Dear Delegates, 

My name is Sarah Factor, and it is my pleasure to serve as the Director of the General Assembly Plenary this year for DAYMUNC XI. Currently, I am pursuing my Master’s degree from the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh in Security and Intelligence Studies with an interest in Human Security. To give you a quick rundown of our topics I will introduce them briefly here:

• Nuclear free zones—probably the most broad topic, not limited to establishment of new nuclear free zones, but also issues addressing the major problems with existing regional nuclear free zones. 

• Struggle against terrorism and it’s implications for HR—primarily this topic entails economic repercussions of terrorism and its implications for standard of living, also this can be conceived of in the opposite way standard of living and the correlation/causality of terrorism, but also victims rights, post 9/11 issues, and a plethora of other topics 

• Spread of HIV/AIDS on peace and security—huge topic human security topic right now; this specifically is looking towards social and economic destabilization and its implications on governance; disproportionate infection rates by age and gender; infection and crime rates 

This is my ninth year participating in Model United Nations on varying levels. I find myself quickly running out of things to say about myself, and so I will end with this: have fun, learn, and ask questions. To that end my email is sefactor@hotmail.com, please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns you might have about the conference. 

Best regards, 

Sarah Factor, Director (sefactor@hotmail.com)

Chair: Vera Bardarska

Rapporteur: Amanda Teckman

I. Nuclear free zones

The concept of nuclear weapon free zones (NWFZ) predates the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty. Upon first reckoning nuclear free zones were meant to limit the number of countries that had nuclear weapons capability primarily to those that had them immediately after World War II. Regardless, the proliferation of several other countries shortly after WWII, raised the question as to the viability of nuclear weapon free zones. 

Currently, there are several examples including zones created by the Antarctic Treaty of 1959, the Treaty of Tlatelolco for Latin America, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, the Seabed Treaty of 1971, the Treaty of Rarotonga 1985, the Treaty of Bangkok 1995, the Treaty of Pelindaba 1996, and the Cairo Declaration. Despite all these zones there are still several more NWFZ’s that have been proposed and ought to be looked at. In addition, there are several issues with the existing NWFZ’s that deserve attention. Because of the breadth of this topic it will be up to the committee to decide what should be addressed and make topical resolutions. (1)

Establishment

Central Asia

Typically thought of as Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Central Asia is an interesting area to look towards for a NFZ. Primarily because of its geopolitical and geostrategic location Central Asia has been expected to be more destabilized after Soviet withdrawal. Central Asia has been affected by India and Pakistan’s nuclear testing, by the conflict between Russia and China, and particularly by conflict between Russia and Islamic countries. It also shares a unique relationship with Russia, particularly concerning the Baikonur space launch facility, military bases, and border protection. The UN has supported such a NFZ in several resolutions, nonetheless no completely solid treaty has been formally drafted. This area has significant potential to have a NWFZ and impact regional security for the better. (2)

Middle East

Obviously an explosive topic for the Middle East is nuclear weapons. Iran and Egypt has consistently pushed for a NWFZ in the Middle East. Currently Syria has lobbied the Security Council to support the establishment of a NWFZ in the Middle East. A sentiment which resounds from Iran in the 1970’s to Russia, UK, and US at the NPT Conference in May of 1995. The obvious conflict here is with Israel. Israel, who has never signed the NPT, clearly has no interest in pursuing a NWFZ in the Middle East due to security concerns. While some Arab countries claim that creating a NWFZ in the Middle East would be a confidence building measure, which would legitimize peace talks Israel rebuts this as a attempt to further weaken Israel’s national security. The 1991 Madrid Peace Conference established a multinational mechanism to work on making the Middle East a nuclear weapon-free zone. The activities of the multilateral working group on Arms Control and Regional Security in promoting mutual confidence and security in the Middle East include establishment of a NWFZ. This mechanism, however, stalled in 1995 as a result of the Israeli position. (3)

