The Newsletter of the Model United Nations of The Hague – 24 April 2015 – The Hague – 10 Pages – Volume 1 | Issue 1

> IMPRESSUM

Editors-in-ChiefNabadip DebAlexandra van Walraven

Layout DesignerIskander Khairoutdinov

PhotographerJip van Leemput

JournalistsDianto LeeflangChristine NikanderIuna VieiraTanya ZhekovaCamelia VasilovStela Marinova GinevaRachel GreenwaldIlinca BogaciovSakari NuuttilaTamara RaatsShariqa HabibMaria Mois

It is time to kick off the second edition of Model United Nations of The Hague! Over a hundred participants from all over the world will be roaming around the streets of The Hague and gather in the amazing venue to simulate five of the United Nations’ complex committees. This year’s edition will simulate the United Nations General Assembly, the International Court of Justice, the United Nations Security Council, the United Nations Human Rights Council and the Crisis Security Council. Every committee will be carefully reported on by your one and only MUNOTH Observer, reporting eagerly and full of enthusiasm on the progress made in the committees.

This year’s theme is “adapting to an evolving world: globalisation, governance, geopolitics.” The theme has been chosen keeping in mind the need for today’s youth to get acquainted with the fast changing dynamics of the world today- be it in terms of globalisation, governance or the geopolitics. In the light of this overarching theme, each committee will be discussing sub-topics.

The General Assembly shall dedicate its time to ‘cooperation for agricultural development, food security and nutrition,’ a topic of great importance considering the rapid growth of population and the increasing lack of nutrition. The second topic concerns the ‘social and economic responsibilities of international corporations in their host countries,’ which links perfectly in with the theme of globalisation. Multinational corporations play a central role in the economies of host countries, but arguably do not assume their responsibilities as key players.

The Crisis Security Council, true to its name, will be releasing its agenda on the day of commencement of session but it could either concern the ‘oil crisis in Saudi-Arabia,’ the ‘Security situation in South America,’ or the ‘Division of Antarctica.’

The Human Rights Council would deal with ‘extrajudicial and arbitrary executions (in the Middle-East)’ which is currently brought up by human rights activists and criticised for not being sufficiently controlled. The

Ready, set, go for MUNOTH 2015!> EDITORIAL

Interview with the Secretary-General 10

Ethics of Drone Usage 5

/MUNof TheHague/MUNOTHObserver

munoth.orgmunothobserver.wordpress.com

@themunothobserver

The MUNOTH Observer – 24 April 2015 2

second topic concerns the ‘deterioration of human rights and the humanitarian situation in the Syrian Arab Republic,’ aiming to provide some solace in the on-going humanitarian crisis in Syria.

The United Nations Security Council deals with ‘preventing, managing and resolving natural resource-induced conflicts,’ a topic that is increasingly debated due to scarcity in natural resources. The lack of resources increases conflicts over the currently available one. The Security Council being in charge of the ‘maintenance of peace and security,’ according to article 24 of the UN Charter, is, therefore, the prime UN organ to discuss this matter. The second issue looks into the ‘cooperation between the UN and region al and sub-regional organisations in maintaining international peace and security.’ With the increase in new actors on different levels – be it in peace-keeping operations, humanitarian actions, building sustainable peace etc. – the SC will have to cooperate with these actors.

Lastly, the International Court of Justice, which incidentally has its seat in the city of Hague will discuss the ‘obligations concerning negotiations relating to the cessation of the nuclear

arms race and to nuclear disarmament,’ a case between the Marshall Islands and the United Kingdom. The Republic of the Marshall Islands brought a claim before the ICJ against nine nuclear-armed Nations, accusing the latter to have breached their obligations with regards to nuclear disarmament.

The three days will be intense but full of activities. The openings ceremony will feature diplomats of high calibre, such as Mr. Jang Jin-Sung, one of the key-note speakers. Originally a propaganda poet and psychological warfare officer, he defected from the North Korean regime and escaped to South Korea. He worked at the Institute for National Security Strategy in Seoul and is founder and publisher of New Focus International, which gives insights into North Korea. He currently lectures at the Korea department of the School of Asian Studies in Leiden.

