security council worldmun 2010

Security Council

S e c r e t a r y - G e n e r a l :A m i N a s hs e c r e t a r y g e n e r a l @ w o r l d m u n . o r g

I n t r o d u C t o r y L e t t e r S

H I S t o r y o F t H e C o M M I t t e e

t o P I C A r e A A : Terrorism in the Middle East-Statement of the Problem-History and discussion of the Problem-Proposed Solutions-Past Actions -QArMAS-Key Actors

t o P I C A r e A B : Environmental Stability-Statement of the Problem-History and discussion of the Problem-Current Situation -Future Challenges-Proposed Solutions-Past Actions -QArMAS-Key Actors

P o S I t I o n P A P e r S

C L o S I n G r e M A r K S

e n d n o t e S

B I B L I o G r A P H I C e S S A y

Dear Delegates,

It is my pleasure and honor to welcome you to World Model United Na-tions 2010! My name is Ami Nash, and I am the Secretary-General of WorldMUN 2010. Within this document, you will find the study guide for your committee. The conference staff for WorldMUN 2010 has been working tirelessly for the past eight months to provide you with an un-paralleled conference experience, starting with this guide. Each Chair has worked to display his or her unique passion for the topics in each study guide and researched extensively to provide you with the best possible over-view of each committee’s topic areas.

Please use this guide as a launching point for your exploration of your committee’s topics and of your country or leader’s policies. The World-MUN Spirit asks each delegate to step into the shoes of those from entirely different cultures, to gain much better understanding across borders, and that starts with your research. The more preparation you do for your com-mittee, the more WorldMUN will be able to offer you. Take the time to read carefully through the study guide, to complete additional research, and to explore the various resources on our website; our Guide to Model United Nations and Rules of Procedure, both of which have been updated this year, are designed specifically to assist you in your preparations. Ad-ditionally, updates to the study guide will be posted later in winter and will provide information on recent news developments and more context to each committee’s topics.

Please enjoy reading this study guide, and I am excited to see all of you in Taipei in March!

Sincerely,

Ami NashSecretary-GeneralWorld Model United Nations [email protected]

C o n t e n t s March 14 - March 18 2010

Security Council

D e p u t y S e c r e t a r y - G e n e r a l , S p e c i a l i z e d A g e n c i e s :R e i h a n N a d a r a j a hd s g c o m @ w o r l d m u n . o r g

Dear Delegates of the Specialized Agencies,

As Deputy Secretary-General of the Specialized Agencies, I am very hon-oured to welcome you to this fabulous organ! The Specialized Agencies is home to WorldMUN’s smallest, yet most competitive and challenging committees. Ranging from traditional UN committees like the Security Council and the International Monetary Fund, to the innovative constant crisis committees, the SA is where intense debate, crisis simulation and diplomacy meet.

Each SA committee seeks the strongest delegates, and brings them together in a variety of simulations. To that end, your Chair and Assistant Chairs have been working hard to provide the very best experience for you in Taipei. This study guide is the result of hours of work and research, and is meant to guide you in your process of preparing for conference. Please use this guide as a launching pad for your own research; research that will be pivotal in ensuring you have as rewarding an experience as possible at committee.

Finally, don’t forget to learn and interact with everyone in your commit-tee – not just the Dais staff. WorldMUN brings thousands of incredibly diverse and intelligent people together year after year. Being in a small committee means that you will have the enviable opportunity of interact-ing and forming deep bonds with all your fellow committee members. Get to know them before on the forum online, and carry these conversations on to committee, and further on, even after the last song at the Farewell Party. WorldMUN would be nothing without the fabulous people you meet – diplomacy always works better when served with a side of fun! If at any point you encounter any difficulties, please feel free to reach out to me, or your Chair – we’re here to make this a great experience for you!

Until we meet in Taipei!

Best Wishes,Reihan NadarajahDeputy Secretary-General, Specialized Agencies WorldMUN [email protected]

I n t r o d u C t o r y L e t t e r : d S G S A

Security Council

S e c u r i t y C o u n c i l C h a i r :R i c k y H a n z i c hh a n z i c h @ f a s . h a r v a r d . e d u

Dear Delegates,

I am thrilled to welcome you to the Security Council of WorldMUN 2010. My name is Ricky Hanzich and I will be your Chair for five days of engaging debate in the most powerful body of the United Nations. I am confident that your decision to tackle either Terrorism in the Middle East or Environmental Security will make for an exciting week of maintaining international peace and security. Fortunately, with the WorldMUN spirit in mind, we also have many nights of international escapades to ease the tension built up throughout the conference. I truly look forward to getting to know each and every one of you come March.

Until then, I’ll just share a little bit about myself with you all. I am origi-nally from Orange County, California and so it was quite a shock to see snow fall for the first time when I entered Harvard my freshman year. As a junior, I’m still not quite used to the weather, but that may be because I keep trying to wear shorts and sandals in the winter. Anyway, I am concen-trating in Government while pursuing a secondary field in Health Policy and a language citation in Spanish. During the school year, I might spend more time on extracurricular activities than my coursework, splitting my time between the Harvard College Democrats, the International Relations Council (IRC), and WorldMUN.

Within the IRC, the umbrella organization for seven different internation-al relations programs at Harvard, I have worked as a tutor for high school students under the Harvard Program for International Education (HPIE) and I am a participant of our school’s travel team (Intercollegiate Model United Nations). For Model Security Council, our conference designed to introduce Harvard students to Model United Nations and other IRC programs, I have served as a delegate within the Security Council in 2007 and was chosen as its Director in 2008. Within our high school confer-ence, Harvard Model United Nations, I was an Assistant Director for the Security Council in 2007 and a Director of Substantive Support in 2008. Regarding Harvard’s college conference, Harvard National Model United Nations, I Assistant Directed for the Security Council in 2008, served as the Director of the same body in 2009, and I am currently the conference’s Under-Secretary-General for Specialized Agencies. Finally, at last year’s

I n t r o d u C t o r y L e t t e r : C H A I r

WorldMUN, I was the Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Before I entered Harvard, I participated in Model United Nations for all four years of high school, directing the Security Council twice for our conference and serving as the Secretary-General during my senior year. As you might be able to tell, MUN has been an integral part of my life for over six years and, moreover, I have dedicated myself to better understanding the principles and goals of the United Nations’ most influential body, the Security Council. I firmly believe in the importance of this committee’s ability to protect the lives of countless innocents. And, even though we are only modeling the actions of the real Council, I know that what we learn from each other during this conference will help shape our actions and beliefs for when we are poised to affect tangible change in our respective nations. As you work with other delegates on forming comprehensive resolutions, I urge you to dedicate yourselves to the spirit of diplomacy and continually keep in mind the billions of people around the world who depend on the United Nations for peace and security. I look forward to protecting the world with you all in the spring.

Yours,

Ricky HanzichChair, Security Council WorldMUN [email protected] Eliot Mail Center, Cambridge MA, 02138

Security council

Harvard WorldMun 2010 Specialized Agencies 5

Security CouncilIntroductIon

Within Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, Article 39 states that the Security Council

is responsible for identifying “the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression” and for taking the steps necessary to “maintain or restore international peace and security.” At the same time, UNSCR 1625 stressed the importance of “strengthening the effectiveness of the Security Council’s role in conflict prevention.” Considering these vital tasks of the Council, I have presented Member States with the pressing issues of Terrorism in the Middle East and Environmental Security, topics that address existing crises while anticipating future conflicts.

For nearly ten years, the Counter-Terrorism Committee, established pursuant to Security Council resolution 1373, has been dedicated to countering terrorist activities around the world. Since the creation of this committee in the wake of the 11 September 2001 attacks in the United States, the Council created the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate in 2004 to bolster nations’ abilities to prevent terrorist acts and adopted resolution 1624 in 2005 in order to gain the commitment of all states to the eradication of terrorist activities. Despite continued efforts to combat terrorism, the Middle East region remains particularly troublesome for the Council, concerning both the threat posed to innocent civilians within the area and around the world. Keeping in mind the historical volatility of the region, the potential of terrorist actions to spark inter-state violence requires the Council to continue to rely on the work of the Counter-Terrorism Committee to prevent conflict in the Middle East.

The topic of environmental threats to international peace and security is assuredly a more unconventional and unexplored dilemma for the Security Council to consider. The first and last time the Council discussed the national security implications of environmental degradation was in April 2007. However, with a successor to the Kyoto Protocol hanging in the balance and the results of the Copenhagen talks of December 2009, the growing saliency of global climate change in the policy discussions of

international leaders is readily apparent. Considering the responsibility of the Council to be involved with conflict prevention, it is also clear that this body must support the existing efforts of the international community by laying out the mechanisms necessary to deal with inter-state and intra-societal violence, border disputes, disease proliferation, and even war. As the most powerful body of the United Nations, it is critical that Member States aid in the prevention of such atrocities and create the framework for mitigating future crises.

The following guide provides a basis for your understanding of these two pressing issues. From historical backgrounds to proposed solutions, I have attempted to reveal the difficulty and gravity of both topics, but hopefully I have also shown light upon the areas in which the Security Council can affect real change. Both Terrorism in the Middle East and the Security Implications of Climate Change present risk to the lives of countless innocents and must therefore be at the top of the Council’s agenda. Your work on these issues will play a significant part in achieving the Council’s goal of maintaining international peace and security.

HIstory of tHe commIttee

On June 26, 1945, about a month after the end of World War II in Europe, fifty nations presented

the culmination of a year’s work in creating an international organization. This Charter of the United Nations, adopting many of the principles laid out in its predecessor, the League of Nations, has endured for over sixty-three years. Under the preamble of the UN Charter, there is a commitment “to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security.” The Security Council, the successor of the League’s Council, was created to fulfill this commitment.

Originally, the Security Council consisted of the five Allies of World War II, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France, China, and the United States, and six other rotating members. The five victors were made permanent members and were given veto power. An amendment to Article 23 of the UN Charter expanded the membership of the Security Council to fifteen members, establishing ten positions of two-year terms. The amendment also indicated that decisions on all matters addressed by the Security Council would

Security council


be passed by an affirmative vote from nine members, granted that no veto power is invoked. The changing dynamics of the international community and the wide expansion of the UN membership since 1945 have caused increasing concern over further Security Council reform. However, considering the veto power of the Big Powers, change is difficult to achieve. Finally, the most significant aspect of the Security Council’s powers is the fact that its decisions are the only commitments that are binding on all members.1 Thus, the Security Council is truly the most powerful body of the UN. Especially given its solemn duty, as stated in Article 39 of the UN Charter, “to maintain or restore international peace and security.”

Under the Security Council’s overarching responsibility to maintain peace and security, there are

numerous powers and functions of the committee. The Council must investigate situations or disputes that could transform into international conflict and formulate courses of action that would provide guidance for settlements. Member States are also responsible for creating a system designed to regulate armaments. The discretion of the Council is called upon to determine what constitutes a threat to peace and what must be done to halt aggression. Power is given to the membership to enforce decisions against aggressors by military means. Finally, the Council serves to recommend admission of new Member States, recommend appointments for the Secretary-General, and help elect Judges of the International Court of Justice.2

In the over sixty years of the Security Council’s existence, nearly 2,000 resolutions have striven to maintain

Security Council ambassadors for over half a century have worked to create nearly 2,000 resolutions maintaining interna-tional peace and security.

http://www.un.int/wcm/webdav/site/lebanon/shared/images/146223%20-%20SC%20pm%20-%2031_05_2007%20-.jpg

Security council


and restore international peace and security. However, it is with creation of certain commissions and committees that the Council has been able to effectively tackle threats to peace and security on various fronts. The recently created Peacebuilding Commission is a UN intergovernmental advisory body that works to assemble resources, propose strategies of peacebuilding in post-conflict situations, and create a forum of all relevant actors. Particularly relevant to this committee’s first topic is the Counter-Terrorism Committee, established under resolution 1373, which aids Member States in their ability to prevent terrorist attacks and the successive Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate created by resolution 1535. The 1540 Committee strives “to prevent the proliferation of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons” and to ensure that non-State actors do not possess these weapons. Lastly, the numerous Sanctions Committees of the Security

Council have worked to pressure States into complying with the Council’s resolutions without having to use military force.3 These are just some of the bodies created by the Security Council, but it is evident that the work performed by the Council and its subsidiary organizations is critical to ensuring a peaceful and more secure future.

Stretching from North Africa to Central Asia, the Middle East remains a constant concern for the Security Council. http://www.globalresearch.ca/articlePictures/Middle-East-map.gif`

Security council


topic Area A: terrorISM In tHe

MIddLe eAStstatement of tHe Problem

Terrorist operations from within the Middle East sparked the United Nations’ current counter-

terrorism efforts within that region and around the world. The resultant Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) and its advising CTC Executive Directorate (CTED), produced by UN Security Council Resolutions 1373 and 1535 respectively, continue to battle global terrorist threats. In the aftermath of the U.S.-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, extremist organizations, criminal gangs, and militant groups seem to have only gained momentum, requiring the continued perseverance of the entire international community. Once the impetus for the UN’s counter-terrorism strategy, the Middle East remains at the center of efforts to stem the tide of terrorist actions that threaten the lives of thousands of innocent civilians and increase the chances of inter and intra-state violence.

The issue of terrorism in the Middle East continues to pose a threat to international peace and security due to the region’s ethnic diversity, religious differences, economic disparities, political turmoil, interplay of distinct state actors, and high number of extremist organizations. The myriad of complex dilemmas facing the Middle East, and thus the Security Council, requires the body’s constant vigilance and an ever-responsive strategy to the crises emanating from the region. Conflict along the Lebanese-Israeli border, sectarian violence in Iraq, suicide bombings in the Gaza Strip, and attacks upon NATO forces in Afghanistan constitute only a piece of the tragic story in the Middle East.

Security Council resolutions that compel the cooperation of all Member States have already called for the cessation of funding for terrorist acts, the elimination of safe havens for terrorist organizations, and the collaboration of governments to prevent terrorist attacks. Yet Afghanistan and Iraq are still mired in war, Israel

fights for its existence while Palestine yearns for its own, the Lebanese government struggles to secure the safety of its people, and Iran and Syria provide the fuel for the fire. Clearly, a new plan for establishing peace and security is required.