Central Europe

In July 1996 Belarus and Ukraine called for a Central and Eastern European NWFZ. But several countries in the area, notably those which aspired to join NATO, opposed to the proposal, claiming that at NWFZ would conflict with overriding security concerns. It is worth noting that all the prospective zonal states are non-nuclear weapons states signatories to the NPT. Several bilateral arms control agreements which look conducive to the idea of nuclear weapon-free zones include the elimination of intermediate-range and shorter range missiles—Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) concluded in December 1987. The treaty entered into force in June 1988. By May 1991, missiles within the range of 500 to 5,500 km were eliminated under the treaty and a verification regime established to ensure they were not reintroduced. Special consideration also needs to be given to Kalingrad Oblast, a Russian enclave on the border of Poland and Lithuania. Nonetheless, again Central Europe has significant potential to have a regional NWFZ. (4)

Problems with Current NWFZ

Verification

The obvious problem with NWFZ’s is that there needs to be a body that verifies compliances. With some NWFZ’s an outside organizations was established to certify compliance as is the case with OPANAL, under the Treaty of Tlatelolco. With other NWFZ’s the signatory states are themselves subject to verification as is provided for under the Antarctic Treaty. This lack of standardization, and suspicions as to the efficiency and legitimacy of the organizations has become a major problem for some areas. (5) The key question here has always been who is going to pay for all this?

Extrazonal States

States that are not under the regional NWFZ’s, primarily states possessing nuclear weapons have special obligations of non-use under most of the treaties. This is clearly not particularly binding, nor viewed with any sort of influencing power on countries outside of the particular NWFZ region in question. This could potentially cause a major disruption of the treaties, given differing emergency situations. Please look at your countries involvement in these disputes, as well as the question of enforceability.

Territorial Disputes

Several of the countries in regional NWFZ’s have border problems with nuclear states. Not only is this an issue of extrazonal states, but this also impacts how the territory that falls under the treaties are viewed. Additionally, several extrazonal states do not recognize specific territories as being included in the NWFZ’s, as is the case with the UK and US with Diego Garcia. This is not only an issue of irritation but also of verification, legitimacy, and extrazonal states. Again enforceability is the major dilemma here that needs to be addressed institutionally.

II. The struggle against terrorism and its implications for human rights

 As an issue for GA Plen this topic is the most conceptually complex of the three. Primarily, this is due to the sensitive take of defining terrorism, terrorist groups, and the victims of such acts. This topic has obviously more relevant due to the events of September 11th nonetheless terrorism ought not be limited to Islamic extremism. Groups like the Uighur community in the Xinjiang-Uighur Autonomous Region of China, Sendero Luminoso (SL) in Peru, the Kamaeradschaft Sued in Germany, the Irish Republican Army, and Environmental Liberation Front in America have been labeled terrorist organizations.;

Terrorism vs. Human Rights

Some in the international community believe that the struggle against terrorism and the preservation of human rights is a zero sum game. This is to say that the pursuit of one must necessarily imply the erosion of the other. For countries that have adopted this policy the international community has an obligation to suppress terrorist organizations at the expense of certain human rights, specifically Article 19 under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights  

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. 

Since September 11th several nations, including the United States, Britain, Germany, Canada, Egypt, Russia and Uzbekistan, have introduced far reaching anti-terrorism measures, some of which are said to violate basic human rights. These include detention of non-citizens, tightening of immigration laws, electronic surveillance without court order, deportation of people who overstay their visas, and monitoring of mail and communications between prisoners and their lawyers. (6) Please take into consideration of your countries own domestic terrorist problems, accusations of state sponsored terrorism, the change concerning civil liberties and terrorism in your particular country. 

Terrorism and Human Rights

While some do believe that combating terrorism necessarily implies the degradation of human rights, there are others who do not share this opinion. Prior to September 11th, there were relatively few documents attempting to define, regulate, and reduce international terrorism. Terrorism was primarily a domestic security issue, as witnessed with Chechnya, the Basque’s, and the IRA. Those that believe that combating terrorism and preserving human rights is not only possible but necessary believe that this may be achieved through democratic means. (7) 

The balance between legitimate methods for combating terrorism and protecting human rights is tenuous. Nonetheless, one feature of successful methods is the maintenance of a legitimate democratic process. International terrorism then necessitates a politically unbiased view in which all actors are legitimated. However, this and other ideas should be thoroughly and democratically debated among relevant international institutions, most notably the United Nations. 