The Diplomatic Soirée is also something to look forward to where some inspiring people are set to share their knowledge. Firstly, His Excellency Mr. Khalid Fahad Al-Khater, the Ambassador of Qatar in the Netherlands, followed by Mrs. Liesbeth Weijs, Coordinator of the Montesquieu Institute. Thirdly,

MUNOTH will be delighted to welcome Mrs. Ingrid van Engelshoven, the Deputy Mayor of The Hague, and Mr. Jean-Pelé Fomété, the Deputy-Registrar of the ICJ. Fifthly, Mr. Alexander Fedorinov, the First Secretary for Political Affairs at the Embassy of the Russian Federation in the Netherlands will join the evening, as well as Mr. Oleg E.H. Büller, Policy Officer at the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Deputy Director of Europol, Mr. Eugenio Orlandi will also come to share his expertise at this special evening. We hear there are more additions to come to this already heavy list of names in the lead up to the conference.

The intense debates over the course of Friday and Saturday shall give way to celebrations on the evening of Saturday with the MUNOTH Student Party where the delegates from all across the world can network, socialize and enjoy as they get ready for the discussions of Day 3.

Be ready for some enriching debates, which will be commented on, scrutinised and applauded by the MUNOTH Observer! <<

“The City of Peace and Justice,” and beyond> ALEXANDRA VAN WALRAVEN

Welcome to The Hague, the third largest city of the Netherlands! First fun fact about the Netherlands: its political heart is not the capital, Amsterdam, but The Hague. The Dutch Parliament and the Royal Family reside in The Hague. Known as the “city of peace and justice,” The Hague is much more than that.

The Hague is closely related to the United Nations and is the seat for various international organisations and institutions. Make sure you check out the Peace Palace, which houses the International Court of Justice and the Permanent Court of Arbitration. The Palace was officially opened in 1913 to provide a residence to the Permanent Court of Arbitration, created back in 1899. It is open to visitors so if you are wondering what happens inside this impressive building, visit it during the weekend. Another cornerstone of ‘ justice’ is the International Criminal

The MUNOTH Observer – 24 April 2015 3

Court, an independent international organisation established by the Rome Statute. Visitors can generally visit the Court quite easily, unless the Chamber holds a closed session. Additionally, The Hague hosts the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), established by the Security Council as a response to the violent conflicts that took place in the Balkans in the 1990s. The last cases are being completed, so make sure you visit this soon-to-be historical building.

Apart from International courts and tribunals, The Hague is also a city for diplomacy and politics. Firstly, for Dutch politics. The “Binnenhof ” is the meeting place of the Dutch Parliament and, therefore, key for the decision-making processes in the Netherlands. It is not odd to see Dutch politicians around the vicinity of this building. If you are lucky you might even see Mark Rutte, Dutch Prime Minister, passing by on his bicycle. Secondly, for world politics. The Hague houses various embassies, scattered around the city and hosted international events. Last year, for instance, the Nuclear Security Summit was held in The Hague and state officials came from all over the world to attend the conference.

Lastly, The Hague is equally a city full of culture and diversity. Be sure to have a look at the “Noordeinde,” street where you can find nice shops and the working palace of the Dutch monarch. Additionally, walk around Lange and Korte Voorhout – these streets are beautiful, especially around this time of the year. At the moment, there is even a fair taking place. If you want to enjoy food or drinks go to the “Plein”, “Grote Markt,” or our small version of China Town. The Hague also has beautiful museums such as the Gemeentehuis,

the Escher Museum or the Mauritshuis – the latter is recently re-opened and the famous ‘Girl with the Pearl Earring’ from Johannes Vermeer is at display. If the weather is nice, go visit the beach in Scheveningen (and if you are a foreigner, try to pronounce the name – Dutch language is not so easy! But do not worry, everyone speaks English here). It is very relaxing and very close by.

Perhaps not a big cosmopolitan city, The Hague still has its charms. Be sure to discover the city as much as you can! <<

GENERAL ASSEMbLy

Sustainable Agriculture, the fight for food security, and setting limits to TNCs> IUNA VIEIRA

The General Assembly of MUNOTH 2015 will discuss the issues of agriculture, food security, and nutrition, which are still among the most pressing ones of our times. The pressure for global unity in this field is reflected by the latest report of the UN World Food Program, which ranks as much as four current food-scarcities situations (Syria, Philippines, South Sudan, and Central African Republic) in the highest category of emergency. The General Assembly is now expected to come in to line and define common measurements for sustainable agriculture, a subject exposed to rapid change due to technological advancement, globalization, and

population growth. The public pressure on the delegates is enormous, as more and more experts claim that global food security can be achieved today, if only the gains from international trade and new technologies are channelled into the right direction.