The problems observed throughout the Middle East have proven resistant to military solutions. The long-term stability of the region and the elimination of terrorist organizations can only be achieved through an approach focused on economic development and the strengthening of political institutions. However, these goals are difficult to obtain when conflicts continually emerge from North Africa to Central Asia. Although seemingly unattainable, it is the duty of the Security Council to both react to developing crises in the Middle East and develop an overarching plan for long-term success.

Al-Qaeda’s attack on the United States on 11 Septem-ber 2001 prompted the Security Council to establish the

Counter-Terrorism Committee. http://www.september11news.com/111wtcreutersitaly.jpg

Security council


HIstory and dIscussIon of tHe ProblemIntroduction

Operative 6 of United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1373, in response to the 11

September 2001 attacks on the United States, established the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC).4 For almost a decade, this body and the CTC Executive Directorate (CTED) have worked to buttress the efforts of Member States in preventing terrorist actions in their respective nations and broader regions. The creation of this committee was by no means the Council’s first step in combating the devastating effects of terrorism. In 1999, UNSC Resolution 1267, in accordance with the same “rule 28” cited in UNSCR 1373, established a committee of the Security Council charged with reporting observations and recommendations concerning efforts to halt the actions of the Taliban in Afghanistan.5 Four days later, UNSCR 1269 “unequivocally condemned all acts, methods, and practices of terrorism… in particular those which could threaten international peace and security” and called upon all states to undertake a wide array of broad measures designed to prevent terrorist attacks.6 The failure of these resolutions to prevent the tragedy of 11 September and the eventual deterioration of international peace and security led to UNSCR 17373 and the subsequent establishment of the Counter-Terrorism Committee.

This body, of course, is concerned with eliminating the scourge of terrorism throughout the world, but considering that activity within the Middle East was the impetus for establishing the committee and waging the “War on Terrorism” over the past decade, our debate will be rooted in the attempt to better secure this turbulent region. Tackling terrorism in the Middle East, however, still only marginally aids us in comprehending and solving the complex issue of terrorism, as the Middle East itself lacks clear boundaries. Thus, in order to identify and more sensibly forge solutions to the dilemmas of the Middle East, discussion will be limited to five key

areas that have routinely been racked by violence and/or contribute to the efforts of terrorist organizations. This background will not cover the significant actions that will undoubtedly occur in the Middle East and Greater Middle East after this guide has been written and even after the inclusion of updates. It will therefore be your task to stay continually updated on the affairs of this region in order to appropriately respond to terrorist activities during our meeting in March. The following overview also recognizes the primary terrorist organizations (with more thorough descriptions in Section F: Key Actors and Positions) involved, but again, this is not an exhaustive list and the quality of debate will depend upon the strength of your research

Iraq

Soon after the United States’ invasion of Iraq on 20 March 2003, Iraq became the primary theatre of

the War on Terrorism. Although Saddam Hussein’s government collapsed less than a month later and on 1 May 2003, President George W. Bush declared the end of major combat operations in Iraq, the United States and its “coalition of the willing” found themselves mired in guerilla war by July of 2003. During the next month, on 19 August 2003, a suicide bombing destroyed the United Nations Baghdad headquarters, killing 20 people and causing some international agencies to flee the capital. Over the past six years, conflict between Sunni (the branch

Terrorist attacks have killed at least 100,000 innocent civilians in Iraq since 2003.http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_

id=14256816&fsrc=nwl

Security council


of Islam believing the leaders after Prophet Mohammed’s death should be elected) and Shi’a (Muslims holding the belief that leadership should have remained within the Prophet’s family or among divinely-appointed Imams) have combined with Arab/Kurdish political friction to plague Iraq with suicide bombings, kidnappings, sectarian violence, and ethnic cleansing.8 Relying solely on media reports, it is estimated that over 100,000 civilian deaths have occurred since the US-led invasion of Iraq.9 However, researchers of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, using a “cluster sample” approach, estimated that 655,000 Iraqis (excluding combatants) were killed during the initial three-and-a-half years of the war.10 In 2006 alone, 34,000 people were murdered, primarily due to suicide attacks. By this year, the death toll of United States soldiers exceeded that of the victims of 11 September.11 In an effort to spread democracy and decrease the threat of terrorism in the Middle East, Iraq instead found itself in violent turmoil. Despite a successful multiparty election on 30 January 2005 (the first in half a century) and over 100,000 U.S. troops stationed in the region, violence continued to surge throughout Iraq. There have been seemingly countless terrorist attacks since 2003: Shiite politician Ayatollah Mohammed Baqr al-Hakim along with 90 other people were killed in a car bomb attack on 29 August 2003; more than 180 Iraqi Shiites lost their lives due to attacks by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian with ties to al-Qaeda, on 2 March 2004; in the months surrounding the transfer of power to an interim Iraqi government in 2004, a number of senior Iraqi officials were assassinated; less than a month after Iraq’s first general election of 30 January 2005, a suicide car bombing killed at least 114 people; on 1 July 2006, 66 Shiites perished from a car bomb in Sadr City; over 500 members of the Yazidi religious minority were killed on 14 August 2007; AQI was responsible for the deaths of at least 60 people on 15 April 2008; and on 23 April 2009, suicide bombers took the lives of 87 Iraqis.12, 13

In order to understand the motives for these atrocities and to begin developing a durable peace for the future, it is important to outline the demographics of Iraq. The nation is unique in that the Shi’a population holds a 65% majority; whereas on a worldwide scale, Shi’a believers constitute only 10 to 15% of the Muslim population. Shi’a Muslims are found primarily in southern Iraq, Iran, and southern Lebanon, but also have

a significant presence in Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and India.14 Although Shiites are commonly in southern Iraq, they also form a majority in Baghdad, leaving Sunni Muslims (20% Sunni Kurds and 15% Sunni Arabs) to occupy northern Iraq. Despite a Shi’a majority in Iraq, Sunni Arabs have historically dominated political and economic affairs (a phenomenon stemming from the Ottoman Empire and then British support of the ruling Sunni Arab minority and the monarchy’s pan-Arab ideology). Sunni minority rule continued even after the fall of the monarchy and through the end of Saddam Hussein’s government. For decades, Saddam’s government killed and arrested Shiite religious leaders and followers and during the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), tens of thousands of Shiites were arrested and deported, while violence surged in Iraqi Kurdistan.15 Now, with a democratic form of government, there exists a Shi’a majority rule. However, AQI (a Sunni extremist group) and other insurgents are dedicated to continuing decades-long attacks on Shiite Muslims while simultaneously undermining the nascent Iraqi government.

Considering Iraq’s relatively rapid transfer of power, a key problem in stemming the tide of conflict comes from the difficulty in distinguishing between sectarian violence (between Sunnis and Shiites, Kurds and Arabs) and terrorist attacks committed by al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), its “front” organization, the Islamic State of Iraq, and other foreign combatants entering through Iraq’s porous borders. The Bush administration commonly blamed AQI, a Sunni extremist group, for exacerbating violence throughout the nation; and some have argued that this was done in an effort to view the US-led invasion of Iraq as a reaction to the attacks of 11 September. Regardless, the United States was successful in disrupting the actions of AQI after killing al-Qaeda leader al-Zarqawi on 8 June 2006 and capturing Islamic State of Iraq leader Khalid Abdul Fatah Da’ud Mahmud al-Mashadani on 4 July 2007.16 In the last quarter of 2007, the U.S. State Department claimed that there was a significant “decrease in civilian casualties, enemy attacks, and improvised explosive devices (IED) attacks.”17 Despite these accomplishments, the National Intelligence Estimate indicates that AQI “retains the ability to conduct high-profile attacks” and Rear Admiral Gregory Smith of the U.S. military states, “the regeneration capacity of al-Qaeda is still out there.” AQI’s ability to foment civil unrest in Iraq, playing off

Security council


Sunni/Shi’a and Arab/Kurdish conflicts, is of grave concern, but this group is unfortunately only one of dozens of extremist groups, criminal gangs, and armed tribes helping to proliferate violence throughout Iraq.18 The United States considers its War on Terror in Iraq to be focused on AQI, the Islamic State of Iraq, militias and death squads fueling intra-communal and sectarian violence, criminal organizations, and insurgents battling Coalition Forces (CF).19

Under the Obama administration, control of the battle against these terrorist forces was given to Iraqi leadership on 30 June 2009. Violence escalated in the weeks after this transition and less than two months later, on 19 August 2009, AQI organized simultaneous rocket attacks and simultaneous car bombs near the cabinet office and six ministry offices, killing at least 95 people and injuring nearly 600.20 This attack constituted the worst Iraq has faced since the beginning of the U.S. withdrawal of troops last year. Considering the extent of this bombing, some wonder whether the United States military left Iraq too hastily.21 President Obama stated that the United States’ combat mission in Iraq will end by 31 August 2010 and that all U.S. troops will be removed, as agreed to under the Status of Forces Agreement, by the end of 2011.22 However, it is unclear if the United States will be able to fulfill their promises in the face of escalating violence. Iraq is certainly a nation that the Security Council must continue to monitor as the fledgling democracy struggles to maintain peace and security for its people. The United Nations may certainly play a more pivotal role as the United States and CF cede full control of security issues to the Iraqi government.

Iran and Syria

The turmoil and tragic violence seen in Iraq over most of the last decade have tragically been exacerbated by

the involvement of two state sponsors of terrorism: Iran

and Syria. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of Iran possesses an elite branch named the Qods Force, which has provided training, funding, and weapons for not only Iraqi combatants, but for Palestinian terrorist groups such as HAMAS, the Taliban in Afghanistan, and Lebanese Hezbollah’s militant wing (although it is disputed whether

this is a terrorist organization). Regarding Iraq, the Qods Force has given Iranian-produced sniper rifles, mortars, automatic weapons, and advanced rockets to militants while working with Hezbollah to train Iraqi combatants in and outside of Iraq to use advanced weaponry.23 Ironically, documents seized from the IRGC indicated that this Shi’a dominated society has even provided financial support for AQI (despite its Sunni ideology), in order to increase instability in the region.24

As the most active state sponsor of terrorism, Iran has also added fuel to fires in Lebanon, Israel, and Afghanistan. In violation of UNSCR 1701, Tehran has helped Hezbollah rearm after the 2006 Israeli-Hezbollah conflict and in 2008 alone, Iran provided the Shi’a political group with $200 million and extensive training in Iranian camps. In efforts to undermine the Middle East Peace Process, HAMAS, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and other Palestinian terrorist groups have received substantial levels of training, weapons, and funding. Finally, in Afghanistan, the IRGC Qods Force has provided the Taliban with a wide array of weaponry (from rocket propelled grenades to plastic explosives) and training (regarding small arms, small unit tactics, and explosives). Furthermore, Tehran failed to bring to justice al-Qaeda affiliates who fled to Iran after the collapse of the Taliban in Afghanistan.25

While not as blatantly supportive of instability in the Middle East as is the Islamic Republic of Iran, Syria has been a principle state sponsor of terrorism, helping

As a state sponsor of terrorism, Iran contributes millions of dollars each year to help fund the activities of various extremist organizations.

Security council


to in fact build defensive ties between these nations. Syria has more subtly contributed to the violence in Iraq, condemning terrorist acts and meeting with Iraqi leaders to discuss the improvement of border security on the one hand and then continuing to allow an influx of foreign fighters and aid for AQI on the other. Prime Minister al-Maliki has repeatedly called for Iraq’s neighbor to halt the flow of militants and bring an end to the efforts of Saddam Hussein loyalists.26 Syria has given Hezbollah both material and political support in Lebanon and provided a number of Palestinian terrorist organizations a safe haven and base for external leadership. However, the government of Syria has claimed that such groups as PIJ and HAMAS have been limited to informational and political actions.27 It is certainly a key responsibility of the Council to determine what organizations truly commit terrorist acts and whether nations such as Iran and Syria are in fact aiding operations.

Lebanon

The 2006 Israel-Hezbollah War and the subsequent UN-brokered ceasefire carried out through UNSCR

1701 has highlighted Lebanon’s central role in the peace and security of the Middle East. Beyond strengthening the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and calling for a “full cessation of hostilities,” UNSCR 1701 also recognizes in operative 18 the importance of past UNSC resolutions spanning over 40 years, from UNSCR 242 (in response to the Six-Day War) of 1967 to UNSCR 1515 (endorsing the Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict) of 2003.28 UNIFIL peacekeepers continue to monitor the “Blue Line” (the border between Lebanon and Israel) and work to ensure humanitarian aid gets to intended civilians.29

A major difficulty of dealing with terrorism in Lebanon revolves around the fact that the Lebanese government recognizes Hezbollah as a legitimate political party, while other nations, such as the United States, view them as a powerful terrorist organization. Maintaining strong ties with Lebanon’s southern Shi’a community, Lebanon also receives support from Syria and Shi’a-dominated Iran. Of course, this Shi’a political group is not the only source of violence in the Middle East. Al-Qaeda-associated Sunni extremist militants work within Lebanon, attempting to exploit the friction between Israel

and Hezbollah after the 2006 conflict. Palestinian refugee camps are also used to recruit and train foreign combatants on their way to Iraq.30 Although the United Nations has a strong presence in Lebanon, more must be done in order to prevent future conflicts with Israel and minimize the influence of extremist groups in undermining the security of Iraq.

Afghanistan and Pakistan

AQI and al-Qaeda groups within Lebanon are tied to the central leadership of the international terrorist

network that originated during the 1980s under Osama bin Laden. In the aftermath of 11 September and the U.S.-led War in Afghanistan, al-Qaeda’s leadership relocated to Pakistan’s tribal areas, along the Afghan border.31 From 1996 to November 2001, the Taliban seized control of the Afghan government, repeatedly refusing to hand over Osama bin Laden and purposefully harboring his followers. Opposition forces led to the fall of the Taliban and the establishment of an interim government in December of 2001, but the Taliban continued to work with al-Qaeda and other insurgent groups to fight Coalition Forces in Afghanistan.32 Currently, the instability of the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan allows AQ leadership to escape Coalition Forces (CF) and Pakistani security forces, giving them greater ability to train combatants and plan attacks. Although a number of top AQ leaders have been killed or detained, remaining lieutenants (including Ayman al-Zawahiri of Egypt and Abu Yahya al-Libi of Libya) continue to advise bin Laden, plan terrorist operations, and provide a public face for al-Qaeda to spread its message of global jihad.33 Despite the presence of over 100,000 Pakistani troops along the Afghan-Pakistani border, al-Qaeda has even extended their reach beyond the Middle East, strengthening connections with affiliates in North Africa and Europe.

