CCBMUN
Press
Disarmament and International Security Committee
Created after World War II with the purpose of dealing with threats to global peace. Debating and advocating for solving matters regarding current crises and conflicts in an international standpoint.
The Official CCBMUN will be covering two topics, 'The impact of Syrian hostilities in the Idlib province in the Middle East' and 'The effects of outside agencies on the crisis in Yemen '
Topics
Model
Topic 1: The impact of Syrian hostilities in the Idlib province in the Middle East
Topic 2: The effects of outside agencies on the crisis in Yemen
Presidents
President: Gustavo Góngora
School: CCB
President: Nicolás Madriñan
School: CCB
Contact: disec@ccbcali.edu.co
Dear delegates,
DISEC, also known as the Disarmament and International Security Committee, was founded on the 26th of June of 1945 in the aftermath of World War ll with the purpose of preventing another global armed conflict. This committee seeks global security and deals with various issues regarding the use of weapons and the fulfillment of the treaties involving weaponry. The commission is involved in the resolution and prevention of conflicts that take place from small hostilities to global armed events. This year the commission will be dealing with…
We expect our delegates to actively participate in the commission and to use their skills to come up with creative solutions that guarantee global security and the adequate usage of weapons. We will be attentive to any concern or doubt you may have, and we look forward to seeing you in our commission.
"
CCBMUNXVIII
Day 1
Today in DISEC: A National Civil War Turned Into an International Armed Conflict
By: Carolina Agudelo
Beginning CCBMUN XVIII in the commission that handles disarmament and international security with a bang. Despite the world going online, the model must go on and the delegates of the model’s General Assembly First Committee (DISEC) had no trouble in starting off their debates today with powerful points and coalitions. Their first topic being the impact of Syrian hostilities in the Idlib province of the Middle East many delegations have things to say and solutions to come up with. Before going into the highlights of what went on behind the commission’s doors things have to be taken into consideration about the topic being discussed.
It is important to know that the Syrian Civil War has lasted almost 10 years and is considered an international matter since nations around the world are involved, and that highlights the importance of this debate to take place. It is an armed conflict that started with the division of political beliefs in Syria and throughout time has resulted in international armed threats and war crimes between nations. Since the very beginning of the debate it was clear which parties are allies and which are enemies and it is clear to see how these relations are affecting this crisis. With opening speeches, delegations started out seeking a diplomatic solution to this big problem but with the development of the debate conflicts rose and many let go of this ideal and believe that peace is no longer an option.
Being clear allies, Russia, Syria, China, and Iran are clashing with Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The matter of chemical bombings, presidential death threats, civilian casualties and even participating in the debate out of self-interest comes into the conversation. The delegate of Turkey, started the debate by stating that Turkey has supported the revolutionary forces but Syria and Russia have used chemical weapons against them. To this argument, the delegate of Syria responds by reminding the debate about the Assad regime’s recognition and calling out Turkey for their contradictory claims about the chemical weapons, since they themselves have also been using said weaponry internationally and illegally, leaving many civilian casualties behind. The delegate of Russia comes in to back up their allies to show their economic and military support and re-stating the fact that the use of international chemical bombings is agains the UN laws and considered a war crime. To this, the delegate of China mentions that they are against the use of military intervention in the Idlib Province and Syria.
As the debate moves on, the United Kingdom comes in with a strong and robust argument claiming that parties involved such as Syria, Iran, and China are participating in debates out of self-interest leaving the room shocked. After some time a crisis comes into play where a man’s brother along with 15 other civilians were killed in a chemical attack on the UK embassy in Syria. But that’s not everything, after some time another crisis comes into play, this time a press release stating that there has been an attempt of murder against Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad. This death threat is being sent by the Turkish government. To this Maria Antonia Zamorano, delegate of Syria in an interview states that “After Turkey's attack on Syria’s president it is clear that peace is not an option anymore”.
The debate continues, civilians live in danger, violations of international laws and the Universal Human Rights are taking place, and vicious attacks on important people and places. With hopes of solving a brutal international conflict peacefully thrown out, delegates must come together to find a solution to this big problem to prevent more lives from getting lost, laws from being broken, and human rights from being violated.
Day 2
Today in DISEC: Are the Yemeni People in Every Delegation’s Best Interest?
By: Carolina Agudelo
For the second day of this online model the Disarmament and International Security Committee has found a solution to their first topic in the model about the impact of Syrian hostilities in the Idlib province of the Middle East. With many things left to discuss and solve, the delegates start debating about the second issue at hand regarding the effects of outside agencies on the Yemen crisis.
Yesterday was a heavy day for debating and discussing their first topic and today they came together to discuss a solution which was found. This solution includes peace talks between nations as well as the surrendering and retiring of Turkey’s presence in the country. Regarding the Yemen crisis and what has been discussed, it is important to know the history and the situation of what is happening before going into the debates. In 2014 the Yemeni civil war started when there was an attempt to overthrow the Yemeni president, Abd Rabbuh Mansur al-Hadi. The two parties involved, the recognized government and the Yemeni rebels both get foreign aid. The Saudi government is the main source for the Yemeni government’s aid and the rebels have mostly received aid from other Saudi rebels, the Chiita and the Irani. Since the second World War, Saudi Arabia and the United States have become allies in regards to military, tactical, and intelligence American resources and influence in the Middle East. Currently, the Yemen crisis is considered the worst humanitarian crisis ever, and politics aside that is what the attention is on; finding a solution to help the Yemeni people, two thirds of which have no access to clean water.
