Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

FUTURE MILITARY WEAPONS study guide

486 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

FUTURE MILITARY WEAPONS study guide

  1. 1. GRAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2013 THE FUTURE OF MILITARY WEAPONS DISARMAMENT AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITIES
  2. 2. THE FUTURE OF MILITARY WEAPONS – STUDY GUIDE GRAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2013 Page 1 1.1 History of the Committee : The General Assembly Despite the League of Nations failure in arbitrating the conflicts that led up to World War II, United Nations also commonly known as the UN was established which sets the principles for international collaboration in maintaining peace and security. Thus, an international organization came to existence on 24 October 1945 and currently recognizes 192 member states. All members of the United Nations are represented in the General Assemblywhich resembles closest to a world parliament and are expected to meet on a regular basis. Each country, large or small, rich or poor, has a single vote, however, none of the decisions taken by the Assembly are binding. Nevertheless, the Assembly's decisions become resolutions that carry the weight of world governmental opinion.
  3. 3. THE FUTURE OF MILITARY WEAPONS – STUDY GUIDE GRAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2013 Page 8 It affords the opportunity for countries to balance global interdependence and national interests when addressing international problems.1 In some cases, Special and emergency special sessions may also be convened. Each state has one vote, when a vote is taken it needs a two-thirds majority for it to be passed.It can make recommendations to promote international peace; international economic and social co-operation and it can promote human rights. The General Assembly is the main deliberative, policymaking and representative organ of the United Nations in which discusses and decides on issues of international peace and security. Because of the great number of questions it is called upon to consider, the Assembly allocates items relevant to its work among its six Main Committees, which discuss them, seeking whe possible to harmonize the various approaches of States, and then present to a plenary meeting of the Assembly draft resolutions and decisions for consideration. These six Main Committees are: DISEC (Disarmament and International Security), Economic and Financial, SOCHUM (Social, Cultural and Humanitarian), Special Political and Decolonization, Administrative and Budgetary and the Legal Committee.2 Each of these committees consists of equal representation from all member states of the United Nations. 1.2 History of the Committee : Disarmament and International Security The First Committee was known originally as the Political and Security Committeewith . However, the committee, quickly overwhelmed by the range of issues assigned to it, came to focus its work on the field of disarmament. Given the importance of disarmament and, in particular, issues of nuclear arms reduction, the General Assembly decided in the wake of the 1978 Special Session on Disarmament that the First Committee should concentrate on this topic. Political issues were shunted to the Special Political Committee, and subsequently the title of the First Committee was changed to "Disarmament and International Security (DISEC)."Debates about disarmament were highly contentious during the cold war and particularly in the early years of nuclear weapons development, when international diplomats were trying to work out a
  4. 4. THE FUTURE OF MILITARY WEAPONS – STUDY GUIDE GRAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2013 Page 8 set of rules and agreements to deal with a new and frightening topic that threatened global survival.3 According to Article 26 of United Nations Charter, DISEC’s mandate is “to promote the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources.”4 Under the UN Charter, all member states and observers of the United Nations are automatically part of the first committee of the General Assembly, and have an equal vote. Documents also require a simple majority to be passed. With topics similar to those discussed in the Security Council, DISEC meets once a year for a 5-week session in October. The First Committee considers all disarmament related topics on the agenda of the General Assembly's regular session. Annually it adopts more than 40 resolutions dealing with the nuclear non-proliferation regime, the various proposals for regional nuclear-weapons-free zones, nuclear test bans, all aspects of the arms trade, chemical and biological weapons, and all types of weapons of mass destruction and conventional arms. It also considers the implementation of existing disarmament agreements and General and Complete Disarmament. 1.3 TOPIC AREA : FUTURISTIC WEAPON RACE The advancement of technology has put a new scheme on the current international power, with more conventional weapon –gunfire, grenades, etc.- becoming more affordable, countries are searching for more lethal and more dangerous weapon. According to weapon specialized magazine, Angkasa, from year 2014 to 2020 there is an increase of 50% military budget from all country around the World. As new and more dangerous weapon is invented, the world now face a graver danger than before.