The instability of Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) has provided al-Qaeda and other foreign combatants with a more extensive safe haven that allows for attacks on Afghanistan and the expansion of anti-CF militants. These insurgents work with the Taliban and other groups such as Hizb-e-Islami Gulbuddin (HIG) to recruit local inhabitants for operations against CF in Afghanistan. Beyond their success in the FATA, extremists also maintain tenuous power in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP), areas of South Waziristan,

Security council


and Baluchistan. However, CF have been inadvertently aided by internal struggles within the Pakistani Taliban. In the wake of Commander Baitullah Mehsud’s death, some militants killed those close to Mehsud, believing that they had worked with authorities opposed to the Taliban. Moreover, Hakimullah Mehsud, the man set to take control of the organization, is thought have been injured or killed in a gunfight with a rival candidate.34 This power struggle certainly aids the counter-terrorism efforts of the Pakistani government and its allies.

The security situation remains similarly problematic on the Afghan side of the border. NATO forces and Afghan forces struggle to secure contested

border areas that are plagued by terrorist and insurgent attacks. Beyond al-Qaeda and Taliban involvement, the international community also faces the extremist activities of HIG and the Haqqani network. Moreover, the rise of narcotics production and criminal organizations has provided combatants with significantly more funds.35 However, with the election of President Barack Obama in the United States, a new, more aggressive approach was implemented by up to twenty NATO nations. In February of 2009, President Obama called for the deployment of 17,000 extra troops to Afghanistan and during the next month he dedicated 4,000 to the task of training and supporting the Afghan army and police. Also, in July

Extremist groups in FATA and NWFP along the Afghan-Pakistani border continue to pose problems for CF and the international community. http://www.khyber.org/images/maps/nwfpmap01.gif

Security council


of 2009, the U.S. army commenced a major offensive against the Taliban in the southern Helmand province.36 Clearly, the military operations of NATO and the United States have constituted the primary fight against terrorists and insurgents throughout Afghanistan, but the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (established by UNSCR 1401) continues to help in providing security advice, technical assistance, and humanitarian aid. Ultimately, although Afghanistan and Pakistan are a part of the Greater Middle East and are commonly considered to be located in South Asia, the influence of terrorist organizations within this region on the affairs of the Middle East command the Council’s continued vigilance in bringing peace to both nations.

Israel, the Gaza Strip, and the West Bank

While Afghanistan and Pakistan remain on the outskirts of the Middle East, Israel, the Gaza

Strip, and the West Bank are at the focal point of this tumultuous region geographically and have been at the center of international attention for half a century. In 1994, the Palestinian Authority (PA) was established in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, but fifteen years later, it is still unclear how responsibilities and jurisdiction within the West Bank are divided between the PA and Israel. Security issues within Gaza are similarly complex as Hamas (a Palestinian militant movement deemed a terrorist organization by some nations) attained power through the PA general legislative elections in 2006 and seized control of Gaza in 2007.37

The most recent conflict in this region began on 27 December 2008, when Israel launched missile attacks primarily on Hamas within the Gaza Strip; although Gaza officials stated that women and children were also among the victims of the attack.38 On 8 January 2009, the Security Council called for “an immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire, leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza” under UNSCR 1860.39 It was not until ten days later that Israel declared a unilateral cease-fire, which was reciprocated by Hamas later that day. However, rocket fire continued to strike Israel, resulting in an Israeli air strike. Ultimately, the conflict took the lives of 1,300 Palestinians and 13 Israelis.40

Tragically, such instances of violence have been all too common in this region for decades, especially since the founding of Hamas in December of 1987 and Hezbollah’s

rise in 1982. Apart from these larger conflicts, Israel, the West Bank, and especially the Gaza Strip continue to suffer from frequent terrorist activities. In 2008, terrorists struck Israel at least ten times, killing twenty-seven civilians. However, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Israel Security Services (ISA) were also successful in foiling a number of other terrorist attacks. During the Israeli military’s anti-terrorist operations of 2008, they killed nearly 800 Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Despite Israel’s recent successes in the region, they still struggle with Hamas terrorists who receive explosives, arms, and funding via tunnels between Egypt and the Gaza Strip. The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) estimated that 1,528 mortars and about 1,750 rockets hit Israel during the course of 2008. Israel has also claimed that Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist organizations have received training from a newly strengthened Hezbollah

Israeli warplanes hit targets along the Gaza Strip’s border with Egypt in 2009.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/02/26/isr.tunnel.airstrike.2.jpg

Security council


in Lebanon.41 Moreover, it is estimated that Iran provides Hamas with up to $30 million per year.42

Fortunately, the leaders of the PA, President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Salam Fayyad have been dedicated to counter-terrorism efforts. PM Fayyad has struggled to halt the terrorist activities of Hamas, but has faced stark resistance in the Gaza Strip. PA security forces (PASF) have been more successful in securing the West Bank. The abilities of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades (AAMB), the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Hamas, and other terrorist groups to plan attacks from the West Bank have been limited. Considering Hamas’ establishment of its own “Executive Force” organizations, intelligence unit, and police, it is much more difficult for the PA to put an end to violence between Israel and Palestinian areas.43 This inability to secure the Gaza Strip helped with current Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s bid for the position, as he campaigned for a stronger stance toward Palestinian militancy. The presence of this leader of the right-wing Likud party has made it more difficult to achieve a new Middle East peace agreement. Indeed, he would only accept the establishment of a Palestinian state if it were entirely demilitarized.44 Despite this, President Abba (the primary Palestinian architect behind the 1993 Oslo Accords) and PM Fayyad have, time and again, publicly denounced violence against Israeli civilians, taken immediate action to apprehend those responsible, and committed to a security program seeking to eliminate terrorist actions.45 Effectively dismantling terrorist organizations in this region will go a long way towards securing a lasting peace between Israel and possibly a future Palestinian state.

Conclusion

Addressing the difficulties posed by these five areas of the Middle East will by no means completely

end the suffering endured for too long by too many innocent people. There are a number of other nations and organizations that should be taken into consideration and may very well be at the center of attention come time for the Council’s session. For example, Turkey continues to engage in violent conflict with Kurdish militants in northern Iraq. Although Saudi Arabia recognized the Taliban-led government of Afghanistan before 2001, King Abdullah has been an important force behind

counter-terrorism efforts throughout the Middle East, helping to resolve crises surrounding Lebanon, securing its border with Iraq, supporting Israeli-Palestinian peace attempts, and eliminating Saudi-based senior leadership of al-Qaeda.46 And, despite animosities of decades past, Egypt has continued to work with Israel to eliminate smuggling tunnels between the Gaza Strip and Egypt. The path toward peace and security in the Middle East remains long, but there is undoubtedly a strong, collective will among nations in the region and throughout the international community to see an end to extremist violence, the senseless killing of innocent civilians, and the dismantling of secure political institutions. And the Security Council will be there every step of the way.

Past un actIons

For decades the United Nations has worked to prevent terrorist attacks throughout the world. However, over

the last decade, the UN has taken extraordinary efforts to create advisory bodies and facilitate the cooperation of Member States to combat terrorism. Al-Qaeda’s attacks on New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania on 11 September 2001 sparked a reinvigorated, international commitment towards halting global terrorism and bringing to justice those responsible for heinous crimes against innocent civilians. Even before the attacks on the United States, the UN Security Council recognized the danger posed by al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and created the al-Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee in 1999 with UNSCR 1267.47

The inability of this committee to force the Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden and cease terrorist operations led to the Council’s creation of the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) under UNSCR 1373 in 2001. UNSCR 1624 provided further guidance for the CTC in 2005, encouraging the body to continue its invaluable work in helping Member States to prevent terrorist actions within their nations and throughout their respective regions.48 As a part of the committee’s mission to improve the institutional and legal abilities of Member States to combat terrorism around the world, UNSCR 1373 urges nations to criminalize the transaction of funds supporting terrorist acts (operative 1), freeze the funds of those involved with terrorism (operative 1), refrain from supporting and providing safe haven to terrorists

Security council


(operative 2), prevent the movement of terrorists through successful border control measures (operative 2), increase the exchange of information critical to preventing terrorist attacks (operative 3), cooperate with other Member States through various agreements (operative 3), coordinate efforts from a national to global level to limit threats to international security (operative 4), and report to the CTC concerning what steps they have taken to implement the resolution (operative 6).49 Since the Council’s passage of UNSCR 1373, over 600 reports have been submitted, forming what is thought to be the world’s largest source of information regarding the counter-terrorism capacities of all 192 UN Member States.

In order to aid in the implementation of these critical provisions, UNSCR 1535 established the Counter-Terrorism Committee’s Executive Directorate (CTED) in 2004 and it became fully operational at the end of 2005. The mandate of CTED was extended until 31 December 2010 under UNSCR 1805. CTED has produced two reports (the first in 2006 and the most recent in 2008) summarizing the information given to the CTC from less than half of the UN membership. Although more information is still needed, CTED made recommendations for how the international community could best focus counter-terrorism efforts in the near future and analysts assessed the current condition of border control, funding of terrorism, human rights protection, international cooperation, law enforcement, and counter-terrorism legislation. Finally, CTED is responsible for conducting on-site visits to consenting countries to help determine the progress nations have made in implementing UNSCR 1373 and what technical assistance they may require.50 Saudi Arabia was one of six nations that CTED visited in

2008.51 The visiting teams conclude their work with reports providing r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s in the areas of law enforcement, technical assistance, counter-terrorism legislation, border control, and international cooperation.52 As a broader goal, CTED seeks to enhance cooperation among Member States, the UN, other international organizations, and regional and sub-regional organizations.

Beyond the c o u n t e r - t e r r o r i s m apparatuses established

by the Security Council, the UN General Assembly also implemented the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy on 8 September 2006 (with the support of all 192 members), while the Secretary-General created the UN Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF) in 2005. These were developed in order to coordinate all of the counter-terrorism resources of the entire UN system and those of its Member States. CTITF consists of twenty-four entities (including CTED) and organizes its efforts through eight working groups and various projects and initiatives.53 Working groups of CTITF were given the task in 2007 of implementing the provisions of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy.54

In addition to these counter-terrorism bodies, the United Nations is also involved in a number of critical Assistance Missions in the Middle East. The UN Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) was established by UNSCR 1500 on 14 August 2003 in order to monitor the handover of the Oil-for-Food program.55 However, increasing violence in the nation necessitated its further involvement. UNSCR 1883 extended its mandate until 7 August 2010 and reaffirmed the importance of UNSCR’s 1770 and 1830, which outlined UNAMI’s current task to resolve boundary disputes, secure elections, protect human rights,

A peacekeeper of UNIFIL monitors the border between Lebanon and Israel, known as the “Blue Line.”

http://www.unmultimedia.org/photo/detail/290/0290684.html

Security council


and aid with reconstruction and development.56 The UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) has played a similar role in Afghanistan since 28 March 2002 when the Council passed Resolution 1401. UNAMA’s mandate was extended until 23 March 2010 through UNSCR 1868 in order to continue its dedication to promoting peace and stability in the region.57 On the other side of the Middle East, along the Lebanese, Israeli border, the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) has monitored the “Blue Line” for over thirty years and works to ensure the cessation of violence, the provision of humanitarian aid, and the protection of civilians.58 Together with the efforts of various counter-terrorism entities, the work of these missions is critical to the reconstruction and development of the Middle East.

ProPosed solutIons

If there is one thing to be learned from the turmoil and tragedy that has consumed the Middle East for

decades, it is that violence is not the answer. A new path focused upon diplomacy, economic development, and political reconciliation must be developed in order to provide the nations of this region any chance for lasting peace and security. Gilles Kepel, the Chair of Middle East Studies at the Institute of Political Studies in Paris, proposes a plan of joint economic development between Europe and the Middle East in his book Beyond Terror and Martyrdom: The Future of the Middle East. In his hypothetical vision of peace and prosperity, an economic union of Iran and its Gulf neighbors would be linked with Europe through a network of natural gas pipelines. As the argument follows, the exportation of natural gas to Europe would require the establishment of diplomatic relations and trade agreements. Looking to a future of scarce oil resources and climate change woes, an increased presence of nuclear energy programs in the Middle East would not be a threat considering nations’ commitments to economic development and the catastrophic results of an attack for the entire region. Kepel argues that Europe would even provide technical and financial assistance for nuclear power plants, enhancing the economies of the Middle East and, in turn, dismantling the leadership and influence of terrorist organizations. He concludes with the belief that “purely political solutions, without economic incentives, are bankrupt from the start.”59 Unfortunately,

the reverse is also true, and the intersection of both political and economic development is what remains so hard to achieve. Indeed, Kepel essentially ignores the former, recognizing the enmity between Arab nations and Iran and the chasm between Europe and the Middle East, but not offering any clear solution on how to bridge the gap. The open forum of the United Nations may be a critical starting point for the establishment of intra and inter-regional cooperation.

Some scholars, such as Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington, have viewed post-Cold War violence as an inevitable “clash of civilizations.” They posit that “ancient hatreds” and diametrically opposed cultures are primarily responsible for the conflict between the Middle East and the West and between different ethnic groups within nations. However, as Harvard Professor of International Relations Jack Snyder argues, this theory fails to take into consideration long periods of time during which current foes lived in peace, concluding that “cultural differences cannot in themselves be a sufficient explanation for the recent fighting.”60 A.Z. Hilali, a research scholar at the University of Hull in England, emphasizes the importance of democracy in the deliberate reduction of extremist influences. He argues that the instability of political institutions and lack of democracies form “an immediate cause of extremism.” However, he also recognizes the deleterious effects of high illiteracy rates, high unemployment, and weak economies.61 The United Nations will certainly have to continue to play a leading role in aiding development, rebuilding infrastructure, and ensuring the legitimacy of democratic elections.