Although the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States (1974) defined a nation’s duty to “regulate and supervise the activities of transnational corporations” within its territory, the obligations Transnational Corporations (TNCs) have, in turn, towards their host countries have not been formulated with the same precision. Therefore, the

General Assembly aims to define the social and economic responsibilities of international corporations in their host countries. This is essential as the number of TNCs and their spheres of influence grew rapidly during the last two decades. This rising autonomy makes it difficult to monitor TNCs’ commitment towards Human Rights, and often allows them to exploit both human and physical resources of their host countries. The General Assembly is expected to create an accurate framework defining the responsibilities of international corporations without limiting their contribution to the international economy. <<

The MUNOTH Observer – 24 April 2015 4

A balancing act in the face of the resource curse?

> CHRISTINE NIkANDER

The nexus beTween naTural resources and armed conflicT calls for social and economic responsibiliTies of inTernaTional players

The United Nations General Assembly of MUNOTH 2015 will dwell upon the social and economic responsibilities of international corporations in their host countries. The General Assembly will focus on crude oil extraction in developing nations, in the hope of tackling resource wars resulting from oil extraction. Conflicts arising from common resource usage are, however, not easily solved.

Gaining control over natural resources can form the incentives and provide the funds for armed conflict. In the presence of inequality, different societal groups may resort to arms to gain control of natural riches. Eradicating conflicts in areas that are rich in natural resources, such as crude oil, proves challenging. Most – if not all – involved parties desire access to the largest possible portion of the resources. International law aims to mitigate the arising conflict by seeking out a compromise for the division of the resources among the involved parties.

Weak society-state relations commonly lead to conflict. In the case of a society being in a weak standing, the state may be seen as being unreliable and, consequently, the power of the state may be undermined by conflict. In the case of a weak state, the possibility to challenge the state or capture the natural resources may lead to conflict. The feasibility of successfully attaining access to natural resources and a weakened state position define the likelihood of resource wars occurring. The control over the resources as well as the possible sales of ´booty futures´ can be used to finance ongoing, as well as future, power struggles.

Many resource-rich nations develop a strong dependency on their resources and are, consequently, not resistant to ´trade shocks´ or price fluctuations. With dropping resource prices, a resource-dependent nation may no longer be capable of sustaining previous living standards and infrastructures – which may, in turn, lead to wide-spread

instability. Natural resource wealth in politically instable areas commonly attracts rebellious groups, who fight in hope to gain access or control over resources. Rebels may even seek to take control of the whole state or region, in which natural resources are located.

The process of extraction can lead to tension through environmental damage, health hazards or even forced migration. Similarly, an unjust distribution of natural resources and the wealth attained by harvesting resources can lead to immense societal inequality and trigger conflict.

The equitable sharing of resources can evoke a sense of justice, through which a state of peace can be sustained. A framework assuring the equitable sharing of resources is a balancing act, to say the least. <<

UN General Assembly conference on starvation > DIANTO LEEfLANGWe are facing unprecedented rises in temperature and an intensification of extreme weather conditions. All around the world agricultural lands go to waste. Stable food production is threatened, farmers face unemployment. In some parts of the world poverty still equals starvation. In the face of disillusionment, the United Nations General Assembly will meet for its 3 day conference on the 24th of April to set new development goals and discuss new approaches to find new solutions to this pressing issue.

The first Millennium Development Goal, established in 1990, was to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger. While significant progress has been made in decreasing the number of people suffering from malnutrition, 805 million people around the world still struggle with the issue of structural food shortages, according to the FAO, IFAD and WFP (2014 Report).

The progress is especially prevalent in areas in Latin America and East-Asia which have, at the same time, experienced rapid economic growth. However, it were economic conditions, rather than international action which lead to success. From the recent global economic and financial crisis, we

have learned that market forces are treacherous. We cannot simply rely on unplanned and unguided economic progress to produce food security, as one unexpected plunge may bring along a lot human suffering. In fact, countries caught in the poverty trap may never be able to deal with their problems on

The MUNOTH Observer – 24 April 2015 5

their own. We, therefore, need strong political will, to design new policies and to implement these adequately. Any effort of the United Nations General Assembly to tackle this problem will have to deal with the challenges of economic responsibilities, population growth and soil degradation. While all member states recognize the right to food, not all states will agree on how to implement it. On the one hand, some More Economically Developed Countries (MEDCs) will plead for building structures and

institutions to facilitate global free trade enabling underfed population to access lower priced food. On the other hand, Less Economically Developed Countries (LEDCs) urge MEDCs for economic concessions, in order to stop the flooding of global food markets with EU and American subsidized agricultural products. LEDCs can, subsequently, develop capabilities for local production and self-sustaining of agricultural sectors in backward rural areas. The General Assembly will need to find unity, perhaps in consensus or by bringing a fully new approach.

