The Unavoidable Vulnerability of Seoul

A huge focus is often put on North Korea's nuclear program and how it is being used as a deterrent against military action from nations such as the US and South Korea. With this, many believe that dismantling it will deprive North Korea of all such deterrents. However, this is not the case.

For decades North Korea has maintained a well-fortified array of artillery weaponry that is pointed directly at Seoul. Being just 35 miles away from the city, these weapons have the ability to bring devastation upon it. And they're extremely well protected. How do you think this affects the strategies of South Korea and its allies? Even if North Korea agrees to abandon its nuclear program, might they still possess a robust deterrent against direct foreign intervention?

Here is an article that outlines the situation pretty well:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/north-korea-artillery_us_58f631a4e4b0b9e9848eb990

Delving Deeper into the United States Current Position on the Iran Deal

The Trump Administration has made their opinions on the Iran Nuclear Deal abundantly clear with President Trump claiming he would introduce changes to the deal if the document didn't undergo changes. In essence, the Iran Nuclear Deal essentially ensured an sanction relief would be provided to Iran provided they cut back on their atomic program.

While Rex Tillerson traveled to Warsaw to discuss strengthening the deal with Britain, France and Germany (the original parties in 2015), Iran has rejected the possibility of renegotiation.

Regardless, Tillerson noted that the United States wishes to have greater control over "Iran's malign behavior". He specifically cited Iran's support for Houthi rebels in Yemen as part of the US's reasoning. 

________Source_______________________________________________________

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-tillerson/tillerson-says-washington-europe-start-work-on-iran-nuclear-deal-idUSKBN1FG0CF?feedType=RSS%3C/div%3E%3C/body%3E%3C/html%3E 

Alleged Chlorine Gas Attacks in Syria

After a missile attack last Monday, some civilians in Ghouta, a rebel-held region east of Damascus, have reported the smell of chlorine gas. Thirteen are reported to have experienced suffocation in Douma. International rescue and health groups argue that the symptoms of patients they are treating point to gas attacks, a claim in which the Syrian government rejects. This is the second reported chlorine attack in the region of January 2018. This isn’t the first time that Syria has denied using chemical weapons against rebel strongholds. A joint effort made by the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has found that Syria has been employing chlorine gas and sarin as weapons.

After the alleged sarin attack in Ghouta in 2013, an attack President Assad denies responsibility for, Syria joined the Chemical Weapons Convention and agreed to destroy its stockpile. In November 2017, the United States sponsored a resolution to renew the jurisdiction of a panel to investigate who was responsible for a sarin attack carried out in Syria earlier that year. However, Russia vetoed that resolution. If the resolution to renew that UN panel had passed, the panel would have been the governing body responsible for investigating these recent attacks. Last Tuesday at the United Nations, the United States condemned Syria for employing chemical weapons. As well, the US condemned Russia for being complicit with Syria’s chemical weapons program, as they had vetoed the November resolution.

Sources: 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-ghouta/rescuers-in-rebel-held-syrian-area-accuse-government-of-gas-attack-idUSKBN1FB135 https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/world/middleeast/syria-chemical-weapons-ghouta.html http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-42675657

Notes on Your Position Papers

As you write your position papers, make sure you refer to BMUN's Position Paper Guidelines to ensure that you meet the requirements. There is a pre-formatted example on the page as well, which you can download and use as a starting point. I'll include some tips below, but make sure you read through the guidelines in their entirety so you don't miss anything.

1. If you want to be considered for the Best Position Paper Award, you must submit your position paper by 11:59 PM PST on February 5. If you want to be considered for committee awards, you must submit your position paper by 11:59 PM PST on February 12. We grade all papers equally, regardless of when they are submitted. But we do appreciate early submissions as they make our lives a lot easier!
2. Make sure you explicitly label the four sections of your paper: Past and Current International Action, Country's Position, Proposed Solutions, and Questions to Consider. Not only will this make it easier for you to organize your own thoughts, but it makes the secretariat's job much easier during grading.
3. Read through the submission instructions and formatting requirements as well. Papers will be uploaded to Huxley this year, which will streamline grading and help get your papers back faster.
4. Do not go over the page limit. While it's good to have a fleshed out paper, it's arguably more important to be able to state what you need to in a concise manner.
5. Our conference is very researched focus. As such, you'll want to make sure you are well-researched before diving into the bulk of your paper.
6. I am personally most interested to read your Proposed Solutions (although I still have to follow the rubric and assign points proportionally to each section). What stands out to me the most in papers are solutions that are not only thoughtful and effective, but also practical and implementable. Putting these solutions on paper will give you a head start come the first committee session.
7. Your papers should adhere to MLA 8 formatting. The Purdue Online Writing Lab is a good resource to refer to. I would recommend using an automated citation tool like Easybib or Microsoft Word's built-in bibliography. This also means that you must have in-text citations:
• Usually, this is simply the author's last name in parentheses.
• If there are multiple authors, list them by their last names in the order they appear (if it's a reasonable number).
• If there are several authors, you may abbreviate it as the first author's last name followed by "et al."
• If there is no listed author, the title of the work is sufficient.
• If you have multiple sources by the same author, you can list the author's name followed by a comma and the title of the work.
8. Finally, do not plagiarize. This will disqualify you from any award and will result in disciplinary action with your advisor. Academic integrity is a value we hold dearly both at BMUN and at UC Berkeley.