Several policies that have been proposed concern themselves with systematic reviews of anti-terrorism laws, law enforcement agencies, government policies that are viewed as being derivatives of terrorist activity. At least in one recent case an anti-terrorism law was not passed by an upper chamber of a Parliament of an OSCE participating State due to a concern that this law would give the government excessive powers and would open doors for violations of human rights. When governments do feel that they need to derogate from international law there are accepted international procedures to do that and for special circumstances defined in international law. Certain rights such as the right to life, freedom of thought, consciences and religion, freedom from torture may not be derogated from under any circumstance. 

Others in the international community have chosen to focus more on the causes of terrorism, and stopping terrorism by increasing civic action. This includes tolerating legitimate non-violent dissent, freedom of religion, and ethnic toleration. It is of utmost importance that delegates understand their countries position in this debate, specifically relating to their policy on terrorism and the feasibility of multilateral solutions. 

Correlation or Causation?

Probably the most complex question that is implied in both of these beliefs is what is the true nature of the relationship between terrorism and human rights? Do lack of human rights cause international terrorism? Or is the relationship merely an indirect correlative—to preserve human rights is to be more open to terrorist attacks and vice versa. There is also a belief that terrorism can work to ensure human rights, by asserting sovereignty and other political agendas. All of these beliefs lead to differing domestic and international policies by countries, and are all reflected in the differing UN resolutions that are being proposed. 

III. The effect of HIV/AIDS on peace and security

 Security is not limited merely to military means, nor is it to be constrained to aspects of human interaction in which personal bodily harm may be inflicted. There has been a recent trend to view security in a more comprehensive sense including economic, political, and personal conceptualizations. 

Economic Security

The demographics of HIV/AIDS infection rates bring particular scrutiny to the economic stability of the countries in question. About 95% of people living with AIDS are in developing countries that have an agricultural base to their economy. The decimation of the most productive sector of the population is an obvious concern for economic security. (8) In countries where many members of the labor force are dying from AIDS there is a reduction in national income. Labor intensive industries are particularly prone to such shortages. The devastating impact of HIV/AIDS on human capital can also serve to discourage foreign investment in some countries. Considerations here would include your country’s GNP, the percentage of your country living in poverty, the economic base of you country, its relations with other international organizations such as the IMF, WTO, and World Bank. 

Political Security

HIV/AIDS impacts population pressures and trends (particularly migration and urbanisation) to create more volatile social and political situations. This combination can produce heightened competition for limited resources and foster more intense rivalries among groups in countries marked by ethnic, religious or other diversity. (9) These attitudes can contribute to the eruption of violence, not just spontaneously, but in some cases as the result of exploitation by ethnic, religious or national elites to serve their narrow interests. Please take into consideration your own ethnic composition, its recent history concerning conflict, the political structure and attitude toward migration policy. 

Personal Security

In 2000, 90% of the 11 million orphans left by the global AIDS epidemic were children living in sub-Saharan Africa. (10) Orphans are also the first to be denied education when extended families cannot afford to educate all the children of the household. This lack of schooling (often combined with a lack of proper nutrition) makes it particularly difficult for orphans to escape poverty. The burgeoning orphan population will be at greater than average risk to engage in criminal activity. The many orphaned African children who will grow up under extreme levels of poverty will be sorely tempted – or even obliged for the sake of their physical survival – to commit a range of property-related crimes. Street children are both the cause and victims of a range of crimes. Petty thefts, muggings and theft of motor vehicles are crimes commonly associated with street children. Many such children are assaulted, abused, raped and drawn into prostitution rings. If would appear that the kind of psychological trauma and lack of parental affection and supervision experienced by AIDS orphans is a good predictor of subsequent delinquency and violent criminal activity. Insufficient research has been done on the extent of the risk AIDS orphans face of engaging in anti-social and violent behavior in their later lives. Things to consider here would include orphan rate, violent crime rate, the role of NGO’s in your country, youth oriented government policies. 