Meanwhile the threat of sustainability hangs over the UN. Erosion, compaction and degradation result in less available land for crop production. Earth faces an annual population increase of 75 million, slowly outgrowing the productive capacity of our soil. The world needs a strategic multilateral solution in order to overcome this chronic challenge. If this process is not halted, we will face an inevitable tragedy. Muddling through is no longer an option. <<

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL

Unmanned does not equal inhumane

> TAMARA RAATS

drones as poTenTial exTrajudicial and arbiTrary execuTion weapon

The threat that terrorism poses today to the international community is increasing. In order to combat this threat and to reduce the spread of the ideology advocating violent attacks against especially Western countries, several states have engaged in the use of drones, which are unmanned aircrafts that fire missiles, in the Middle East. Drones form an example of a technological advance that can be used in the context of extrajudicial and arbitrary executions. Although ‘unmanned’, drones are controlled by human beings.Usage of them, thus, brings along ethical repercussions when putting them in context of human rights. They can be used to protect the right to life, while unethical treatment that does not comply with

international human rights law can bring this right to life of citizens in danger.

The usage of drones in the War of Terrorism has some profound advantages over using ground forces or manned aircrafts. Drones are less expensive, decrease the amount of time between identification of a possible target and the use of lethal force against that subject, and do not require the involvement of troops, which could result into saving lives.

Although drones are regarded to also greatly reduce the amount of civilian deaths, practice shows that usage of drones still

The MUNOTH Observer – 24 April 2015 6

results into many innocent casualties. Human rights group Reprieve came out with a report stating that when targeting 41 men with drone strikes carried out by the United States in Pakistan and Yemen, approximately 1,147 people were killed (The Guardian). In seven cases, the targets are assumed to not have died themselves.

The Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Christof Heyns, states in his report “Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions”, submitted to the UN General Assembly in 2013, that the way to regulate the usage of drones under international law is contested. Drones can be easily used to perform extrajudicial killings, as states do not have to be in territorial control and have to hold their target in custody. It is also debatable whether drones comply with international human

rights’ notion of use of force being the last resort. According to Heynes: “The view that mere past involvement in planning attacks is sufficient to render an individual targetable even where there is no evidence of a specific and immediate attack distorts the requirements established in international human rights law.” This would be arbitrary killing.

The question whether the usage of drones is ethically responsible when engaging in warfare, is an example of the debate to what extent technology offer possibilities or actually poses threats to the security of human kind. The potential of drones to be inserted for extrajudicial or arbitrary killings makes discussing them therefore relevant or even necessary for the Human Rights Council. <<

INTERNATIONAL COURT Of JUSTICE

One of the smallest countries in the world sues the nine ultimate nuclear power states over failure to disarm> TANyA ZHEkOVA

The Marshall Islands, a small Pacific republic in Micronesia, have decided to file nine separate cases against nuclear countries at the International Court of Justice in the Hague. The Pacific nation, which was deemed “by far the most contaminated place in the world” by the US Atomic Energy Commission, was subjected to 67 nuclear tests between 1946 and 1958 and it still bears the radiological legacy of the US nuclear weapon testing. The Republic accuses the states of United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea of a “flagrant denial of human justice”, arguing they have violated their legal obligation to disarm.

So, what is the agreement that the nuclear states have allegedly violated? After the demonstrated deadly force of nuclear weapons during and after the Second World War, the UN was prompted to create the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons or NPT in 1969 to promote general and complete disarmament. The treaty divides the signatory States into nuclear and non-nuclear states, the former being only five - the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, and China. However, this treaty has been signed by only 114 countries and there are three nuclear states that have not signed it – India, Pakistan, North Korea, as well as one undeclared nuclear state - Israel. After the end of the Cold War, the agreement was renewed in 1996 stating that it was an obligation of all states to “pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective international control”.