Beyond the efforts centered around economic and political advancements, the future of the Middle East also depends on the quality of educational systems and the equality guaranteed for all citizens, regardless of ethnicity or gender. Despite its controversial role in the region, the United States launched the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) in 2002, providing over US$530 million to 16 countries and the Palestinian territories.62 The business training, employment programs, and legal reforms regarding gender equality have all worked toward the goal of creating a more secure, prosperous region.63 Although not specifically targeted toward the enhancement of counter-terrorism efforts, these steps are crucial to the long-term success of the Middle East and the eventual dismantling of extremist groups.

Security council


QuestIons a resolutIon must answerResolution FormatConsider carefully how you wish to tackle the resolution writing process: Should you focus on a particular region in the Middle East recently racked by violence? Will you choose to create a broader framework of economic and political development to encourage long-term peace and security?

Identification of Terrorist OrganizationsOne person’s terrorist could be another person’s leader of a legitimate political party: In the months leading up to the conference, take into consideration the actions of all parties to conflict (especially those threatening the lives of innocent civilians); how will your nation respond to those responsible, directly or indirectly, for continued violence and during times of crisis?

Stable GovernmentHow will you work to ensure the security of elections and the strength of political institutions in Afghanistan and Iraq?

State Sponsors of TerrorismUNSCR 1373 demands the cessation of “the financing of terrorist acts,” yet some nations and criminal organizations still fund attacks responsible for the deaths of countless innocents; what provisions can the Council produce in order to achieve the full implementation of this resolution?

Beyond the United NationsWithin the framework of CTITF, how can the Security Council help coordinate the work of international, regional, and sub-regional bodies in order to stem the tide of terrorist actions?

Key actors and PosItIonsAl-Qaeda and AQI

The Services Office of Afghanistan, designed to combat the Soviet’s invasion in 1979, was led by Osama bin

Laden and Palestinian religious scholar Abdullah Azzam. These men reached out to fifty nations, recruiting and

training thousands of mujahideen to fight off the Soviet invasion. Bin Laden, however, sought to extend his “holy war” throughout the region and the world and created al-Qaeda around 1988, with the mission of ridding the Middle East of Western influences and establishing fundamentalist Islamic regimes. During the Gulf War, bin Laden saw Saudi Arabia’s harboring of U.S. and allied troops as a sacrilegious act and was subsequently exiled to Sudan for his public ridicule of the government. Since then, al-Qaeda has not only attacked Western and Jewish targets, but also those of “immoral” Muslim governments, including Saudi Arabia. In the aftermath of the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, the influence of the senior leadership of al-Qaeda was seriously impeded, as they were forced to flee into Pakistani cities and along the Afghan-Pakistani border. However, al-Qaeda is still connected to a number of other Sunni fundamentalist organizations, including the Islamic Army of Aden in Yemen, the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and Jama’at al-Tawhid wal Jihad in Iraq and even cooperates with the Shi’a Lebanese militia, Hezbollah.64 Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), or al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, serves as a prime example of how senior leaders of al-Qaeda still influence the actions of terrorists throughout the Middle East. In 2007, U.S. General David Petraeus labeled AQI “public enemy No.1” in Iraq, linking the group to the most visible suicide attacks and terrorist operations in the nation. Although the death of AQI’s leader al-Zarqawi led to the decentralization of the organization, AQI offshoots such as the Islamic Army of Iraq and the 1920 Revolution Brigades continue to pose a threat to Iraq’s security. Moreover, it is important to keep in mind that AQI is only one of dozens of extremist organizations, criminal gangs, and armed tribes fueling sectarian violence and causing the deaths of countless civilians in Iraq.65

Taliban

The Taliban in both Afghanistan and Pakistan have been similarly instrumental in the efforts to battle

NATO forces and foster instability in the region. This Muslim extremist group seized control of Kabul in 1996 and led Afghanistan until 2001, when it was forced to retreat to southern and eastern provinces, along the Afghan-Pakistani border, and within Pakistan. The Taliban is known to have harbored Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda followers. Despite this, during its rule, Saudi

Security council


Arabia, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates recognized Taliban leadership of Afghanistan. Mohammed Omar, the leader of the Taliban in Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001, is unlikely to be in control of current operations and it is presumed that Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar now commands most Afghan Taliban operations. The Pakistani Taliban, an institutionally separate group, is currently plagued by a power struggle, but continues to clash with Pakistani security forces.66

Hezbollah

While the international community widely recognizes al-Qaeda and the Taliban as facilitators of terrorist

actions, the status of Hezbollah’s militant wing is disputed. This Shi’a political group, founded in 1982 after Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, acts as a significant provider of social services for thousands of Lebanese Shiites, largely located in the south of the nation. Hassan Nasrallah has served

as Hezbollah’s secretary-general since 1992 and Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah acts as its spiritual leader. The most recent major conflict between Lebanon and Israel occurred in 2006, during which time more than one thousand civilians died and hundreds of thousands became displaced persons or refugees as a result of war between Hezbollah and the Israeli army. Internally, the Lebanese government faced further violence in 2008 when Hezbollah took control of West Beirut. This act led to Hezbollah’s gain of veto power in the parliament, but ultimately hurt the group’s credibility as seen with its loss to the “March 14” coalition in the June 2009 parliamentary elections.67

Hamas

As the most powerful Palestinian militant movement and the victors of the 2006 Palestinian legislative

elections, Hamas is similarly positioned as a recognized political organization with a militant, terrorist wing. Intriguingly, “hamas” is simultaneously the Arabic word meaning zeal and the Arabic acronym for the Islamic Resistance Movement. Hamas originated out of the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, but became independent in 1988, moving away from the Brotherhood’s commitment to nonviolence. Hamas carried out its first suicide bombing in April of 1993 and since then attacks have been targeted throughout Israel, the Gaza Strip, and the West Bank. As of 2007, Hamas is in control of the Gaza Strip and continues to be in conflict with the rival Fatah movement and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas who remains in control of the West Bank.68 Hamas’ rejection of peace talks and refusal to recognize the state of Israel greatly undermines the Middle East Peace Process.

Bloc Positions

The Council has unanimously passed the primary UNSC resolutions regarding counter-terrorism

efforts, such as UNSCR 1269, 1373 and 1535. Turkey has a particularly vested interest in seeing a stable Iraq, as it continues to violently struggle with Iraqi Kurdistan. The permanent members of the Council, in particular the United States and the United Kingdom have long been a central part in the affairs of the Middle East. Ultimately, the economic potential of this region makes its security of utmost concern to the membership of the entire Council.

Osama bin Laden is the leader of al-Qaeda, an internationally recognized terrorist organization responsible for numerous attacks

over the past two decades.http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2gse3v4&s=5

Security council


suggestIons for furtHer researcH

Although this topic is extremely complex, involves seemingly countless actors, and provides more

questions than answers, you fortunately have a wealth of information out there to begin tackling the difficult issues at hand. Since 2001, a deluge of scholars and professors from universities around the world have analyzed the past, present, and future of the Middle East and you will assuredly find a plethora of resources at your fingertips within your own university’s political science or international relations department.

As Terrorism in the Middle East is an issue that is constantly appearing in the news, I highly recommend subscribing to unwire.org, which compiles the most relevant articles of the day (from energy and environment to peace and security) and updates you every day of the week. Beyond this, I have found it extremely helpful to consistently read the New York Times and the Economist, both of which you can follow online.

The three most useful and informative websites I

have found are globalsecurity.org, cfr.org, and un.org. The first site provides comprehensive reports on the demographics, histories, and backgrounds of key nations in the Middle East. Moreover, you can access policy reports and analysis created by the Congressional Research Service of the U.S. Library of Congress. The website of the Council on Foreign Relations is a think-tank site that provides essential background information, political analysis, and reports on the current crises facing the international community. Finally, the United Nations website is of course the first source you should turn to in order to understand the mission and goals of the Security Council, the past actions taken by the UN and other key players, and the bodies currently fighting against terrorist threats. The Security Council’s site gives you access to all resolutions passed since 1946, the site of the Counter-Terrorism Committee outlines its progress on the implementation of UNSCR 1373, and the website of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force provides links to all of its entities, working groups, and initiatives. The United Nations website is certainly a good place to start.

Hamas’ control of the Gaza Strip and hostility toward Israel complicates the ability of the PA and Israel to create a peace agreement.http://www.rafahtoday.org/newsphotos/07/november/24/Hamas%20supporters.jpg

Security council


topic Area B: environmental

Securitystatement of tHe Problem

The 15th United Nations Climate Change Conference of Parties (COP15) will take place from 7 December

to 18 December 2009 in Copenhagen, Denmark. The resultant agreement produced under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) will succeed the Kyoto Protocol, the first agreement of the UNFCCC to reduce greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. As the timeline for targets expire in 2012, the December negotiations will be the crucial next step in mitigating the effects of global warming. Fortunately, the top emissions-emitting nations from both the developing and developed worlds show a renewed sense of urgency and seem to recognize the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fourth Assessment Report, produced in November 2007, which firmly and unequivocally states that there exists a warming of the climate system with clear “increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level.”69 Indeed, at the July 2009 G8 Summit of L’Aquila, Italy, nations agreed that a rise in global temperature of more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures was unacceptable. However, the summit declaration did not include specific commitments to match their rhetoric.

The IPCC’s report outlines likely scenarios if these nations fail to forge an international and legally binding agreement by December in Copenhagen. Some African nations will face a 50% reduction in agricultural production in ten years, endemic mortality due to diarrheal disease will increase in Asia with changes in the frequency of floods and droughts, European citizens will face more heat waves and wildfires, small islands will suffer from water scarcity, North America will encounter a shift in the vectors of various diseases, and a significant number of Latin American citizens are expected to go hungry due to significant decreases in the production of crops.70

Ultimately, as the think tank the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) indicates, no country, developing or developed, will benefit in the long-term from environmental degradation.71 Besides the hundreds of millions of people who will suffer from humanitarian crises, global climate change will also have serious security implications.

A report created by CSIS and the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), outlines the national security implications of global climate change. In the expected scenario, likely results include: conflict over scarce resources, especially within Africa; geopolitical reordering; increased cross-border and internal tensions due to large-scale migrations; and heightened spread of disease caused by shifts in disease vectors. Under the severe case, migration and water scarcity will cause internal tension even within developed nations, armed conflict will occur in response to resource scarcity, and pandemic disease will threaten the lives of millions. Finally, the catastrophic scenario would involve the “strong and surprising intersections of […] global climate change and international terrorism.” The report relates that conflicts driven partly by environmental factors are already occurring in the Middle East (water scarcity), South Asia (monsoons), and Darfur (desertification).72 Climate change will likely exacerbate these situations and spark new violence.

In the Security Council’s first-ever debate on the impact of climate change on peace and security, China and the “Group of 77” developing nations argued that the Security Council did not have the expertise to handle the situation. However, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was clear in stating that global warming has peace and security implications that go beyond the social, economic, and environmental effects.73 The Security Council must seriously consider supporting the commitments outlined in the Copenhagen agreements in order to play a pivotal role in combating a primary root cause of social and political crises and armed conflict.

Security council


HIstory and dIscussIon of tHe ProblemIntroduction of Environmental Degradation as a National Security Issue

On 23 June 2009, former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan warned the Global Humanitarian

Forum that “every year we delay, the greater the damage, the more extensive the human misery.”74 Fortunately, Annan sees a source of hope for future climate talks with a new United States administration that understands the multi-faceted and tragic implications of failing to act within a progressive, international framework for mitigating the effects of climate change. However, the reasons for a new willingness to invest in alternative energy sources and negotiate a successor to the Kyoto Protocol are based on more than just a desire to protect the environment. During his road to the White House in July of 2008, President Obama stated that “this is not just an economic issue or an environmental concern – this is a national security crisis. For the sake of our security […] we must

end this dependence on foreign oil.”75 Indeed, the United States is held hostage by its dependence on foreign energy sources. In exchange for environmentally deleterious oil, the United States provides 700 million dollars each day to hostile and unstable nations.76 While this national security concern is a prime motivator for a sea change in U.S. environmental policy, broader environmental security issues endanger the fates of developing nations far more severely. Lacking the adaptive capacity and political stability of the developed world, nations throughout the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa will fight over a diminishing supply of food and water. Resource wars are likely to be unavoidable. It is difficult to ignore the challenges the world faces with a limited supply of oil, but much more dangerous to fail to recognize the implications of scarce food and water sources. Yet, in the academic world, there still exists controversy over the relation of environmental degradation and national security.

The most extreme opposition to the idea of environmental security comes from academics such as Herman Kahn and Julian Simon. These thinkers, a military

The July 2009 G8 Summit of L-Aguila, Italy failed to produce concrete commitments from the industrialized world.http://www2.tbo.com/exposure/full/2009/07/09/6266_g-8-summit.jpg

Security council


strategist for the RAND Corporation and a Professor of Business Administration at the University of Maryland, respectively, believe the connection between human actions, environmental degradation, and the resultant danger to human life is fallacious and exaggerated. They see the purpose of framing climate change within the context of national security as a ploy to gain resources from already established institutions and will ultimately fund ineffective bureaucracies. Others view the rise of environmental politics as just a byproduct of the confusion that has arisen with the end of the Cold War. Daniel Deudney, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University, argues that with the high cost of expansionist wars, the ability to create substitutes for limited materials, and the possibility to trade scarce resources, resource wars of the past are unlikely. Deudney and others warn that putting environmental problems within the language of security could inhibit the realization of appropriate solutions. Some security analysts even believe the concept of environmental security could distract from national security goals, diverting resources away from traditional security objectives.77

Other scholars, such as Thomas Homer-Dixon, a Professor of Political Science at the University of Toronto, recognize that throughout history, resource scarcity has been a primary factor in conflict. Jessica Mathews, the President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, taking into consideration environmental change, urged the international community to adopt a broadened “definition of national security to include resource, environmental and demographic issues.” As a majority of the scientific community can attest and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) clearly and definitively illustrates, human disregard for the environment will almost certainly endanger the lives of millions of people in both developing and developed countries. Moreover, worsening climatic conditions will strain international relations. Conflict over limited resources is nearly inevitable.

