Security Council

Dear Delegates,

Welcome to the most powerful body in the United Nations—the Security Council!  My name is Graeme Crews, and I will be your director for what promises to be an engaging, heated, and ultimately satisfying four days of debate in the HNMUN 2011 Security Council.

I am a sophomore here at Harvard in Leverett House, planning to concentrate in Social Studies and earn a citation in Spanish.  In addition to HNMUN, my MUN experience includes participation in ICMUN, our traveling team, HMUN, our high school conference, and WorldMUN, our conference held internationally.  Aside from participation in Model UN, I am Publicity Chair of the Harvard Speech and Parliamentary Debate Society, compete in inter-collegiate debate tournaments, and work for Harvard to solicit alumni donations. Some of my less intensive extracurricular activities include watching trashy TV shows, consuming large amounts of sweets, and spending an inordinate amount of time on Facebook.

The two issues before this committee are particularly relevant in the present-day Security Council and line up well with the Security Council’s mission of ensuring international peace and security.  The Iranian Nuclear Program topic will encourage you to evaluate the evidence regarding what Iran refers to as its “peaceful nuclear program.”  You will explore potential responses should you find Iran has stepped outside the area of acceptable conduct.  The Somalia topic will allow you to explore the impacts of failed states on regional and internal stability as well as explore potential solutions to what seems to be a systemic, unending problem.  Discussion of the limits of sovereignty, the nature of terrorism, the problem of piracy, and the lack of infrastructure will all be investigated.  Ultimately, both these topics strive to both examine major issues in international relations while simultaneously grounding discussion in the mechanisms at the Security Council’s disposal to adequately respond to these issues.  Although grounded in the present-day, do not be surprised if crises are thrown your way.  The Security Council is constantly responding and adapting its actions to new information, and your experience will be no different.

I am extremely excited for HNMUN 2011 and look forward to the insight you will undoubtedly bring to the two contentious issues facing us.  If you have any questions, I urge you to contact me at any point.  I look forward to committee session in February.  Get ready!

Sincerely,

Graeme Crews
Director, Security Council
Harvard National Model United Nations 2011

Topic Area A: The Iranian Nuclear Program

In February of 2010, UN nuclear inspectors claimed for the first time they had extensive evidence of “past or current undisclosed activities” by Iran’s military to develop a nuclear warhead.  While this seems at first glance like irrefutable proof, conflicting sources emerge and all aspects of the Iranian Nuclear Program are not obvious.

After a failed attempt in the 1960s, Iran began anew its nuclear program in the 1990s.  While some nations say otherwise, Iran claims that its nuclear program is peaceful, established for the purpose of creating a peaceful nuclear power program so as not to dip into its plentiful oil supplies that it wishes to sell abroad.  The UN Security Council has in the past enacted sanctions and drafted agreements with Iran, but no permanent solution has emerged to the contentious issue.  The greater problem lies in the emergence of a nuclear power in the Middle East, which is generally agreed not to bode well for stability in the region.

The major questions the Security Council will face include: Is Iran pursuing a national policy of obtaining nuclear weapons? Is it adhering to international law and the guidelines of the IAEA with regards to its nuclear problem?  What are the impacts of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East?  If there are any infractions, how should the UN Security Council respond?  All these questions, plus many more, require an evaluation of competing sources, a collective answer all countries can agree, and a knowledge of the mechanisms available for the Security Council to dispose.

Topic Area B: The Situation in Somalia

Since 1991, Somalia has paradoxically existed as a sovereign state without an effective central government.  Clan militias, tied inextricably to the long history of the region, were effective in toppling the government, but then turned against one another in conflicts that extend to the present.  Given this situation, the election in 2009 of the moderate Sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed proves to be seemingly the best prospect for stability in the nation.  Still, Somalia remains consistently last on ranking of failed states, indicating it remains in a fragile state of perilously returning to civil war and anarchy.  Five thousand African Union soldiers are present in the country now, hopefully to ensure this return does not occur.

The impacts arising from the failed state status of Somalia include that Somalia cannot provide for services and security for its people, that Somalian pirates and overall disorder disrupts trade, and that terrorism activities increase as al-Qaeda and other subnational, clandestine organizations find a haven in failed states like Somalia.  The Security Council has the unique position of responding to each of these impacts and establish a path to stability in Somalia.

With all this in mind, the questions the Security Council would ask and attempt to come to agreement on would include: What are the implications of the situation in Somalia on regional peace and stability?  Have past actions led to any success in building up the state?  What actions, if any, could and should be done to help solve the crisis?

Does internal strife in nations warrant external interference?  Will the Security Council undertake new forms of old methods to help Somalia?  In committee, all this will be decided.