However, despite all the promises and pledges for nuclear disarmament, the countries’ actions seems to be a complete opposite of their words. Instead of reducing and removing its nuclear weapons, the United Kingdom, for instance, is regularly modernizing and improving them for future use. For instance, it is currently in the process of replacing its submarine-launched Trident arsenal. 68 years after the first UN General Assembly resolution, 45

years after the NPT entered into force and nearly 20 years after the Court delivered its advisory opinion, there are still more than 17 000 warheads in existence, enough to destroy all life on the planet.

The Marshall Islands argue that this significant delay in taking action means that the nuclear countries have breached their obligations although neither the NPT, nor the Court’s decision have

enforced any timeframes or deadlines for disarmament. The Marshallese islanders say they have been suffering serious health and environmental effects caused by experimental nuclear testing and that has prompted them to take action against the hypocritical approach of nuclear nations, who pledge disarmament, while squandering billions to modernise their nuclear arsenals. <<

The MUNOTH Observer – 24 April 2015 7

Mind-boggling Claims and Arbitrary Numbers:Off to a good start, Marshall Islands! > STELA GINEVA

According to an order by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the Republic of the Marshall Islands seeks to see nuclear superpowers meet their obligations towards nuclear disarmament as well as face up to their alleged breaches of obligations relating to the cessation of the nuclear arms race under the Treaty of Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

The following days will see the claim against the United Kingdom (UK) unfold in the ICJ. What is unique to this case is that out of all of the states which the Marshall Islands has brought claims against, this is the only state which has accepted compulsory jurisdiction by the ICJ – meaning that willing or unwilling, the UK stands before the ICJ today ready to discuss the merits of the case. According to the memory submitted by the Marshall Islands, the UK should be held liable for failing to effectively comply with the provisions of the NPT. Curiously, the Marshall Islands

chose to keep this submission rather vague; specific provisions were not identified in the Prayers and Remedies Requested section of its memory. This brings forth the question whether the Marshall Islands wants the UK to be held liable for disregarding the treaty in its entirety or merely for Art. VI of the NTP as identified in its Introduction and Summary section. One could argue that the latter claim is more likely, as the former option lays out a broad and rather vague scope of the question. Discussing the treaty in its entirety and how it relates specifically to the UK would be an undoubtedly time consuming venture for both sides. It would be interesting the UK’s response to this accusation – should the treaty be taken in its entirety, it would undoubtedly be much easier for the UK to show that it complies with many if not all of the provisions and thereby refute this claim.

Furthermore, the Marshall Islands is asking the ICJ to request the UK

to pay $100,000 per individual who ‘experienced’ the nuclear testing and still suffers thereof. This boggling claim seems to deserve a case of its own, at the least. An issue of this magnitude spurs the UK to not only take full responsibility for the damages caused by nuclear testing, but also to pay a substantial amount of money based on vague wording. After all, what is meant by ‘experienced the nuclear testing’? What is the scope and definition of ‘experienced’? How has the arbitrary number of $100,000 been decided on and what exactly is it supposed to cover? An issue for which fact finding and conciliation committees work on for years has been dealt with in two sentences.

The aftermath of these claims will no doubt be interesting to observe. This journalist is especially looking forward to the UK’s reaction. <<

The MUNOTH Observer – 24 April 2015 8

Can the prosecution bring “a legal challenge to Uk’s hypocrisy”?> MARIA-CAMELIA VASILOV

Once upon a time in Micronesia, there was a small country: the Marshall Islands. It was so small that it was less than twice the size of the city of The Hague. Three Marshallese advocates – Amalia von Magyary, Filippa Sofia Braarud and Vanessa Möhring – will be in The Hague this week to remind the world that five of the world’s nuclear powers had officially promised to disarm by signing the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty in 1968.

In the present session, the International Court of Justice will focus on the United Kingdom (UK), but any decision taken will have a major impact on the remaining cases. The quote in the title comes from a statement by Kate Hudson, the general secretary of the British NGO Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. Indeed, what legal arguments can the prosecution bring against high-level hypocrisy?