A particularly significant component of the rise of environmental security in the political sphere has to do with the decline of a bipolar world. Two decades have passed since the end of the Cold War and its era of mutually assured destruction. Even in an age of terrorism, rogue states, and weapons of mass destruction, some would argue that environmental degradation

increasingly poses the greatest danger to human lives rather than the prospects of war. Richard Ullman, a Professor of International Affairs at Princeton University, provided an appropriate definition of national security for a world no longer controlled by the whims of two superpowers, but rather increasingly confronted by non-traditional threats. Joseph Romm further developed Ullman’s conclusion, attempting to confine the definition to the most serious security threats, stating, “a threat to environmental security is whatever threatens to drastically 1) degrade the quality of life for the inhabitants of a state, or 2) narrow the range of policy choices available to the government.”78 Some may argue, however, that with terrorist attacks, from 11 September 2001, to suicide bombings in Pakistan in July 2008, national defense should be focused on the “War on Terror.” This fight to protect the homeland ostensibly cannot be impeded by costs related to predicted environmental concerns when terrorism seems to pose much more imminent and immediate dangers. This perspective, however, fails to take into consideration the complete range of causes of the problem. A report created by United States generals entitled, “National Security and the Threat of Climate Change,” in fact explained that environmental degradation may “provide an avenue for extremist ideologies and create the conditions for terrorism.”79 In 2007, the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Center for a New American Security worked with leaders in the fields of foreign policy, oceanography, national security, history, political science, and climate science to produce “The Age of Consequences: The Foreign Policy and National Security Implications of Global Climate Change.” The report indicates that under an expected climate change scenario, large-scale migrations will heighten cross-border and internal tensions while conflict over resource scarcity is likely in many weak African states. Moreover, as security analyst Elizabeth Chalecki, a professor concerned with environmental security at Tufts University, points out, terrorists will increasingly target scarce natural resources to cause both deaths and political chaos.80 It is now critical for developed nations to consider all threats to the security of its citizens. Furthermore, these countries must realize both the isolated impact of climate change on its citizens and the implications of the developing world’s inability to adapt. Ultimately, while considering national security as conceived by Ullman and Romm, the

Security council


developed world must recognize the dangers to human health posed by climate change and the decreased capacity to respond to the instability of neighboring developing nations. Environmental degradation is likely to relocate military forces to areas suffering from more frequent and intense natural disasters and may seriously impede both the progress of peacekeeping missions and efforts to stabilize failing states. Agreement on the definitions of environmental and national security may help focus the committee on addressing the root causes of threats to international peace and security.

History of Civilization Reacting to Resource Scarcity and Natural Disasters

Although the world is becoming increasingly developed, important lessons may still be learned from society’s

past reactions to resource scarcity and natural disasters. Some argue that in an increasingly industrialized and interconnected world, substitutes may be developed

to effectively release tension. On the other hand, many fear that, when dealing with essential resources of water, timber, and oil, little can be done besides pursing sustainable development. Moreover, when natural disasters have struck, storms of the 21st Century have shown how little prepared even developed nations are in providing temporary humanitarian relief. By outlining past instances of disputes over oil, water, timber, and minerals, and previous responses to natural disasters, the international community may realize what can be done to mitigate the impending violence of the future.

Currently, the first and foremost material connected to resource wars is petroleum. With its pivotal position in the global economy, international violence to control its sources has been and will continue to be a dilemma. The intense battle over oil became clear during World War II. Many major battles began with the Axis Powers’ desire to control petroleum supplies. More recently, the Persian Gulf War of 1990 began with Iraq’s

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was honored with the Nobel Peace Prize, along with former Vice-Presi-dent Al Gore, in 2007.

http://www.ipcc.ch/img/photos/ipcc-deleg-nobel-peace-big.jpg

Security council


invasion of Kuwait to attain more oil. The United States has enacted embargos on oil exports to various nations during times of war whereas during in the 1970s, Arab states ceased petroleum exports to the United States and the Organization of Petroleum-Exporting Countries (OPEC) instituted a fourfold increase in the price of oil.81 Shifting to the Caspian Sea basin, which contains the second or third largest reserves of oil in the world, history suggests future conflict as well. Although little violence is directly attributable to disputes over petroleum, there are a number of authoritarian regimes and a history of regional rivalries, ethnic tension, and territorial disputes.82 As time passes, the reserves located in the Caspian Sea basin will become more significant and contentious, providing the spark for conflict. A similar situation exists in the South China Sea, but is aggravated by the rapid economic growth in Asia, which demands increased amounts of energy.83 As sources of petroleum continue to dwindle, the willingness of nations to go to war over the remaining oil will only

increase. The situation is also exacerbated by the fact that petroleum supplies are often located across several nations and oil is transported by ship or pipeline through areas of instability. Dealing with a resource of such global importance, any interference with the flow of oil will almost certainly be met with foreign involvement.84

Oil truly drives the global economy. However, its disastrous effect on the climate and the predicted outcomes of environmental degradation reveal that water may soon overtake petroleum as the primary cause of conflict. With rising temperatures, shrinking supplies of drinkable water, and rapid industrialization, disputes over this essential element are imminent. Possibly even more distressing is the fact that this resource has been fought over for centuries. Enemies destroyed dikes and canals during times of war millennia ago. Now, with the clear division of nation-states, two or more countries often access a major source of water. For example, the Nile passes through eight countries before entering Egypt

Iraq’s conflict with Kuwait in 1990 was fueled by a desire to attain a dwindling source of oil in the Middle East. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/Kuwait_burn_oilfield.png

Security council


and the Mediterranean Sea. Thus, it is not surprising that during the 1980s, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the then minister of state for foreign affairs of Egypt, warned that “The next war in our region will be over the waters of the Nile, not politics.”85 In the case of the Jordan, Tigris-Euphrates, and Indus basins, there have been attempts to appropriately allocate water. However, many negotiations have failed or been suspended. In the 1960s, Arab plans to divert water from the Jordan River led to intense conflict with Israel, involving the Israeli obstruction of Jordanian dam construction. In 1975, the Tabqa Dam crisis, sparked by Syria’s filling up of the Tabqa Dam reservoir, led to preparations for war by Iraq and Syria, but fortunately ended with peaceful negotiations and the Syrian release of 200 million m3 of water into the Euphrates River. The Indus basin has been and will continue to be a major source of conflict between India and Pakistan. Ten years ago, the Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) stated that as water becomes scarcer, the more “capable of unleashing conflicts” it would become.86 Those words are no less true today.

Finally, the fight for timber and minerals is most typically scene within states. Over the past decades, Sierra Leone has seen the deaths of tens of thousands and the displacement of hundreds of thousands due to conflict over diamonds. At the same time Angola has been ravaged by conflict over oil and diamonds between the government and the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA). Borneo contains one of the world’s largest tropical forests and happens to be divided between the three nations of Brunei, Indonesia, and Malaysia. Since 1987, conflict has existed between the indigenous groups of the island and the Malaysian government.87 As environmental degradation worsens and the world’s supply of timber diminishes, conflicts like these will only worsen. Moreover, as hostilities surrounding minerals and timber are commonly restricted within the borders of particular nations, the Security Council has a unique responsibility in maintaining peace and security different from issues concerning oil or water. Serious consideration of the Responsibility to Protect, a concept expounded by the General Assembly involving the international community’s duty to protect people from genocide and crimes against humanity, may even come into play to ensure the safety of minority populations that happen to

maintain limited resources. Beyond exacerbating the situation of resource

scarcity, global climate change is predicted to dramatically worsen the strength and frequency of natural disasters. In the CSIS report “The Age of Consequences,” the most common, but not necessarily constructive, lesson learned is that natural disasters are “both socially divisive and unifying at the same time.”88 This was recently and most readily seen when Hurricane Katrina slammed into New Orleans, Louisiana in August 2005. The emergence of a million environmental refugees put strain on neighboring states, such as Arkansas and Texas, creating social tensions, while at the same time, the United States saw an outpouring of sympathy that worked to provide much needed humanitarian aid. The report admits that it will be difficult to predict future responses to natural disasters, especially if a global disaster occurs affecting multiple places at once.89 However, as populations increase, especially within developing nations with less adaptive capacities, it will only be more difficult to mitigate the effects of natural disasters. Hopefully the analysis of past responses to such crises will aid the committee in developing the mechanisms necessary to prevent social strife in the wake of natural disasters.

Proliferation of Disease Due to Environmental Degradation

At the dawn of the 21st century, a person can travel to the other side of the globe in a matter of hours,

news is dispersed to hundreds of millions of people in less than a second, and technological advancements continue to work to improve and extend the lives of all individuals. These three aspects of contemporary society undoubtedly have beneficial aspects. However, with over 2 billion air-borne passengers per year, the threat of a swift international proliferation of an infectious disease is more perceptible than ever; Internet access can spread panic faster than the infectious agent itself; and, most worryingly, despite the efforts of microbiologists, new cures are not being produced fast enough to replace failing ones.90 In fact the spread of infectious diseases is at its highest rate in history while the world faces the unprecedented emergence of one new disease every year.91 As a part of the broader issue of environmental degradation, the issue of disease proliferation is undoubtedly disastrous for developing nations. A primary social determinant of health is

Security council


socioeconomic status and as one-fourth of the population lives in “dire poverty,” as indicated by the World Health Organization (WHO), billions of people are vulnerable to the spread of water-borne and air-borne diseases such as cholera, infectious hepatitis, malaria, diphtheria, yellow fever, tuberculosis, and typhoid.92 As Dr. Jim Kim points out in Dying for Growth, far too many people in the developing world, from Central America to Africa, are suffering from diseases that are mistakenly considered uncommon today and “more typical of life in previous centuries.”93 It is clear that developing nations lack the adaptive capacities of wealthier nations. However, as the Director-General of the WHO Dr. Margaret Chan points

out, “vulnerability is universal.”94

The CSIS argues that the developed world will face numerous environmental-related dilemmas, including endemic disease. The IPCC indicates in its AR4 Synthesis Report from 17 November 2007 that with the advent of global climate change, transformations will occur in the vectors of infectious diseases, causing the introduction of diseases to populations lacking the medicine and natural immunity to survive.95 The World Meteorological Organization, the United Nations Environment Programme, and the WHO sponsored the book, Climate Change and Human Health – Risks and Responses, that explicitly outlines the impact of environmental degradation on the health of humankind. In the sixth

chapter titled Climate Change and Infectious Diseases, it is made clear that “climatic conditions affect epidemic infections” and, moreover, this is not a new phenomenon. The question is not whether climate change will affect the spread of infectious diseases, but rather what can we do to mitigate the great risks posed to the world’s population.

Environmental degradation and the spread of various infectious diseases are assuredly linked, but for some, the last connection to national security remains tenuous. Some may argue that this issue is being handled and should be handled by bodies such as the World Health Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme. Making climate change a national security issue, it is argued, only distracts from the true goal of national security in dealing with violent conflict. However, with the end of the Cold War, and the fear of mutually assured destruction largely mitigated, a redefined concept of national security should and must be created. Now, more than ever, it is important to look at national security in terms of the individual’s well-being. It is becoming increasingly apparent that environmental degradation and the increased spread of disease take more lives than armed conflict. In a multi-polar world in which non-traditional threats to national security are gaining prominence, Ullman and Romm’s definition of an environmental security threat must be adopted. Global climate change’s effect on the spread of infectious diseases will undoubtedly limit the possible policy choices for nations and significantly degrade the quality of life for humans throughout the world. Beyond the fact that pandemic disease could wipe out

Borneo’s rain forests remain a continual source of conflict be-tween indigenous groups and the Malaysian government.

http://image09.webshots.com/9/6/54/63/154565463AtuoZW_fs.jpg

Security council


tens of millions of lives without the push of a trigger, such a humanitarian crisis would divert the attention of military personnel and effectively weaken the power of military forces used to handle traditional security issues of armed conflict. Ultimately, the Security Council was established to maintain international peace and security, as directed by Article 24 of the United Nations Charter. The most effective way to accomplish this task is to prevent the breaching of peace and security in the first place. Fortunately, dealing with a security issue driven by environmental degradation, the opportunity for eliminating the cause of the dilemma is considerable. However, with millions of lives at stake and the ability of the developing world to control outbreaks severely limited, the Security Council must deal with this issue swiftly.

Although the World Health Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme are primary forces in preventing and limiting the spread of diseases, the Security Council must provide support when considering diseases that could infect tens of millions of people and consequently strain tensions between nations struggling to protect their respective citizens. To provide focus for the member states of the Council, it is appropriate to focus attention on one especially destructive, but treatable disease that may pose a grave security threat in the near future. Malaria provides only a glimpse into the new and transforming diseases the world must increasingly address. However, it does reveal a clear picture of how environmental degradation affects the spread of disease and what implications this has for the well-being of people throughout the world. The limited adaptive capacity and instability of neighboring developing nations will have grave implications for the health of their people and the citizens of the developed world. By presenting the possible shifts in location and prevalence of this disease, as well as its predicted affects on both developing and developed nations, hopefully some light will be shed on how the Security Council can improve the impending situation.