If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me. You can also find sample position papers on our BMUN Learn website (including one from one of my best delegates!).

Small Arms in Ukraine

There's a lot of visible content in current events that relate to our first topic of nuclear disarmament. Much of the news this past month has involved North Korea and its nuclear program. Don't let this overshadow our second topic of illicit small arms trade. As you can see in our committee's topic synopsis, there are many regions in the world affected by this topic. One such is Ukraine. Its civil war with the rebelling Donetsk People's Republic has allowed Russian small arms to flood the country. Through its backing of the DPR, Russia has provided a massive number of firearms and light artillery equipment that have been leading to the death and injury of civilians.

Here's an article from a Ukranian source on the recent killing of a civilian due to mortar fire:

https://www.unian.info/war/2357377-olenivka-incident-update-one-civilian-killed-another-wounded-in-shelling-by-occupation-forces.html

The website has a lot of great articles on this ongoing war that we tend not to hear much about. 

“Trump administration takes more steps to crack down on North Korea's nuclear weapons development

Tensions between North Korea and the United States continue to elevate with the Trump Administration attempting to curb North Korea nuclear development. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin of the United States claims that they focusing their efforts on stifling those financing North Korea directly. In part they are doing this through sanctioning entities, individuals and even vessels. While this primarily targets North Korean nuclear development, these sanctions attempt to limit all weapons supplied to North Korea.

Questions to Consider:

• How does your country propose the elevation of tensions between these two nations?
• Is your country affected or will your country be affected by these tensions? 
• Is there any relevant/realistic technology outside of the THAAD system that could be effective in targeting a nuclear attack?

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/24/treasury-dept-issues-more-sanctions-in-response-to-north-koreas-nuclear-weapons-development.html 

North Korea still making millions from small arms export

While small arms is commonly perceived as an issue that only exists among terrorist organizations and non-state actors, state-actors also play a significant role in defining the small arms landscape. North Korea is a state that still makes significant profits from exporting small arms. The United Nations first placed sanctions on North Korea's small arms trade in 2009. However, the implementation of such sanctions has not significantly reduced North Korea's small arms exports. In this committee, delegates should not only consider the implementation of sanctions to reduce small arms exports, but also consider how to reinforce these sanctions to ensure their effectiveness.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/14/news/north-korea-small-arms-trade/index.html

"How serious is the North Korean anthrax threat?" from CNN

It was discovered that a North Korean soldier who had escaped to South Korea had anthrax antibodies in his blood, potentially implying that North Korea is employing biological weapons. The South Korean government is preparing against a biological attack by stocking up on anthrax vaccines following this discovery in November. The Trump administration, in the National Security Strategy report, claims that North Korea is funding nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons research.

North Korea, however, has denied all such claims and expresses its frustration and anger to the United States for spreading “untruths”. North Korea is a signatory to the Biological Weapons Convention. The author of this article points out how the United States falsely asserted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction in 2003 which was proven to be supported by false intelligence.

Given that Kim Jong Un’s half brother, who fell out of favor with the state, was killed by a nerve agent attack, it’s suggested that the North Korean state does have these capabilities. Also as North Korea is testing its missile defense system, some have expressed fear about missiles being launched containing biological weapons. However, experts have assured that it is unlikely for the pathogens to stay alive during a launch. The biggest threat is to South Korea, as biological weapons could easily delivered by armed forces.

Article link: http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/27/asia/north-korea-anthrax-intl/index.html

What does Hawaii's False Alarm Reveal?