According to the Memory recently submitted by the Marshallese advocates, the UK is in breach of the general principle of international law pacta sunt servanda, or displaying good faith when applying the provisions of treaties and other international obligations. Scholars

and practioners argue that good faith entails interpreting a treaty as having an obligation rather than simply refraining from action. Therefore, even if the UK could have interpreted its obligations to pursue disarmament negotiations as doing nothing in particular, the right thing to do would be to actively seek a positive outcome. Negotiations not “leading to a precise result”, as the ICJ 1996 Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons stresses, cannot be considered in good faith.

Concerning the prayers and remedies requested in the Memory, I want to note two things. Firstly, that the defense is likely to challenge the desired monetary compensation: 100,000 dollars for each Marshallese individual “who experienced the nuclear testing and still suffers thereof ”. As the Marshall Islands are home to 68,000 individuals and the projected proportion of cancers attributable to radiation generated by nuclear tests conducted in the Marshall Islands is 55%, the maxim amount can be 3740 million dollars. But the USA has already paid 759 million dollars in compensation to the Marshallese

Islanders for their exposure to nuclear testing. This is an insignificant amount compared to, for instance, the cost of the Manhattan Project alone, which was around 20,000 million dollars. Comparing the amount of compensation, however, to other cases of nuclear testing – note in particular Japan for the 1954 ‘Bravo’ test – it is quite high.

Secondly, declaring that “the continuation of the possession of nuclear weapons is to be perceived as a breach of ius cogens” would be an outstanding progress and quite the end of any debate on nuclear weaponry. This is because peremptory norms, also known as ius cogens, though notoriously difficult to identify, must enjoy general acceptance. To this date, ICJ has not outlawed possession of nuclear weapons, although it has admitted that the threat or use of nuclear weapons contradicts in general “the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, and in particular the principles and rules of humanitarian law,” following its Advisory Opinion. Undoubtedly, a fascinating debate awaits us. <<

SECURITy COUNCIL

Preventing, managing and resolving natural resource-induced conflicts> ILINCA bOGACIOV

Sometimes less covered in the mainstream media than other types of conflicts, natural resource-induced conflicts are a serious threat to global peace in the 21st century and it is no surprise that their management poses serious challenges to global actors, given risks they raise, but also their very complex causes.

The United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s message on the International Day for Preventing the Exploitation of the Environment in War and Armed Conflict recalled that “since 1990, at least 18 violent conflicts have been fuelled by the exploitation

The MUNOTH Observer – 24 April 2015 9

of natural resources such as timber, minerals, oil and gas. Sometimes this is caused by environmental damage and the marginalization of local populations who fail to benefit economically from natural resource exploitation.”

Indeed, the causes include environmental degradation, demographic changes,

increasing consumption and climate change, which all place significant pressures on the availability and usability of natural resources such as land, water and ecosystems to the point where a valid question arises: is it realistic that such conflicts can be prevented? When it comes to managing them, our understanding of how to

mediate natural resource conflicts has increased, but putting this knowledge into practice remains a challenge. This is why the United Nations plays such a significant role in providing enhanced mediation guidance, and it remains to be seen whether countries will implement the necessary framework to resolve such conflicts. <<

United Nations reaching out to regional bodies> RACHEL GREENWALD

Along with discussing the prevention of natural resource-induced conflicts, the United Nations Security Council will be strategizing the best ways for the United Nations(UN) to cooperate with other regional and sub-regional organizations in order to maintain peace and security.

Due to the UN’s broad range of responsibilities, working with these other organizations is imperative to gain local knowledge and perspectives about regions where the UN may need to step in to stop conflict. On the other hand, the UN is also able to help other regional organizations lend support to countries that are ill equipped for combatting new types of conflicts such as cyber terrorism

and guerilla war tactics by giving them niche expertise that comes from having a global network.

Although cooperation between the UN and other regional organizations have been on the rise since the Cold War, not all of these initiatives have been effective. In order for cooperation between these two sectors to be successful, the decision makers in the UN need to make this issue a larger priority.

Recently, the UN has made efforts to link itself more closely to the African Union. However, if the Council finds sub regional cooperation to be beneficial, agreements should also be made between

the Arab League, the Union of South American Nations, and Collective Security Treaty Organization.