Currently, Plasmodium falciparum is the most life threatening of the four species of malarial parasites and it is responsible for a majority of malarial deaths in developing countries.96 The symptoms of malaria are characterized by headache, backache, fever, shivering,

pain in the joints, diarrhea, and repeated vomiting.97 Malarial parasites are transmitted through the bite of an infective female Anopheles mosquito (vector) and further cases of malaria can arise through congenital transmission and exposure to infected blood products.98 Each year, 350 to 500 million people are infected and one million are unsuccessfully treated and die.99 Of those who die, 80% are from sub-Saharan Africa.100 In the developed world, the implementation of water and case management, the improvement of housing and socioeconomic conditions, and a focus on vector-control helped to interrupt the transmission of malaria by the middle of the 20th Century.101 However, the capacity for preventing and controlling this disease in developing nations is vastly inferior. Once environmental degradation is added to the equation, the limited adaptive capacity of the developing world will be highlighted while risks will be opened to the citizens of developed nations. Not only will environmental degradation cause the malarial vector to shift, the limited supply of food, water, and land, especially in Africa, causes conflict over resources and the displacement of millions of people. Twenty-six million people were displaced in 2007 alone by resource wars and the situation will only worsen as supplies dwindle. These displaced peoples are often

Global warming may shift the vector of malaria and even help transform the disease, exposing previously unexposed and thus

extremely vulnerable populations to the malarial parasites.http://news.uns.purdue.edu/images/+2004/williams-mosquito.jpg

Security council


forced into regions abandoned because of malaria and, under terrible living conditions, die at rates higher than the victims of the conflicts that caused them to flee.102

In Climate Change and Infectious Diseases, the World Health Organization indicates that malaria is “probably the vector-borne disease most sensitive to long-term climate change.”103 Destructive agricultural practices, deforestation, and water development projects have increased the prevalence of malaria in the developing world.104 Moreover, high altitude regions that have normally been protected from malaria due to low temperatures and thus inhospitable environments for vector development will be increasingly at risk.105 The rise in global temperatures due to climate change will introduce malaria to populations that have never been exposed and thus lack the organization, resources, and immunity to fight the disease. The world has already seen the affects of higher global temperatures with the shifting of the mosquito vector to cooler environments of the African highlands.106 The CLIMEX model (a statistical based model to show the “climatic constraints… for various vector-borne diseases”) of Sutherst and others indicates that the malaria vector of Australia could extend its reach 330 km south.107 Moreover, in the expected climate change scenario outlined by the CSIS in the Age of Consequences, an increased frequency in heavy rainfall events and more intense storms is predicted.108 These extreme climatic events are closely linked to the spread of malaria. In the Punjab region of the Indian subcontinent, it was determined that the malaria epidemic increased five times in the year after El Niño hit.109 Finally the malaria vector may, in order to adapt to increased temperatures, undergo microevolution.110 In a study performed by Bradshaw and Holzapfel, it was determined that the pitcher-plant mosquito can adapt genetically in response to the longer growing seasons produced by climate change.111 Diseases like malaria have been around for centuries and with increased global temperatures, the natural processes of mutation and bolstered resistance to antimicrobials will only be accelerated.112 The feeble health systems of developing

nations will only become more ineffective while the developed world becomes more concerned about its citizens and reduces aid contributions to those in greatest need. The health implications of environmental degradation, which both degrade the quality of life of individuals and constrict the range of policy options, certainly have the potential to spark international confrontations. It will be the responsibility of the Security Council to establish the tools necessary to avoid such conflict and ensure peace and security worldwide. Moreover, with potentially tens of millions of lives in the balance, Member States should consider formulating future responses to health crises. Certainly legitimate concerns arise out of organizational

conflict with the work performed by other international bodies such as the WHO and UNEP, but it will be a significant task for the Security Council to determine when the binding decisions of the body must be exercised to protect the

lives of countless innocents.

Conflicts Regarding Resource Scarcity

Global demand for water, food, timber, and energy is increasing at an unsustainable rate. Explosive

population growth and the spread of industrialization have combined to drastically increase the demand for resource-intensive commodities.113 The development of global climate change has and will continue to seriously impede the world’s ability to provide clean water and food. Nations throughout the Middle East and Southwest Asia utilize the Tigris-Euphrates, Indus, and Jordan River basins. This area, likely to be inhabited by one billion people by 2050, has experienced disputes over water for centuries and the likelihood of future conflict is strong. African nations from Sierra Leone to Angola have been embroiled in tragic conflict over timber and minerals for decades. Finally, regarding energy, mounting military forces in the Middle East, a permanent United States military infrastructure in the Persian Gulf, Russian forces in the Caspian Sea basin, and a strong Chinese presence in the South China Sea, lead to the one conclusion that it is only a matter of time before conflict rages over oil.114

“The feeble health systems of developing nations will only become more ineffective while the developed world becomes more concerned about its citizens and reduces aid contributions to those in greatest need”

Security council


The foreboding future of Africa is made more ominous by the conflicts over resources that have already existed for centuries. Major sources of water throughout Africa are shared by two or more countries and with demand surpassing the dwindling supply, conflict is highly plausible. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that resource scarcity may put stress on the already existing dilemmas of ethnic tensions, poverty, migration, and weak governmental institutions.116 Both the increase in population and industrialization of developing nations will cause further tension over sources of water. The situation is particularly acute in the Nile Basin. The Nile reaches nine countries before exiting to the sea. As Egypt is the last country to receive water from the Nile before entering

Struggles of African Nations

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) asserts in its AR4 Synthesis Report from 17

November 2007, that global climate change is unequivocal and clearly predicts disastrous effects for Africa. By 2020, 75 to 250 million people will struggle to get sufficient amounts of water. By the same year, the predicted drastic decrease in agricultural production (up to 50%) will “further adversely affect food security and exacerbate malnutrition.” Nearing the 22nd century, the rise in sea level may force 5 to 10% of GDP to be used to adapt to the dangers posed to low-lying coastal areas. Finally, the amount of arid and semi-arid land will increase by 5 to 8% by 2080.115

With a diminishing supply of water for nine nations, the Nile River Basin is a likely source of future conflict over scarce resources.

http://mapmaker.rutgers.edu/355/nile_basin_lrg.gif

Security council


the Mediterranean, it is firmly against the construction of dams on the upper Nile. Thirty years ago, Egyptian President Anwar el-Sadat proclaimed, “The only matter that could take Egypt to war again is water.” However, Cold War needs limited conflict between Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sudan. With the end of the Cold War and dramatic increases in the populations of nations all along the Nile, the likelihood of a peaceful solution, such as a region-wide development plan, seems difficult to achieve.117 To avoid or prepare for conflict, the Security Council should remain aware of such strained regions.

Past un actIons

As environmentalism is a relatively recent movement from the 1960s, the concept of environmental security

has only been considered in national and international politics for a few decades. A significant beginning may be found with the “Earth Day” established by Gaylord Nelson in 1970. Although involving millions of Americans, this monumental environmental demonstration revealed the United States’ recognition of the significance of global climate change to the international community. Two years later in Stockholm, Sweden, the issue was clearly recognized on a global scale at the United Nations Conference on the Environment. Decades before this, conferences concerning the conservation and equitable distribution of resources were held, but beginning with the conference at Stockholm, environmental issues were earnestly and formally considered. In fact, the United Nations Conference on the Environment led to the establishment of the United Nations Environment Programme. The Stockholm conference also recognized the importance of involving NGOs and fostering North-South cooperation.

In 1983, the United Nations General Assembly created the World Commission on Environment and Development. Four years later, the Commission produced the report Our Common Future that suggested policy options for dealing with increased industrialization, population growth, heightened energy utilization, and food scarcity. Most importantly, the report emphasized the necessity of sustainable development. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development of 1992 furthered the Commission’s efforts and offered solutions that attempted to address the concerns of developing and

developed nations.118

The negotiations of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development led to the Kyoto Protocol of 1997. This document involved developed nations reducing six types of greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2 percent. Moreover, greenhouse gas levels would be cut to 1990 levels by 2012. Although 182 nations are a part of the Kyoto Protocol, the United States has not ratified because the document does not require developing countries to significantly reduce emissions.119 As the 2012 benchmark quickly approaches, little time remains to negotiate a Kyoto successor. Fortunately, a number of UNFCCC Conference of Parties and Meetings of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol have occurred since 1997 in order to be prepared to create a document in December 2009 in Copenhagen. Although the Kyoto Protocol was a critical international step in fighting global climate change, it was still just the first, and the UNFCCC has recognized the importance of developing a successor to the agreement. The Protocol went beyond simply encouraging certain measures, as the UNFCCC has done, and committed members to specific targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions.120 As the Security Council has the power to bind Member States to the provisions of its resolutions, representatives may wish to consider creating operatives that would ensure participating nations abide by commitments to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This regulatory power of the Council will certainly be a controversial and significant issue to discuss within a body that has heretofore avoided the issue of environmental security.

Since the Stockholm conference, nearly one hundred multilateral conventions have been created that cover topics from sea and air pollution to the utilization of nuclear materials. Problems have occurred with nations failing to ratify conventions and it remains difficult to observe, analyze, and enforce the requirements of the conventions. However, emerging international environmental law will increasingly aid in ensuring that all nations participate in the mitigation of climate change.121 The UNEP works to further develop and implement these laws that stress the importance of cooperative action in meeting the challenges posed by environmental degradation. Moreover, tens of thousands of NGOs, from Greenpeace to Friends of the Earth, have been critical in complementing the work accomplished by international

Security council


conferences and the United Nations. The European Union, the Organization for

Economic Cooperation and Development, the African Union, the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization have all been involved in lessening environmental degradation. Moreover, the World Bank, the International Labour Organization, the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the International Maritime Organization, the United Nations Development Programme, the World Health Organization, and the Food and Agricultural Organization discuss environmental issues.122

In its first and last debate on the subject, the Security Council discussed the impact of climate change on peace and security in April 2007. Although no resolution was formed, the Council began an important discussion on the issue of environmental security. Developing nations failed to see the role the Security Council could and should play in an issue already dealt with by so many international organizations, with arguably more professional expertise. However, small island nations, the developed world, and Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon acknowledged the security implications of climate change and recommended the Council to continually review the matter. Although developing countries desired to frame the topic as a sustainable development issue, the purpose of presenting the Security Council with the dilemma was based on the security implications of global climate change. The Representative of the United Kingdom, who called for the meeting, stressed the importance of addressing the risks of resource scarcity and environmental refugees. Ultimately, the Security Council’s debate on this issue revealed the necessity and difficulty of properly identifying security threats.

ProPosed solutIonsExpanding the Range of Policy Choices: Methods of Environmental Peacemaking

In “The Problems and Possibilities of Environmental Peacemaking,” Ken Conca and Geoffrey D. Dabelko

outline the successful paths from environmental cooperation to peace. The authors warn that the cases analyzed (the Aral Sea accords, the Southern African Development Community (SADC) protocol on water-courses, the Caspian Environmental Program (CEP),

South Asia’s bilateral water accords, and the North American Free Trade Agreement’s (NAFTA) side agreements) have all been created in the last two decades and firm conclusions would be presumptuous. Thus far, however, progress has been made. The Aral Sea accords have seen the reduction of tensions in Central Asia despite water scarcity and ethnic differences. At the same time, the observation is made that while regional stability is bolstered by bilateral water accords, these agreements do little to alleviate intra-societal disputes. Ultimately, Conca and Dabelko conclude that “the mere existence of cooperation is less important than the content, scope, and orientation of that cooperation.”123

An important analysis surrounds the fact that different regions require different methods of cooperation. In the Aral and Caspian cases, intergovernmental environmental cooperation was found to create more robust trans-societal linkages. On the other hand, the southern African and South Asian cases draw little connection between intergovernmental dynamics and the improvement of trans-societal bonds. The situation, however, may improve with a focus on sustainable watershed management rather than water-sharing agreements. Finally, in the Baltic case, there seems to be simply an “interplay of trans-societal and intergovernmental channels” in which states respond to societal changes and the strategic climate at the same time.124

Ultimately, environmental cooperation does not necessarily produce peace, but leaders should keep the wide range of methods of environmental cooperation in mind. Environmental peacemaking efforts from various nations, the European Union, and NGOs should be the model for what the Security Council can support. Developed and developing nations, North and South, must work together to look beyond traditional security threats and see the potential of policies focusing on environmental peacemaking and cooperation. In an increasingly interdependent world, it is critical that the South’s concerns are discussed and addressed in a productive dialogue between North and South.125

Enforcement

A primary difficulty in realizing environmental cooperation rests upon the enforcement of

environmental peacemaking agreements. The People’s Republic of China’s representative to the Security Council

Security council


stated in the first-ever debate on the impact of climate change on peace and security that “the developing countries believe that the Security Council has neither the professional competence in handling climate change – nor is it the right decision-making place for extensive participation leading up to widely acceptable proposals.” Citation.He argued that the Kyoto Protocol and the UNFCCC had provided sufficient principles for nations to follow in limiting environmental degradation. However, as the representative from Papua New Guinea indicated, global climate change is just as dangerous to small islands as bombs are to large countries. The Security Council may be needed to ensure that all nations contribute to halting the degradation of the environment. As was pointed out by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Slovakia, Security Council resolution 1625 calls for the Council to respond to the root causes of threats to peace and security.126 With the increasing scarcity of resources and the escalating frequency and strength of natural disasters due to global climate change, conflict is imminent. The UNSC must act.

QuestIons a resolutIon must answer1) In what ways, if any, can the Security Council aid states, regional bodies, and international organizations in mitigating climate change?2) What mechanisms should the Security Council implement to appropriately react to conflict over resource scarcity?3) How can the concept of environmental peacemaking be used to link environmental cooperation and future stability and peace?4) In what ways, if any, should the Security Council aid the World Health Organization in preparing for an increased spread of infectious disease?5) What should the Council’s role be in encouraging technological developments that would help to avoid nearly inevitable conflict over limited supplies of oil?6) How can weak or failing states, such as those found in Africa, be protected from conflict over scarce water sources?7) Given the commitments garnered in the Copenhagen talks, how can the Security Council best help ensure all nations do their part in the mitigation of climate change?

Key actors and PosItIons

The primary blocs are divided between developing nations and developed ones. The position of the

“Group of 77” developing countries was clearly articulated in the Security Council’s first debate on the impact of climate change on peace and security. On 17 April 2007, the Chinese representative to the Security Council argued against discussing the topic of global climate change believing the Council did not have the “professional competence” and was not the correct venue by which “extensive participation” should take place. Speaking on behalf of developing countries, China indicated that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol were sufficient in dealing with this issue primarily focused on sustainable development. Pakistan added to China’s statements, arguing that discussion of climate change within the Security Council constituted an infringement on the authorities of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council.

The Kyoto Protocol was severely undermined by the United States’ refusal of ratification.

http://www.macalester.edu/environmentalstudies/students/projects/citizenscience2008/cleandevmechanism/images/

kyoto%2520protocol-jj-001.jpg

Security council


On the other side of the spectrum, Papua New Guinea, speaking on behalf of the Pacific Islands Forum, emphasized the security implications of global climate change. The representative related that environmental degradation would soon pose risks as threatening as conventional weaponry and would create numerous environmental refugees. Papua New Guinea, however, does not expect the Security Council to get involved in current climate change negotiations and simply desires the Council to keep the issue in mind and ensure that all nations comply with their duties to improve the situation.

