been hesitant about pushing
Pyongyang too hard, for the fear of collapsing the regime.
The Six-Party Talks
The Six Party Talks is a group of six countries involving China, the United States, North and
South Korea, Japan and Russia that are aimed at ending North Korea’s nuclear program through a
negotiation process. The talks began in August 2003, and several rounds of negations resulted in a
September 2005 agreement in which Pyongyang agreed to abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons,
to rejoin the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and allow sanction monitors to return into the
country, and in exchange would receive food and energy assistance from other members of the talks.
This negotiation would pave the way for Pyongyang to normalize relations with both the United
States and Japan, and the negotiation of a peace agreement for the Korean peninsula.
For the United States, the Six Party Talks serve as a means to make North Korea’s nuclear
weapons program a multinational problem rather than a bilateral issue. The main concern regards
Pyongyang’s nuclear program and the possible sale of nuclear materials and technology to hostile
states and terrorist groups and regardless anticipates that North Korea will accept sanction monitors
into the country. North Korea’s main objectives is a nonaggression pledge from the United States,
and anticipates normalized relation with Washington and unfettered access to economic aid from
other Six-Party nations. South Korea, possibly North Korea’s largest target, is frozen in an
unresolved conflict, and their ultimate goal is the denuclearization and reunification of the Korean
peninsula. To reiterate, China is North Korea’s main trading partner, fears a rush of refugees across
its border as a result of a collapse, and has provided energy and food assistance to the North.
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
Regardless of their strong relations, and the fear of a flow of refugees, they have agreed to sponsor a
United Nations resolution with the United States for restrictive sanctions.
Russia has traditionally joined China in warning against harsh sanctions. North Korea’s
recent provocations, similar to the other members of the Six-Party Talks, have driven Russia to issue
condemnations against the regime’s nuclear testing. As a result, Russia has ultimately backed
renewed United Nations sanctions against Pyongyang over its third nuclear test. Japan worries that
as the North’s nuclear program expands, missile tests could potentially reach Japan. North Korea
had previously condemned the United States and their refusal to remove North Korea from its State
Sponsors of Terrorism list until the issue was resolved; Japan supported this position wholly.
Committee Mission
North Korea under the supreme leadership of Kim Jong-un is no different from his
predecessors, he is familiar with challenging restrictive sanctions, strengthening the North Korean
nuclear program and protecting their supreme interests. Studying North Korea’s history with regards
to nuclear expansion suggests that the North has repeatedly nullified agreements and defied
sanctions issued by the United Nations. While UN sanctions have become more restrictive for the
regime, it is crucial to examine the ambiguity of resolutions and restrictions that have been
implemented. Moreover, while implementation strategies have been far-reaching and complied by,
states need to have an active role in assuring that North Korea does not put their determination to
rise as a nuclear super power on display. History and current events suggest that North Korea views
sanctions as temporary restrictions that can easily become broken; it is important to repair such
resolutions, and strengthen implementation strategies to reach a diplomatic negotiation. China,
South Korea and the United States will play key roles in diplomatic negotiations; China in particular,
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
sharing a border with the North has much at stake in Northeast-Asia, but has the potential to
mitigate the break out of nuclear war.
Research Questions
1. Is it possible to examine the key role American intelligence agencies can play in reaching
strengthened and peaceful negotiations?
2. Would it be logical to review, and reduce the ambiguity of former negotiations between North
and South Korea? How could Resol:ution 2094 be improved?
3. Are there additional sanctions that would prove to be more useful? It is critical to inspect past
sanctions, and review their effectiveness, and ways in which they could be improved to burden
North Korea.
4. How could states play a more active role in observing the rapid expansion of the North Korean
nuclear program, trade, and business transactions?
5. Are there underlying tensions attributing to the tensions between North Korea, and their
resistance to condemnations from global actors?
UCMUN 2013 Security Council
Topic B: North Korea Nuclear Weapon Program since 2012
Works Cited
Rice, Susan E. "FACT SHEET: UN Security Council Resolution 2094 on North Korea." FACT
SHEET: UN Security Council Resolution 2094 on North Korea. United States Mission to
United States, 7 Mar. 2013. Web.
the
New York Times. "2 Koreas Agree on Nuclear Ban, But Not on Method of Inspections." The
New York Times. The New York Times, 01 Jan. 1992. Web.
Bajoria, Jayshree, and Beina Xu. "The Six Party Talks on North Korea's Nuclear Program." The
Six Party Talks on North Korea's Nuclear Program (2013): n. pag. Council on Foreign Relations.
Council on Foreign Relations. Web.
Weisman,, Steven R. "North Korea Signs Accord On Atom-Plant Inspections." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 31 Jan. 1992. Web.
Global Policy Forum. "Global Policy Forum." Sanctions Against North Korea -- Key Documents. N.p.,
n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2013.
New York Times. "Timeline of North Korea's Nuclear Program." Timeline of North Korea's
Nuclear Program From 1991 to 2013. NYT, n.d. Web.