  5. 5. THE FUTURE OF MILITARY WEAPONS – STUDY GUIDE GRAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2013 Page 8 Arm Race: Large scale production of Anti-Matter and Advancement of Drones An expert from Groningen University, dr. Lars Ulrich, has stated that the world is shifting towards smaller size devices. Mr. Ulrich also stated that while the size might be small the potential inside the weapon is equal or even bigger. In line with Mr Ulrich statement, the development of weapon in each country shifting into smaller, portable but more dangerous weapon. The notion of having more lethal weapon is smaller size becoming a worldwide issue, when CERN -a body of Europe government specialized in energy- announced that the anti- matter has finally been able to be produce in large specimen. Although an official statement by CERN suggests that CERN would preserve the technology for scientific purposes, a recent leaked diplomatic cable published by Timesleak.com suggested that European Union has bargain with CERN to test Anti-Matter as a possible arsenal in near future. Anti-Matter which often dubbed as future energy,is the counterparts of Matter, when both Matter and Anti-Matter meet they will turn into pure energy. Based on Einstein calculation, one gram of Anti Matter is enough to run New York for a week and is 20 times more powerful than Atomic bomb dropped in Hiroshima. Meanwhile, other leakage by Timesleak.com also suggest that Researcher has finally been able to incorporate “ANU Algorithm” into Lethal Autonomous Robots (LARS). The Algorithm introduce a mechanism which allow LARS to “think” meaning that they can distinguish between hostile target and civilians. The leakage yield an international concern, with LARS is able to eliminate target without human interference, world leaders is concerned that LARS is violating the International Humanitarian Law and made clear that such technology needs to be controlled even more. Arm Race: Large scale production of Anti-Matter and Advancement of Drones An expert from Groningen University, dr. Lars Ulrich, has stated that the world is shifting towards smaller size devices. Mr. Ulrich also stated that while the size might be small the potential inside the weapon is equal or even bigger. In line with Mr Ulrich statement, the development of weapon in each country shifting into smaller, portable but more dangerous weapon.
  6. 6. THE FUTURE OF MILITARY WEAPONS – STUDY GUIDE GRAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2013 Page 8 The notion of having more lethal weapon is smaller size becoming a worldwide issue, when CERN -a body of Europe government specialized in energy- announced that the anti- matter has finally been able to be produce in large specimen. Although an official statement by CERN suggest that CERN would preserve the technology for scientific purposes, a recent leaked diplomatic cable published by Timesleak.com suggested that European Union has bargain with CERN to test Anti-Matter as a possible arsenal in near future. Anti-Matter which often dubbed as future energy,is the counterparts of Matter, when both Matter and Anti-Matter meet they will turn into pure energy. Based on Einstein calculation, one gram of Anti Matter is enough to run New York for a week and is 20 times more powerful than Atomic bomb dropped in Hiroshima. Meanwhile, other leakage by Timesleak.com also suggest that Researcher has finally been able to incorporate “ANU Algorithm” into Lethal Autonomous Robots (LARS). The Algorithm introduce a mechanism which allow LARS to “think” meaning that they can distinguish between hostile target and civilians. The leakage yield an international concern, with LARS is able to eliminate target without human interference, world leaders is concerned that LARS is violating the International Humanitarian Law and made clear that such technology needs to be controlled even more. 1.4 Proposed Solutions 1. TOTAL DISARMAMENT The potential of Anti-matter and LARS is undoubtedly huge, perhaps more than even nuclear weapons. As such, there is an option to impose a complete ban, in which no countries is allowed to research or create these new weapon systems. However, several obstacles exist to impose a complete ban. a. A total disarmament will benefit countries that do not the capabilities to create these new weapons in the first place. However, larger and wealthier countries with the technology and budget to research these technologies will undoubtedly be dissatisfied. These countries will have to be appeased before a complete ban can take place.