Although much humanitarian aid has been provided by many external organizations, it doesn't make it through the border and when it does it is used or destroyed by the rebels. In today’s discussions delegates seek to find a solution to this crisis. With opening speeches China has given resources and seeks to help resolve this terrible crisis; the United Kingdom is concerned about this crisis and how humanitarian aid is not reaching the places where it is needed; Iran is in favor of negotiation and open to proposals; Saudi Arabia is in complete opposition to the rebel groups, recognizes the legitimate government and will continue to provide military aid to the Yemeni Government; the United States seeks to find a solution to this issue and believes that Iran is making it worse; and Russia doesn’t fully support either one of the parties involved and seek to find the best solution for the Yemeni people.
As the debating starts each delegation intervenes and discusses their concerns and positions in regards to the dilemma at hand. Powerful coalitions between Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom, and the United States start to form and go against other alliances between Iran, Iraq, Russia, and China. The main points of the debate turn to the fact that the United States, the United Kingdom, and Saudi Arabia are seeking to aid the legitimate government of Yemen whilst Iran, Iraq, Russia, and China are seeking to aid those who are against the government. Saudi Arabia argues that other countries should not succour those whose goals are two things, one overthrowing the legitimate government and imposing an unrecognized and false new one, and two preventing humanitarian aid from reaching those who need it the most.
Despite heavy efforts made by the US and Saudi Arabia to move Iran’s position, even arguing that Iran has committed war crimes and seeks the surrendering of the nations who are assisting the current recognized government in order to coup d’etat it, Iran remains heavily positioned in the fact that their resources and aid are going to the rebels and that will not change. As time moves and the commission keeps debating, two crisis come in that point to the Houthi rebels’ assassination of the Yemeni president and the retaliation of Saudi Arabia and the United States in the form of a bomb that left 1000 civilian casualties behind.
The true question now is, are delegations willing to let their differences aside to come together and find a solution that will seek the Yemeni people’s best interest, or will debates and attacks continue? Although delegations fail to forget the importance of the Yemeni people’s health and security, other factors come into play which make the diplomacy of this issue that much harder.
Day 3
Today in DISEC: Will There be War?
By: Carolina Agudelo
As this year’s online model comes to an end, the Disarmament and International Security Committee is also reaching conclusions and solutions to their second matter for this model which refers to the effects of outside agencies on the Yemen crisis. After yesterday’s resolution to their first topic, delegates have come to an agreement for a solution to their second matter, after arguments, attacks, and declared wars. The committee has been working hard for the past three days to find solutions to the problems at hand.
Before going into what solution the commission decided on, it is important to know what happened today beforehand. In the debates, Iran believed that the coalition between Saudi Arabia, United States, and United Kingdom only seemed to want muslim rule in Yemen. Canada wanted to solve this problem quickly and peacefully for the people of Yemen putting their shoes in those of the people and talk about political treaties once the issue is solved and China is also seeking to end this crisis in a peaceful manner but doesn’t believe that the coalition (US, UK, and Saudi Arabia) want that for the crisis. The United Kingdom will not stand down from the ultimatum that was proposed and stands against the finantiation of the rebel groups. Iran comes in and says that they stand with their alliances but will not take responsibility for the actions of rebel groups. A crisis in the form of a press release referring to a war declaration on Iran by the United Kingdom, the United States and Saudi Arabia because of the Houthis attack on the capital is released. Saudi Arabia doesn’t understand how Iran is denying their contribution when they are financing the Houthis and their attack on the Saudi capital and will now proceed to invade Yemen.
After drafting a resolution declaring war on Iran by the coalition between Saudi Arabia, United States, and the United Kingdom which was approved by the DISEC commission still needed to be approved by the Security Council in order to be valid, but after submitting the resolution to the SC, with 2 votes in favour, 1 abstained, and 4 against, the resolution was denied and in turn there will be no war. That concludes the last day for the CCBMUN XVIII in the DISEC commission, despite the paranormality of the online model, presidents and delegates came through and made this experience enjoyable and exceptional.
CCBMUNXVII
Simulation Day
Will delegations come together for a common cause?
By: Carolina Agudelo
Today’s simulation debate discussed the Afghanistan conflict. To understand the debate it is important to understand the conflict itself, which has been present since 2011 with Osama Bin Laden’s attack on the US. Long before this in 1999 the UNSC pronounces al-Qaeda and The Taliban as terrorist entities. September 11th 2001, is not only known for the 9/11 attack but also the assasination of Ahmad Shah Massoud, who had anti-taliban beliefs and aspirations, by members of al-Qaeda. The 9/11 attack was not only to the World Trade Center in New York but also to the Pentagon in Washington D.C. As a response to this attack, the US, with help from the UK fired air missiles to Afghanistan.