I'm guessing most of you heard about this, but I've linked a good NYT article on the matter:

Over the weekend a false balistic missle warning was sent to the phones of resdients and tourists in Hawaii. In the 40 minutes between the issueing of the original warning and it's retraction, hundreds of thousands of people ran to shelter and said good bye to loved ones. It was a traumatic experience that has strengthened the fear of rogue nations, such as North Korea, possessing nuclear weapons. This coincides with aggressive efforts from nations such as the US to deprive North Korea of its nuclear program. Thus US and it closest allies currently see the destruction of this program as the primary means of reducing the threat that North Korea poses to the world.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/13/us/hawaii-missile.html

"EU commends destruction of Libya’s chemical weapons stockpile"

The Chemical Weapons Convention, originally passed on January 13th, 1993, had a huge step forward with Libya's continued cooperation in destroying their chemical weapons stockpile. While recent tensions between the United States and North Korea has highlighted the issues with nuclear weapons, Libya's milestone should not be overlooked. 

This step was accomplished in part by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) resolution from July 2016 that requested assistance in helping Libya eliminate their remaining 500 metric tons of chemical agents. The European Union responded by providing aid to the nation of Libya per financial or technical means. 

Questions to Consider:

• Does your country have a chemical weapons stockpile? If so what category level and if your nation doing anything adhere to the CWC?
• Is your nation a signatory to the CWC? 
• What additional steps should be taken to reduce nations stockpiles of chemical weapons or nuclear weapons? 

Sources:

https://www.neweurope.eu/article/eu-commends-destruction-libyas-chemical-weapons-stockpile/ 

https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/country-files/libya/events/2017/article/libya-destruction-of-chemical-weapons-stockpiles-12-01-18 

Pentagon Suggests Countering Devastating Cyberattacks With Nuclear Arms

The United States has recently drafted a new nuclear strategy that permits the use of nuclear weapons as retaliation against devastating cyber attacks. Although this nuclear strategy is not approved by President Trump yet, it carries major implications for the current state of nuclear weapons. The United States' inclination toward broadening the scope of what warrants nuclear retaliation may spread to other nuclear-armed states. Nuclear-armed states will be perceived as comparatively passive if they do not adopt similar retaliation strategies. Furthermore, the new nuclear strategy increases the probability of nuclear weapons usage against non-nuclear-weapon states. Between two nuclear-armed states, mutually assured destruction will still play a significant role in preventing nuclear weapons warfare. However, between a non-nuclear-weapon state and a nuclear-armed state, the nuclear-armed state becomes more prone to use nuclear weapons since the cause to use nuclear weapons has broadened. This news article also brings into question what qualifies as "extreme circumstances" that justify the use of nuclear weapons. Recent improvements in technology have led to an increasingly diverse and broad range of threat. Which one of these threats can be considered as legitimate grounds for nuclear retaliation? Who should be in charge of making these judgments? These are all questions that should be addressed in a draft resolution.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/16/us/politics/pentagon-nuclear-review-cyberattack-trump.html

"Exclusive: Trump to call on Pentagon, diplomats to play bigger arms sales role - sources" from Reuters

By trying to expand arms sales overseas, the United States government may be contributing to an increase in small arms proliferation globally. Foreign diplomats would essentially act as salesmen for American defense contractors under this new policy. Officials from the Trump administration have said that, however, the already established International Trafficking in Arms Regulation will undergo a overhaul and be a considerable focus as they pursue this arms sales expansion.

Although this move could improve the economy by increasing the inflow of money, it runs the risk of fueling the expansion of illicit small arms trade. Before this plan was announced, arms sales had increased by $11 billion between 2016 and 2017 under Trump’s tenure. The United States’ expansion of sales are meant to compete with foreign competitors who have been leading specific sectors of the arms market. Many are worried, however, that these sales to governments could end up in human rights abuses and/or terrorist attacks, as potentially not all governments are equipped to use maintain arms responsibly. As well, these arms could be overtaken by private citizens and black market sales could ensue. These increased sales have been under scrutiny as some of the countries the United States is selling to, like Saudi Arabia, could use these arms to commit civilian deaths--like in the Yemen Civil War. Given these claims, the Trump administration has assured that such potential consequences would be taken into account when engaging in any arms transactions.

Article Link: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-weapons/exclusive-trump-to-call-on-pentagon-diplomats-to-play-bigger-arms-sales-role-sources-idUSKBN1EX0WX