The Houthi insurgency in Yemen could give the Council good reason to draft a strategy with the Arab League. Saudi Arabia has been executing airstrikes over Houthi positions across Yemen since March 26. The country claims they are degrading much of the Houthi’s infrastructure, but the conflict does not seem to be coming to a close in the near future. Nonetheless, cooperation between the Arab League and the UN could be the extra factor needed to tame the conflict. <<

CRISIS SECURITy COUNCIL

South America’s Security Challenges> MARIA MOIS & SHARIqA HAbIb

South America faces a series of security challenges which affect not only regional stability, but also the security of the neighbouring United States. According to the UN Development Programme (UNDP) reports, South America is the only region in the world where murder rates increased in the first decade of this century. Robberies have nearly trebled over the past 25 years and extortion is growing fast.

Plenty of factors explain South America’s crime situation. The not just internal but external demand for cocaine and attempts to suppress the drug trade prompted the spread of

organized criminal mafias; growth in domestic consumption of drugs has since compounded the problem. A huge percentage of the population is young and many of them poorly educated earning low wages which along with income inequality becomes another factor that eggs on the crime rates.

The penal system is the least enlightened. The region’s prisons are notoriously brutal and overcrowded. The homicide rate in prisons in South America is three times higher than it is in the general population. Prisoners are routinely beaten by staff and other inmates.

Yet even in this darkness, there are silver linings. The South American governments have taken measures to increase security to protect their people. For example, Mexico has

apprehended various cartel leaders, like Sinaloa’s Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán and Hectór Beltrán Leyva, head of the Beltrán Leyva Cartel, who was recently arrested. The security council at MUNOTH shall hopefully come up with a comprehensive resolution that goes a long way in curbing down the crime rates in South America and improving the security. <<

The MUNOTH Observer – 24 April 2015 10

A WORD WITH THE SECRETARy-GENERAL

How relevant do you think the United Nations and Model United Nations are in today’s world?Those are two questions, really! Obviously, there is a massive debate about the efficiency and relevance of the UN in today’s world. A lot can be said about what is going well and what is not. To summarize, I think the principles upon which the organization was built are still of immense relevance but its structure oftentimes hinders its ability to be optimally efficient. When I look at the importance Model UN has played in my life, I cannot say otherwise than that it really matters. It shows youth why issues in the workings of the UN persist and where improvements can be made, it teaches values like cooperation and it brings people from all over the world together to foster greater understanding of other cultures.

How has the journey of lead up to the MUNOTH been and how has it specifically been for you as the Secretary General?Overall, it has been such an enjoyable learning experience. It has been equally rewarding to work so actively towards one goal with a great group of people and my life would have been a lot less exciting over the past 9 months had MUNOTH not been a part of it. We have had ups and downs and mistakes have been made, but I feel so honoured to have been given this position. Although the conference has not yet happened, the journey has been an experience I have appreciated hugely.

How different is MUNOTH this year with respect to its first edition?Well, I was not there last year so I may not be the best person to ask. I would like to think that we built upon the work of the founders of the organisation. Like with any relatively new organization, the first few years will come with big changes as we are in the process of figuring out what works best. Just to name a few differences for MUNOTH 2015, we have changed the venue, the committees are different and the board structure has altered.

The theme of the conference this year is “Adapting to an evolving world: Globalization, Governance and Geopolitics.” What was the thought behind adopting this as the theme?When the board and I devised this as our theme, our main argument in favour of it was its relevance. The theme is universally applicable and encompasses many of the major issues facing our world. There is a certain duality in it too. Its focus obviously seems to be on the “global”, but by including governance, the theme also encourages participants to look critically at the countries they are representing. The role the UN plays in the world, the value of borders in an increasingly international world and the way in which old structures and institutions may need reforming in order to remain in a position where they can function were all ideas we saw under this theme. (Also, any opportunity to use alliteration should be taken advantage of.)

Tell us about your Secretariat, Any special memories?A lot of strong characters means hefty discussion, but also incredibly fun times. We really came together as a group and have spent a lot of our meetings laughing about all kinds of things. We are busy people and have things going on outside of MUNOTH – Olaf is really involved in activities with the International Studies study association, Ingeborg rows a lot in Leiden and Kristina had an internship at the Czech Embassy for a while. Combining these things with school work and MUNOTH made it difficult to free up time to go do fun things together, but we went for Italian food once which was lovely! I think you will probably see us laugh a lot during the conference.

Your expectations from the delegates over the next three days?I think MUN conferences are all about finding the perfect balance between truly indulging in the debate that is going on and socializing in order to meet new people. If everyone is proactive and respectful during committee sessions and sociable and open-minded the rest of the day, I think the conference will be a tremendous success. There is little more we can do now, it is up to you! <<