  7. 7. THE FUTURE OF MILITARY WEAPONS – STUDY GUIDE GRAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2013 Page 8 b. Many treaties involving weapon control have been broken in the past. Even if all countries originally decide to follow the complete ban, how will a country that later decides to leave the treaty be handled? c. What if a country decides to secretly research these technologies while under the complete ban treaty? If it manages to complete an anti-matter weapon or LARS, how will the other countries be capable of opposing a country that has the completed weapon? 2. PARTIAL DISARMAMENT Rather than a complete ban, it is possible to have a partial ban, in which only a few selected countries are allowed to possess anti-matter weapons and LARS. This will create a more stable balance of power, as wealthier countries will be able to create these weapons to protect themselves and their weaker allies. Additionally, no significant difference in power will be created between a country that has secretly created one of these weapon systems and other countries. However, new problems will have to be solved before a partial disarmament can be achieved. a. Which countries will be given the authorization to possess these weapons? If only Western countries are selected, many Eastern countries will be discontented. A balanced number of countries from all over the world will have to be chosen. b. How will the authorized countries be chosen? Many countries exist that possess the funds necessary to research the required technologies, but many of those countries have also been in constant wars and may recklessly use these systems. However, countries that have always been completely neutral cannot be counted on to use their weapons if necessary. A list of characteristics will have to be created to choose the authorized countries. c. In the future, how will additional countries be chosen? As of now, many countries are incapable of building these new weapons. However, once these countries become further developed, they may appeal for the permission to create these weapon systems.
  8. 8. THE FUTURE OF MILITARY WEAPONS – STUDY GUIDE GRAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2013 Page 8 3. COMPLETE OR PARTIAL BAN ON THE USE FOR MILITARY PURPOSES ONLY These technologies do not only have military uses. Antimatter is a source of energy that has an even greater potential than nuclear power. It can be used to provide cheap and easily transportable source of energy for the world. The Widagdo Algorithm can also be used to differentiate criminals (hostile targets) from normal civilians and thus can be used by law enforcements. As such, while these systems can be on a complete or partial ban for military purposes, countries that wish to use these systems for peaceful purposes can be allowed to research the required technologies. However, in this case, several policies will have to be established first. a. It is still necessary to decide whether these systems should have a complete or partial ban when using them for military purposes. b. Unfortunately, these are dual-use technologies, in which systems originated from these technologies for peaceful purposes can quickly be changed for military purposes. As such, it is easy for a country to claim that they are only using anti-matter and LARS for peaceful purposes when they are actually preparing them for military use. How should such countries be treated? 4. NO RESTRICTIONS Absolutely no treaties will be created on the restriction of research and possession on anti-matter and LARS. Any country will be free to research and construct antimatter weapons and LARS. While this may be the most reckless option, countries with a wish to possess the freedom to choose their own laws may request to have no international policies on these weapon systems. 1.5 Bloc Positions 1. Weapon Developer Countries Country who categorized as weapon developer and supplier has shown support to the development of futuristic weapon. Russia center for weapon development, Chernovyl, has initiate program “Vladivostok” which aims the creation of small scale nuclear handguns. United States of America as the biggest spender in the world for military has created several portfolio
  9. 9. THE FUTURE OF MILITARY WEAPONS – STUDY GUIDE GRAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2013 Page 8 for futuristic weapon, including a fully autonomous Lethal Autonomous Robots. Both country also indicated that weapon development is a part of country national interest, thus there is no need to limit ones country weapon creation. 2. European Union Responding recent leaks that pointed EU is developing Anti-matters as a possible arsenal, president of the European Council, has issued that EU always supporting the idea of world peace and would like to reiterate its commitment. However, Mr Leroy has also stated that it is important that in order to maintain peace in regional level, approach using “bigger stick than other country is necessary”. Adding the fact that EU had the biggest particle collider, a device to create Anti-matters, in the world. EU will continue the development of anti-matters as Anti- Matters can serve as a symbol of powerhouse to EU. 3. Alliance of Weapon Free-Zone Countries This countries, who from the past has torn by fear of war and conflict, reject the idea of having a new kind and more deadly weapon invented. Countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan whose land has been destroyed by the past war has clearly oppose the creation of Lethal Autonomous Robots and Anti-Matters. This country believe that the current weapon had already cause a huge blow to them and see no point of having a new array of weapon with more deadly effect created. 1.6 For Further Research: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html http://www.nti.org/country-profiles/ http://www.icanw.org/the-facts/nuclear-arsenals/ http://www.icanw.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/nwcguide2012.pdf http://www.acronym.org.uk/map

×