Delegations in the debate want to come together for a solution. The fact that the US has removed itself from the peace treaty with The Taliban is being discussed. Multiple delegations talk about how there’s a main focus on the Taliban, but other terrorist groups should be taken into account, too. The US insists that if delegations are interested in peace they should be willing to accept war.
After some time, the delegations of China and Afghanistan made a joint intervention: they spoke about how delegations are not giving possible solutions and about how there is a lack of interest from the delegates on this matter. They mentioned the multiple problems that were present in Afghanistan such as the lack of economic support from other countries as well as deficiency of awareness about the subject. They also provide possible solutions such as monetary support from other countries such as China.
The debate continues and a crisis surfaces, the Crisis team joins the debate giving out a speech about how a humanitarian aid truck was sent and ambushed leaving behind multiple casualties. The topic was still being discussed and no realistic solution was being proposed. Some delegates were proposing war and violence as a form of solution while others opposed saying that peace was the answer. Then the violence struck again, delegates where saying that before peace there had to be war and there was no other way. In an interview with Maria Antonia Zamorano, delegate of Afghanistan, states that “the main problem is the conflict in Afghanistan where The Taliban has a great impact on the society.” later she was asked what was the best solution for her nation. “The best solution was proposed by the delegate of the United States where there is a military intervention which is not necessarily violent unless it is fully necessary. A military intervention would facilitate the negotiation of a peace treaty with The Taliban.
Day 1
Disarmament and international security committee
By: Macarena Suso
“Space militarization has been used since the Cold War as a method of increasing national security” (Taken from the president’s commission guide). Here, in the Disarmament and International Security Committee, delegates discussed and debated about the influences of space militarization and satellites in societies. It is considered that this affects each delegation in a certain way, being either negative or positive, delegates debated how their country is affected by this issue and decide how satellites should be used.
As the debate starts, delegates discussed the main concern on how satellites and space weapons are harmful to the citizens and how these can be used as weapons of mass destruction. Countries such as Iraq believe that satellites are contaminating space but, despite this issue, countries are continuing to launch satellites even though they are responsible for a violation of this issue. Other delegations such as Italy and China, agree. On the other hand, the US believes satellites are crucial for the development of our daily life, they have positive impacts in communication, businesses and others. Finally, after saying,“it isn't the matter of protecting, it is the matter of caring for the citizens,” The US makes its point, stating that satellites must be used for developments rather than for protection. As a result, countries such as Afghanistan believe that the delegation of the US, who supports the use of satellites, know the risks and harming it creates, but cares only about the positive impacts in its society while not thinking on how it negatively affects other delegations.
The delegation of Spain continued the debate by saying that countries that have large amounts of launched satellites are a threat and endanger other countries. The UK somewhat agrees, this delegation believes that satellites are dangerous to all. When it comes to threats, some delegations such as China although, have satellites and a lot of technological advances, have no intention to threaten other countries, this is why the use of satellites as harming weapons are nowhere near the ways they believe satellites and space weapons should be used. Yet, countries like the US are considered a threat to most delegations because of its use of satellites for development.
Finally, as a solution, it is most likely for the delegates to have a division between their ideas. Hopefully, both a fair and effective solution is applied to this issue.
Day 3
Disarmament and international security committee Day 3
By: Macarena Suso
Today, in the Disarmament and International Security Committee, yesterday's topic is continued. “Artificial satellites are commonly used as military assets in space militarization” (Taken from the president's commission guide). To clarify, because artificial satellites have harming capabilities and are considered space weapons, delegations will be discussing the risks of using military satellites, and the banning of these weapons in space.
As in for today’s debate, there was a lot of disagreements and divisions between the delegate´s ideas. Delegates discussed about the banning of weapons in space, and as the main concern, how this affects, either positively or negatively, each society. The delegation of Afghanistan made an intervention in which this country states what the real danger is. This delegation strongly believes that most countries are against space militarization, however, the countries who support the use of satellites, such as the US, and are protecting themselves, act as a danger to societies because there is nothing to be protected from. After describing why the US is the threat, it is clear that the delegation of Iraq agrees with the delegation of afghanistan. Furthemore, because the US has 129 launched satellites most delegations find this an unnecessary amount, for instance, the amount of satellites launched between the delegations of russia and china together, is fewer than USA's 129 satellites. Correspondingly, countries such as China believe that the delegation of the US are willing to use their satellites as threats.
On the other hand, delegations such as Pakistan and Italy disagree with the countries that blame the US, afterall, they believe that everyone has the right to protect themselves. UK somewhat agrees with these countries after saying that the use of satellites is necessary for economic developments. Contrarily, the delegation of Germany, claims that achieving success becomes an ambition. After mentioning the topic of development, the delegation of Iraq mentions yet another problem caused by satellites, “science and technology should be used to improve the environment” Iraq, after saying this asserts that a very large amount of launched satellites have been lost in space, which is a contribution to space contamination and, it endangers the environment.
After a crisis, which affected over 3,000 people, is displayed. Delegates are gathered to discuss so the debate can be continued and an advisable solution is applied.