As a developed nation, Singapore recognized that although the developing world would be hardest hit by climate change, developed countries would also be at risk. Thus, Singapore’s representative stated that the developed world needs to participate in stopping what “we are ourselves are responsible for.” Ultimately, the only successful effort to halt and reverse the effects of climate change would involve the collaboration of all nations.127

Going along more specific geographical lines, African nations will most likely be exposed to armed conflict over resource scarcity. With already weak and failing states, the strain on the environment will only exacerbate tensions between and within nations. By 2050, possibly 250 million people will face water scarcity and food production could be cut in half.128 Conflict already exists in the Nile Basin between Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia, while tragic violence has been exhibited in Sierra Leone and Angola. Climate change’s affect on the availability of food and water will make future conflict nearly certain. Africa is in desperate need of the international community’s cooperation and the Security Council’s involvement concerning climate change.

Even the developed nations of Europe and North America will face more frequent and intense heat waves and wildfires.129 Some nations throughout the world may experience benefits in the short-term. However, in the long-term, all countries will suffer.130 Conflicts and humanitarian crises in developing nations will put pressure on the supplies and military forces of the developed world. Countries from all blocs must come together to arrest climate change and eliminate a significant threat to peace and security.

Considering a new concept of national security within the framework of environmental degradation, the

World Health Organization (WHO) plays a key role in improving human well-being. If an environmental security threat constitutes the dramatic decrease in the quality of life of a nation’s citizenry, then the WHO must work with the Security Council and the entire international community to mitigate the risks posed by global climate change. In particular, the WHO may provide expertise concerning climate change’s effect on the proliferation of disease.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is an essential organization in tackling a significant root cause of conflict and social and political crises. The UNEP’s struggle with climate change began in the late 1980s when the UNEP worked with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to create the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The UNEP also gave support to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which came into effect in 1994. More specifically, the UNEP has increased the monitoring and assessment of global climate change, helped nations incorporate clean energy techniques and technologies, and aided adaptation work in the developing world. Moreover, projects of the UNEP work to help the private sector and governments reduce greenhouse gas emissions, accomplish regional and national environmental goals, and mitigate risks to communities and ecosystems.131

As aforementioned, the IPCC is a crucial partner in understanding and responding to the effects of global climate change. From 1990 to the present, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has produced four assessments regarding the science of climate change, the impact of environmental degradation, and possible solutions. The IPCC provided critical information for the Kyoto Protocol and it continues to aid negotiations of the UNFCCC.132

suggestIons for furtHer researcH

To adequately address this issue, you will have to first look at the academic battle over the redefinition of

national security. Depending on your nation’s perspective of climate change’s effect on security issues, particular authors may be helpful in providing strong theoretical arguments throughout debate. Daniel Deudney’s “The

Security council


Case Against Linking Environmental Degradation and National Security” and Mark Levy’s “Is the Environment a National Security Issue?” reveal a view common with most developing nations in that environmental degradation poses different security risks that should be handled by other bodies of the United Nations. However, this topic has been discussed by the Security Council in 2007 and will be on the table at WorldMUN 2010. Thus, it is clear that the international community is seriously considering the concept of environmental security. Lester Brown’s “Redefining National Security,” Joseph Romm’s analysis in Defining National Security: The Nonmilitary Aspects, and Richard Matthew’s “Environmental Security: Demystifying the Concept, Clarifying the Stakes” all provide a powerful window into a world that increasingly faces nontraditional threats. Finally, in Environmental Peacemaking, by Ken Conca and Geoffrey D. Dabelko, an argument is made for focusing on avenues from environmental cooperation to lasting peace.

Moving from the theoretical to the practical, you will find it particularly helpful to review the CNA Corporation’s report “National Security and the Threat of Climate Change” and the CSIS and CNAS’ “The Age of Consequences: The Foreign Policy and National Security Implications of Global Climate Change.” In regards to the proliferation of disease, you should use Andrew T. Price-Smith’s The Health of Nations: Infectious Disease, Environmental Change, and Their Effects on National Security and Development. Lastly, to fully comprehend past and future conflicts over scarce resources, Michael T. Klare’s Resource Wars is a necessity.

Apart from the wealth of information you can find in your University’s libraries, you also have access to invaluable sources on the Internet. The Institute for Environmental Security, an NGO established in 2002, maintains a website at envirosecurity.org. The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars is in and of itself a great policy tool, but also provides links to programs such as the Environmental Change and Security Program, which is directed by the aforementioned Geoff Dabelko. The United Nations provides a useful site at envsec.org, pooling together the resources of UNEP, UNDP, NATO, and other organizations. Further information can be found at the site of the Harvard University Center for the Environment and that of the Earth Policy Institute. Links to all of these sites may be found at my own website, web.

mac.com/rhanzich, and I urge you to contact with me with helpful sites, reports, and articles you find during your research so I can share these resources with the entire Council. I look forward to working with you to learn more about the national security implications of climate change in the months ahead.

PosItIon PaPers

The previous discussion of Terrorism in the Middle East and Environmental Security was only the

beginning to better understanding these crucial issues facing our world in the 21st Century. In order to enhance our comprehension of underlying causes of the problems and to seek possible solutions, you will have to come to the

Those in nations with less adaptive capacities will increas-ingly suffer from drought, famine, and conflict.

http://hopeethiopia.org/images/famine-relief03.jpg

Security council


Security Council session prepared to discuss, negotiate, and compromise. The quality of information you find regarding your nation’s position on conflict within Israel or the responsibility of the developed world in reducing carbon emissions will be the true determinate of the success of the conference.

In order to be prepared for debate in March, you should conduct research within three basic sections for each issue. The first must be an historical background of the topics, recognizing the key sources of conflict and the current dilemmas facing the international community.

The second will be past national action, which should shine light upon your nation’s actions domestically and internationally concerning each issue. Finally, the most important section, and thus the longest, will be your country’s policies and proposed solutions. The delineation of your nation’s plans, objectives, and principles will be crucial for engaging debate and quality resolutions.

The three sections must be written within at least one page (per topic), single-spaced, Times New Roman, font size 12. Historical background and past national actions should constitute one half of the page while your solutions will take up the other half. Look to the Questions a Resolution Must Answer section as a guideline for what to address in your third section. If you have questions at any point during the research process or while writing the position paper, please feel free to contact me.

closIng remarKs

After reading this study guide, it is my sincere hope that you not only have a greater understanding of

the serious implications of Terrorism in the Middle East and Environmental Security, but that you are intrigued by these complex issues and seek to find solutions to these dilemmas even after our meeting in March. As we get closer to that time, please check the committee website to obtain updates discussing more recent developments. Considering the volatility of the issues at hand, it will be crucial that you stay abreast of the most current developments. The quality of debate, working papers, and resolutions will largely depend upon the effort you put in before we all meet for the first time. Thank you very much for reading this study guide, and I look forward to learning much more from all of you in Taiwan!

China’s level of commitment to combating pollution and reducing carbon emissions will be a large determinant of the

success of a successor to the Kyoto Protocol.http://employees.oneonta.edu/allenth/environmental%20is-

sues/ChinaAirPollutionTracyAllen.JPG

Security council


endnotes1 “The United Nations: An Introduction for Students.” United Nations Cyberschoolbus. 2000. United Nations. 9 Oct. 2008 <http://cyberschoolbus.un.org/unintro/unintro4.htm>.2 “Functions and Powers.” UN Security Council. United Nations. 9 Oct. 2008 <http://www.un.org/docs/sc/unsc_functions.html>.3 “Main Bodies.” Main Bodies. United Nations. 9 Oct. 2008 <http://www.un.org/aboutun/mainbodies.htm>.4 United Nations, Security Council, Resolution 1373 (2001) 3.5 United Nations, Security Council, Resolution 1267 (1999) 3.6 United Nations, Security Council, Resolution 1269 (1999) 2.7 8 Gilles Kepel, Beyond terror and martyrdom the future of the Middle East (Cambridge, MN: The Belknap P of Harvard UP, 2008) 2.Iraq Body Count, 22 Aug. 2009 <http://www.iraqbodycount.org/>.9 Iraq Body Count, 22 Aug. 2009 <http://www.iraqbodycount.org/>.10 “BBC NEWS | Middle East | ‘Huge rise’ in Iraqi death tolls,” BBC NEWS | News Front 22 Aug. 2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6040054.stm>.11 Kepel, 8.12 “BBC NEWS | Middle East | Timeline: Iraq after Saddam,” BBC NEWS | News Front Page, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4192189.stm>.13 “95 killed on Iraq’s deadliest day since U.S. handover - CNN.com,” CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/08/19/iraq.violence/index.html>.14 “The Origins of the Shi’a-Sunni Split : NPR,” NPR : National Public Radio : News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7332087>.15 “Religious Structures.” GlobalSecurity.org - Reliable Security Information. 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/religion.htm>.16 “Islamic State of Iraq – an al Qaeda front -,” The Long War Journal, 23 Aug. 2009 <http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2007/07/islamic_state_of_ira.php>.17 “State Department on Terrorism in the Middle East, North Africa,” America - Engaging the World - America.gov, 23 Aug. 2009 <http://www.america.gov/st/texttrans-english/2008/April/20080430121233eaifas0.4066278.html>.18 “Profile:Al-QaedainIraq(a.k.a.al-QaedainMesopotamia) -,” Council on Foreign Relations, 23 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/14811/>.19 “State Department on Terrorism in the Middle East, North Africa.”20 Sam Dagher, “2 Blasts Expose Security Flaws in Heart of Iraq,” The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/20/

world/middleeast/20iraq.html?_r=3&ref=global-home>.21 “Bombs in Baghdad: Blasted, again | The Economist.” Economist.com. 23 Aug. 2009 <http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14256816&fsrc=nwl>.22 “Foreign Policy,” OCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd” Welcome to the White House, 23 Aug. 2009 <http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign_policy/>.23 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 3: State Sponsors of Terrorism,” U.S. Department of State, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2008/122436.htm>.24 “Profile:Al-QaedainIraq(a.k.a.al-QaedainMesopotamia) -,” Council on Foreign Relations, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/14811/>.25 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 3: State Sponsors of Terrorism.”26 Dagher.27 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 3: State Sponsors of Terrorism.”28 United Nations, Security Council, Resolution 1701 (2006) 2, 4.29 “UNIFIL: United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon,” Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unifil/>.30 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (7120 Report)-- 5.1. Terrorist Safe Havens/Strategies, Tactics, Tools for Disrupting or Eliminating Safe Havens,” U.S. Department of State, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2008/122438.htm>.31 “Al-Qaeda (a.k.a. al-Qaida, al-Qa’ida) -,” Council on Foreign Relations, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/9126/>.32 “BBCNEWS|SouthAsia|Countryprofiles|Timeline:Afghanistan,” BBC NEWS | News Front Page, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1162108.stm>.33 “Al-Qaeda (a.k.a. al-Qaida, al-Qa’ida).”34 “Killings Rattle Pakistan Taliban - WSJ.com.” Business News & Financial News - The Wall Street Journal - WSJ.com. 25 Aug. 2009 <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125103758449251853.html?mod=dist_smartbrief>.35 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (7120 Report)-- 5.1. Terrorist Safe Havens/Strategies, Tactics, Tools for Disrupting or Eliminating Safe Havens,” U.S. Department of State, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2008/122438.htm>.36 “BBCNEWS|SouthAsia|Countryprofiles|Timeline:Afghanistan.”37 “Israel, the West Bank and Gaza,” Welcome to Travel.State.Gov, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1064.html>.38 “BBCNEWS|MiddleEast|Gazaconflict:Timeline,”BBC NEWS | News Front Page, 25 Aug. 2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7812290.stm>.39 United Nations, Security Council, Resolution 1860

Security council


(2009) 1.40 “MiddleEastIsrael-PalestinianConflictTimeLine,”Middle East: MidEastWeb, 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.mideastweb.org/timeline.htm>.41 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 2. Country Reports: Middle East and North Africa Overview,” U.S. Department of State, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2008/122433.htm>.42 “Hamas -,” Council on Foreign Relations, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/8968/>.43 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 2. Country Reports: Middle East and North Africa Overview.”44 “BBCNEWS|MiddleEast|Countryprofiles|Countryprofile:IsraelandPalestinianterritories,”BBC NEWS | News Front Page, 24 Aug. 2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/country_profiles/803257.stm>.45 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 2. Country Reports: Middle East and North Africa Overview.”46 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 5. Terrorist Safe Havens (7120 Report) -- 5.3. Collaboration with Saudi Arabia,” U.S. Department of State, 27 Aug. 2009 <http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2008/122440.htm>.47 Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee, Rep., 26 May 2009, United Nations, 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/sc/ctc/pdf/CTC_joint_Statement_19may09.pdf>.48 “Counter-Terrorism Committee,” Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World, 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/sc/ctc/>.49 United Nations, Security Council, Resolution 1373 (2001) 2-3.50 “Counter-Terrorism Committee,” Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World, 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/sc/ctc/aboutus.html>.51 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (7120 Report)-- 5.1. Terrorist Safe Havens/Strategies, Tactics, Tools for Disrupting or Eliminating Safe Havens.”52 “Counter-Terrorism Committee.”53 “UN Action to Counter Terrorism,” Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World, 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/terrorism/cttaskforce.shtml>.54 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (7120 Report)-- 5.1. Terrorist Safe Havens/Strategies, Tactics, Tools for Disrupting or Eliminating Safe Havens.”55 “About UNAMI,” Welcome to UNAMI Web Portal for UN Agencies Working in Iraq! 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.uniraq.org/aboutus/aboutus.asp>.56 “Security Council extends UN mission in Iraq for one more year,” Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World, 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=31714&Cr=Iraq&Cr1=>.57 “Mandate,” United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, 25 Aug. 2009 <http://unama.unmissions.org/Default.aspx?tabid=1742>.