HIV/AIDS as a Threat to International Peace 

HIV/AIDS as a threat to international peace is again a dynamic problem with its derivations in the political upheaval in the countries that are also plagued with the highest infection rates. These countries are most notably African countries, Botswana, Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Democratic Republic of Congo etc. In differentiating HIV/AIDS as a security issue and HIV/AIDS as a threat to international peace it is important to view the destabilizing effects insofar as they concern intergovernmental interaction. 

The propensity for HIV/AIDS has a destabilizing effect on the economies and political climates of countries with high infection rates. Furthermore, in countries with complex ethnic identity struggles the HIV/AIDS pandemic exasperates the already sensitive underlying tensions. This has been most recently exposed with the use of rape as a weapon, specifically by forces knowingly infected with HIV/AIDS, as was the case in Rwanda Genocide of 1994. Rwanda provides a haunting example of how HIV/AIDS can be used as a weapon to commit crimes of genocidal proportions(Human Rights Watch). 

When viewing HIV/AIDS as a threat to international peace areas of complex ethnic composures ought to be given priority. Areas like Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Congo, and Southeast Asia, have all had instances where HIV/AIDS was used as a weapon and also as a stigmatizing disease that is associated with a particular ethnicity. 

In many ways, HIV/AIDS as a threat to international peace relates to many of the issues raised when viewing HIV/AIDS as a security threat. Merely extrapolate the consequences of security breaches for a country onto international interaction, and these problems cause a major threat to international peace that has largely remained ignored by the international community. 

For the sake of the GA Plen considerations to look at would be HIV/AIDS in the military and the consequences thereof; ethnic stereotyping, migration, AIDS as a weapon, demographic considerations in the infection rate (ie class issues), transnational corporations and responsibility, NGO’s and their role in the epidemic. 

Previous UN Action

The UN has attempted to address the AIDS epidemic most notably through the creation of UNAIDS, a joint venture between nine other UN cosponsors. UNAIDS was created in 1994, and has worked on projects ranging from condom distribution to removing the stigma of AIDS in developing countries. Nonetheless, HIV/AIDS as a security issue or threat to international peace is largely not addressed in this body. Given the nature of the topic it would be possible to claim that the legitimate authority on this subject ought to be the Security Council, under Article 23 of the UN Charter. The Security Council has passed one resolution explicitly addressing HIV/AIDS, S/Res/1308 (2000). The GA Plen on the other hand address HIV/AIDS on a fairly regular basis as early as 1987. Resolutions of particular importance are A/Res/54/283 (1999), A/Res/57/299 (2000), A/Res/47/50.

Notes:

1. Nuclear Threat Initiative. “Nuclear Weapon Free Zones (NWFZs)” 
http://www.nti.org/db/china/nwfzorg.htm

2.  Karimova, Alla. “Possibilities of a Nuclear Weapons-Free Zone Creation in Central Asia.”
http://www.uspid.dsi.unimi.it/proceed/cast97/karimova.html

3.  Pande, Savita. “Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone in the Middle East.”
 http://www.ciaonet.org/olj/sa/sa_98pns02.html 

4. Pande, Savita. “Scope for Nuclear Weapon- Free Zone in Central and Eastern Europe”
http://www.idsa-india.org/an-oct8-1.html

5. Goldblat, Jozef. "Nuclear Free Weapons Zones: A History and Assessment." 
Non-Proliferation Review, Spring/Summer 1997.
http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/npr/vol04/43/goldbl43.pdf 

6. Lysak, Owen. “Terrorism, Human Rights and the Criminal Law.”
http://www.spr-consilio.com/artlysak3.html

7. Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
“Ensuring respect for human rights in the fight against terrorism”
http://www.osce.org/odihr/human_rights/antiterrorism/

8. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. “HIV/AIDS and Food Security”
http://www.fao.org/hivaids/

9. UNAIDS Executive Director, in United Nations University, 2 October 2001.
“AIDS and Human Security” http://www.africaaction.org/docs01/piot0110.htm

