Groups such as ISIL, ISIS, and Al-Qaeda have, in recent history, become global threats to not only the countries they terrorize, but also to the world as a community. While countries are defending their borders against such threats, others are fighting on a scale of ideology, morality, and questionable intentions. As countries strive to protect themselves – and, at the same time, secure their position on a global scale – with more technologically advanced weapons, the threat of terrorists obtaining weapons of mass destruction (WMD) becomes a possibility the global community must take into account.
“Terrorists” is a broad term that ranges from a single person using violence and intimidation to pursue their political aims, to entire groups striving for dominance in the world for their political or possibly religious intentions. Terrorism as we have come to know today largely means going against a person’s citizenship in a country, and causing fear and turmoil to snake its way into the heart’s of others. Terrorists largely aim for power, but when thinking on this topic, it will be important in committee to determine on what scale “terrorists” will be combatted when preventing them from acquiring WMD. Will a single group be targeted with your resolution? Or will a single person without any largescale association to a terrorist group be considered a threat to be taken into consideration?
Weapons of Mass Destruction, as defined in United States law, are “any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas”, “any weapon involving a disease organism”, or “any weapon that is designed to release radiation… at a level dangerous to human life” meant to “cause death or serious bodily injury” through their release or use. Nuclear weapons, in the last few decades, have become a controversial subject in their own right. Who has the right to own or produce such destructive weapons? How are they to be regulated? These are some things to think about when thinking about the regulation of such WMD. Which weapons shall be regulated, and how will they be regulated? With the threat of mass extinction if certain weapons are to be fired, it will take a global initiative to combat WMD in the hands of terrorists.
A fresh topic from the United Nations, it has been discussed this year in depth and at length. With governments having their own preventative measures in place, as well as knowledge and intelligence that they might not make accessible to other countries, a peaceful resolution is necessary, as well as cooperation between nations. At the same time, for some countries WMD are important defensive mechanisms and this should also be taken into account when thinking of preventative measures against terrorist organizations.
In order to come to a resolution for this topic, be sure to keep in mind your own foreign policy, as well as some of the following questions:
- Think about prevention. What does prevention entail versus disarmament?
- How active does your foreign policy allow you to be when coming to resolution?
- Who/should there be someone/something in charge of such an operation?
- How will this resolution last in the future or be regulated?