58 “UNIFIL: United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon,” Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World, 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unifil/>.59 Gilles Kepel, Beyond terror and martyrdom the future of the Middle East (Cambridge, MN: The Belknap P of Harvard UP, 2008) 273-274.60 Jack Snyder, From Voting to Violence: Democratization andNationalistConflict (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2000) 19.61 Auriana Ojeda, Current Controversies - The Middle East (paperback edition) (Current Controversies) (New York: Greenhaven P, 2003) 29.62 Middle East Partnership Initiative, 26 Aug. 2009 <http://mepi.state.gov/>.63 “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (7120 Report)-- 5.1. Terrorist Safe Havens/Strategies, Tactics, Tools for Disrupting or Eliminating Safe Havens.”64 “Al-Qaeda (a.k.a. al-Qaida, al-Qa’ida) -,”65 “Profile:Al-QaedainIraq(a.k.a.al-QaedainMesopotamia).”66 “The Taliban in Afghanistan -,” Council on Foreign Relations, 26 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/10551/>.67 “Hezbollah (a.k.a. Hizbollah, Hizbu’llah) -,” Council on Foreign Relations, 26 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/9155/>.68 “Hamas -.”69 Bernstein, Lenny, et al. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Valencia: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007, 2.70 Bernstein, 11-12.71 Campbell, Kurt, et al. (2007)”The Age of Consequences: The Foreign Policy and National Security Implications of Global Climate Change.” Center for Strategic & International Studies, and Center for a New American Security. Washington, DC. 8.72 Campbell, 6-9.73 United Nations. Security Council. Department of Public Information. Security Council Holds First-Ever Meeting on Impact of Climate Change on Peace, Security. 17 Apr. 2007. 12 July 2009 <http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2007/sc9000.doc.htm>.74 MacInnis, Laura. “Annan Optimistic About Climate Pact Prospects.” Reuters AlertNet 23 June 2009. AlertNet. 12 July 2009 <http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LN1823.htm>.75 Obama, Barack H. “A New Strategy for a New World.” Washington, D.C. 15 July 2008.76 Ibid.77 Matthew, Richard A. “Environmental Security: Demystifying the Concept, Clarifying the Stakes.” 14-20.78 Romm,JosephJ.DefiningNationalSecurity.Councilon Foreign Relations P, 1993, 36.79 Sullivan, Gordon R., et al. National Security and the

Security council


Threat of Climate Change. Alexandria: The CNA Corporation, 2007, 13.80 Campbell, 7.81 Klare, Michael T. Resource Wars: the New Landscape ofGlobalConflict. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2001: 27-32.82 Klare, 81.83 Ibid, 110.84 Ibid, 29.85 Ibid, 153.86 Klare, 138-185.87 Ibid, 190-205.88 Campbell, 29.89 Campbell, 29-33.90 Chan, Margaret. The World Health Report 2007: a Safer Future. World Health Organization. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2007, vi.91 Ibid. vi.92 Millen, Joyce V., Alec Irwin, and Jim Y. Kim. Dying for Growth: Global Inequality and the Health of the Poor. Monroe: Common Courage P, 2000. 608.93 Ibid. 608.94 Chan, Margaret. The World Health Report 2007: a Safer Future. World Health Organization. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2007, vi.95 Bernstein, Lenny, et al. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Valencia: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007, 3.96 “Malaria Background Information.” Internet Journal of Infectious Diseases 4.97 Ibid.98 Thwing, Julie, et al. “Malaria Surveillance - United States, 2005.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 56 (2007): 23.99 Ibid. 24.100 Ibid. 24.101 Thwing, Julie, et al. “Malaria Surveillance - United States, 2005.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 56 (2007): 24.102 “WarFever:MalariainConflict.”BBC 25 Apr. 2008. 12 July 2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7365573.stm>.103 World Health Organization, Climate Change and Human Health (Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003) 112.104 Ibid. 119.105 Ibid. 119.106 Ibid. 108.107 Ibid. 115.108 Campbell, 42.109 World Health Organization, Climate Change and Human Health (Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003) 112-113.110 Ibid. 108.111 Ibid. 108.112 “Infectious Diseases a World Threat.” Australian

Nursing Journal 15 (2007).113 Klare, 15.114 Klare, 28-191.

115 Bernstein, Lenny, et al. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Valencia: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007, 11.116 Claussen, Eileen. “Environment and Security: the Challenges of Integration.” Woodrow Wilson Center’s Environment and Security Discussion Group. International Conference on Climate Change. Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington, D.C. 27 July 1994: 40.117 Klare, 138-159.118 Matthew, “Environmental Security”:16.119 Knight, Matthew. “A Timeline of Climate Change Science.” Cnn.Com/Technology. 2008. CNN. 12 July 2009 <http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/03/31/Intro.timeline/index.html>.120 “Kyoto Protocol.” UNFCCC. United Nations. 13 July 2009 <http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php>.121 Matthew, “Environmental Security”: 15.122 Ibid, 16.123 Conca, Ken, and Geoffrey D. Dabelko. Environmental Peacemaking. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center P, 2002. 220-222.124 Conca, 229-230.125 Ibid, 230-232.126 United Nations. Security Council. Department of Public Information. Security Council Holds First-Ever Meeting on Impact of Climate Change on Peace, Security. 17 Apr. 2007. 12 July 2009 <http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2007/sc9000.doc.htm>.127 Ibid.128 Bernstein, 11.129 Ibid, 11.130 Campbell, 8.131 “UNEP and Climate Change.” United Nations Environment Programme. UNEP. 12 July 2009 <http://www.unep.org/Themes/climatechange/UNEPCC/index.asp>.132 “About IPCC.” Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC. 12 July 2009 <http://www.ipcc.ch/about/index.htm>. Bibliographic Essay

Security council


bIblIograPHIc essay

topic Area A

Key Actors“Al-Qaeda (a.k.a. al-Qaida, al-Qa'ida) -.” Council on Foreign Relations. 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/9126/>. “BBCNEWS|MiddleEast|Countryprofiles|Countryprofile:IsraelandPalestinianterritories.”BBCNEWS|NewsFrontPage.25Aug.2009<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/country_profiles/803257.stm>.“Hamas -.” Council on Foreign Relations. 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/8968/>. “Hezbollah (a.k.a. Hizbollah, Hizbu'llah) -.” Council on Foreign Relations. 26 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/9155/>. “Islamic State of Iraq ? an al Qaeda front -.” The Long War Journal. 23 Aug. 2009 <http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2007/07/islamic_state_of_ira.php>. “Israel, the West Bank and Gaza.” Welcome to Travel.State.Gov. 24 Aug. 2009 <http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1064.html>. Middle East Partnership Initiative. 26 Aug. 2009 <http://mepi.state.gov/>.“Profile:Al-QaedainIraq(a.k.a.al-QaedainMesopotamia)-.”CouncilonForeignRelations.23Aug.2009<http://www.cfr.org/publication/14811/>. “The Taliban in Afghanistan -.” Council on Foreign Relations. 26 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cfr.org/publication/10551/>.

News Articles“BBC NEWS | Middle East | ‘Huge rise’ in Iraqi death tolls.” BBC NEWS | News Front Page. 22 Aug. 2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6040054.stm>.“Bombs in Baghdad: Blasted, again | The Economist.” Economist.com. 23 Aug. 2009 <http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14256816&fsrc=nwl>. Dagher, Sam. “2 Blasts Expose Security Flaws in Heart of Iraq.” The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/20/world/middleeast/20iraq.html?_r=3&ref=global-home>. “Killings Rattle Pakistan Taliban - WSJ.com.” Business News & Financial News - The Wall Street Journal - WSJ.com. 25 Aug. 2009 <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125103758449251853.html?mod=dist_smartbrief>. “Security Council extends UN mission in Iraq for one more year.” Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World. 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=31714&Cr=Iraq&Cr1=>. “95 killed on Iraq’s deadliest day since U.S. handover - CNN.com.” CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/08/19/iraq.violence/index.html>. “OCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd” Foreign Policy.” OCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd” Welcome to the White House. 23 Aug. 2009 <http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/foreign_policy/>.

Reports and Analysis“Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 5. Terrorist Safe Havens (7120 Report) -- 5.3. Collaboration with Saudi Arabia.” U.S. Department of State. 27 Aug. 2009 <http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2008/122440.htm>. “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (7120 Report)-- 5.1. Terrorist Safe Havens/Strategies, Tactics, Tools for Disrupting or Eliminating Safe Havens.” U.S. Department of State. 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2008/122438.htm>. “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 3: State Sponsors of Terrorism.” U.S. Department of State. 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2008/122436.htm>. “Country Reports on Terrorism 2008 Chapter 2. Country Reports: Middle East and North Africa Overview.” U.S. Department of State. 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2008/122433.htm>.Iraq Body Count. 22 Aug. 2009 <http://www.iraqbodycount.org/>. Kepel, Gilles. Beyond terror and martyrdom the future of the Middle East. Cambridge, MN: The Belknap P of Harvard UP, 2008. Ojeda, Auriana. Current Controversies - The Middle East (paperback edition) (Current Controversies). New York: Greenhaven P, 2003. “The Origins of the Shi’a-Sunni Split : NPR.” NPR : National Public Radio : News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR. 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7332087>.

Security council


“Religious Structures.” GlobalSecurity.org - Reliable Security Information. 24 Aug. 2009 <http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/religion.htm>. Snyder,Jack.FromVotingtoViolence:DemocratizationandNationalistConflict.NewYork:W.W.Norton&Company,Inc.,2000.“State Department on Terrorism in the Middle East, North Africa.” America - Engaging the World - America.gov. 23 Aug. 2009 <http://www.america.gov/st/texttrans-english/2008/April/20080430121233eaifas0.4066278.html>. “What’s the Difference Between Shi’a and Sunni Muslims?” About.com Islam. 22 Aug. 2009 <http://islam.about.com/cs/divisions/f/ Shi’a_sunni.htm>.

Timelines“BBCNEWS|MiddleEast|Gazaconflict:Timeline.”BBCNEWS|NewsFrontPage.25Aug.2009<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7812290.stm>. “BBC NEWS | Middle East | Timeline: Iraq after Saddam.” BBC NEWS | News Front Page. 24 Aug. 2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4192189.stm>. “BBCNEWS|SouthAsia|Countryprofiles|Timeline:Afghanistan.”BBCNEWS|NewsFrontPage.24Aug.2009<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1162108.stm>. “MiddleEastIsrael-PalestinianConflictTimeLine.”MiddleEast:MidEastWeb.25Aug.2009<http://www.mideastweb.org/timeline.htm>.

United Nations“About UNAMI.” Welcome to UNAMI Web Portal for UN Agencies Working in Iraq! 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.uniraq.org/aboutus/aboutus.asp>. “Counter-Terrorism Committee.” Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World. 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/sc/ctc/aboutus.html>. “Mandate.” United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan. 25 Aug. 2009 <http://unama.unmissions.org/Default.aspx?tabid=1742>. Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee. Rep. 26 May 2009. United Nations. 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/sc/ctc/pdf/CTC_joint_Statement_19may09.pdf>.“UN Action to Counter Terrorism.” Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World. 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/terrorism/cttaskforce.shtml>. “UNIFIL: United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon.” Welcome to the United Nations: It’s Your World. 25 Aug. 2009 <http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unifil/>.United Nations. Security Council. Resolution 1269. 1999.

topic Area B

Health Security ConcernsChan, Margaret. The World Health Report 2007: a Safer Future. World Health Organization. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2007.“Infectious Diseases a World Threat.” Australian Nursing Journal 15 (2007).“Malaria Background Information.” Internet Journal of Infectious Diseases.Millen, Joyce V., Alec Irwin, and Jim Y. Kim. Dying for Growth: Global Inequality and the Health of the Poor. Monroe: Common Courage P, 2000. 608.Thwing, Julie, et al. “Malaria Surveillance - United States, 2005.” Morbidity and Mortality, Weekly Report 56 (2007).“WarFever:MalariainConflict.”BBC25Apr.2008.12July2009 <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7365573.stm>.World Health Organization, Climate Change and Human Health (Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003).

National Security DefinedClaussen, Eileen. “Environment and Security: the Challenges of Integration.” Woodrow Wilson Center’s Environment and Security Discussion Group. International Conference on Climate Change. Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington, D.C. 27 July 1994.Matthew, Richard A. “Environmental Security: Demystifying the Concept, Clarifying the Stakes.”Obama, Barack H. “A New Strategy for a New World.” Washington, D.C. 15 July 2008.

Security council


Romm,JosephJ.DefiningNationalSecurity.CouncilonForeignRelationsP,1993.

Predictions and Proposals for Climate Change CrisisCampbell, Kurt, et al. (2007)”The Age of Consequences: The Foreign Policy and National Security Implications of Global Climate Change.” Center for Strategic & International Studies, and Center for a New American Security. Washington, DC.Conca, Ken, and Geoffrey D. Dabelko. Environmental Peacemaking. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center P, 2002. 220-222.Klare,MichaelT.ResourceWars:theNewLandscapeofGlobalConflict.NewYork:HenryHoltandCompany,2001.Knight, Matthew. “A Timeline of Climate Change Science.” Cnn.Com/Technology. 2008. CNN. 12 July 2009MacInnis, Laura. “Annan Optimistic About Climate Pact Prospects.” Reuters AlertNet 23 June 2009. AlertNet. 12 July 2009 <http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LN1823.htm>.Sullivan, Gordon R., et al. National Security and the Threat of Climate Change. Alexandria: The CNA Corporation, 2007.

United Nations“About IPCC.” Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC. 12 July 2009 <http://www.ipcc.ch/about/index.htm>.Bernstein, Lenny, et al. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Valencia: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007.“Kyoto Protocol.” UNFCCC. United Nations. 13 July 2009 <http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php>.“UNEP and Climate Change.” United Nations Environment Programme. UNEP. 12 July 2009 <http://www.unep.org/Themes/climatechange/UNEPCC/index.asp>.United Nations. Security Council. Department of Public Information. Security Council Holds First-Ever Meeting on Impact of Climate Change on Peace, Security. 17 Apr. 2007. 12 July 2009 <http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2007/sc9000.doc.htm>.

security council worldmun 2010

Documents