10. Fourie, Pieter, and Schoenteich, Martin.
“Die, The Beloved Countries: Human Security and HIV/AIDS in Africa.”
http://www.unisa.ac.za/contents/publications/ docs/Polit212.pdf

 Resources for topic I:

BBC News “Syria seeks UN-backed arms ban.” Thursday, 17 April, 2003
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2955161.htm 

Canadian Network to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (CNANW)
“Nuclear Weapons Free Zones.”
http://www.web.net/~cnanw/b4.htm 

Center for Nonproliferation Studies. “Nuclear Weapons Free Zones: A Comparative Chart.”
http://www.nti.org/e_research/official_docs/inventory/pdfs/apmnwfzc.pdf 

Nuclear Files.org “Nuclear Weapon-Free Zones”
http://www.nuclearfiles.org/redocuments/treaties-nwfz.html 

Rosen, Mark. “Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones”
http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/1996/autumn/free-a96.htm

Resources for topic II:

Human Rights Watch. “In the Name of Counter-Terrorism: Human Rights Abuses Worldwide”
http://www.hrw.org/un/chr59/counter-terrorism-bck4.htm 

Agamben, Giorgio. “On Security and Terror” Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 09/20/01
http://www.bard.edu/hrp/HRresponses/security/agamben.htm 

Interamerican Commission on Human Rights, Organization of American States.
“REORT ON TERRORISM AND HUMAN RIGHTS.”
http://www.cidh.oas.org/Terrorism/Eng/toc.htm 

Federation of American Scientists. "The War on Terrorism" and Human Rights: Aid to Abusers http://www.fas.org/terrorism/at/docs/Aid&Humanrights.html

Khan, Irene. “Human rights challenges following the events of 11 September and their impact
on universality and the human rights movement.”
http://www.cihrs.org/conference/khanpaper_e.htm 

Duffy, Helen. “RESPONDING to SEPTEMBER 11: THE FRAMEWORK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.”
http://www.cihrs.org/conference/duffypaper_e.htm 

RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY
[on the report of the Third Committee (A/54/605/Add.2)]
54/164. "Human rights and terrorism.”
http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/
d82ca53d4f86c6eb802568a100559948?Opendocument

Resources for topic III:

Human Rights Watch. “Rwanda's Genocide: Human Rights Abuses Against Women.”
http://hrw.org/press/1996/09/rwandagenocide.htm 

Kristoffersson, Ulf. “HIV/AIDS as a Human Security Issue: a Gender Perspective.”
Joint UN Programme on HIV/AIDS.
http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/hivaids/kristoffersson.htm 

Moodie, Michael and Schnieder, Mark. “The Destabilizing Impacts of HIV/AIDS:
First Wave Hits Eastern and Southern Africa; Second Wave Threatens India,
China, Russia, Ethiopia, Nigeria.” Center for Strategic and International Studies
HIV/AIDS Task Force. http://www.csis.org/africa/destabilizing_aids.pdf 

National Intelligence Council 2000, “The Global Infectious Disease Threat and
Its Implications for the US”
http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/nie/report/nie99-17d.html

Roth, Jean. “HIV/AIDS Crisis in Africa: A Threat to World Peace and Security”
UCLA International Institute
http://www.isop.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=498 

Sarin, Radhika, “A New Security Threat: HIV/AIDS in the Military,”
World Watch, March/ April, pp. 17-22. 

UN AIDS. “AIDS Becoming Africa Top Human Security Issue.”
http://gbgm-umc.org/programs/aidsafrica/security.htm 

UNAIDS. “HIV/AIDS, Human Rights and Law.”
http://www.unaids.org/en/in+focus/hiv_aids_human_rights.asp UNAIDS.
Statement by Peter Piot, 

The Impact of HIV/AIDS on Peace and Security Statement by Sir Jeremy
Greenstock KCMG, Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom, in the
Security Council, 19 January 2001
http://www.ukun.org/xq/asp/SarticleType.17/Article_ID.200/
qx/articles_show.htm