Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AD-HOC COMMITTEE
BACKGROUND GUIDE
P age |2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Letter from the Chairs
12
16
17
Suggested Resources
19
P age |3
James Underwood
jamesu@stanford.edu
P age |4
P age |5
P age |6
A key distinguishing factor of the Security Council is its ability to enforce its resolutions, a
power granted due to the burdens of peace and security, and the valuable lessons learned from
the failure of the League of Nations. Whereas other bodies are only able to recommend or call
upon member-states to abide by their resolutions, the Security Council is given full ability to
direct its member-states to pursue certain courses of action and if any state refuses to do so, the
Security Council may enforce its decisions via diplomatic, economic, and even military
sanctions.
Peacekeeping operations are the United Nations military arm, authorized only by the Security
Council and born out of an interpretation of the Charter. These forces are sent around the world
to support the Security Councils resolutions as well as uphold the general goals of peace and
security.
Though the issue of vetoes causing stagnation became less relevant after the end of the Cold
War, questions still persisted in 2015 regarding the merits of allowing five states to have such
power, particularly as that power was mainly derived from their victory in a war seventy years
prior. In fact, some even challenged the validity of having any permanent members.
Furthermore, reports about the effectiveness of peacekeeping operations were rather varied. The
pressure was sufficient that it seemed that some sort of change was due, although no one was
quite sure what that may entail or how it might take shape.
P age |7
P age |8
By the end of her first term, Bokova was celebrated as one of the best and most influential
Secretary-Generals in the history of the United Nations. Supporters compared her to Dag
Hammarskjold and Kofi Annan. She easily won a second term.
During her second term, Bokova focused increasingly on Security Council reform. While the
Uniting for Consensus movements call for an expansion of non-permanent seats proved to be a
desirable proposal for the majority of U.N. member-states that believed additional permanent
seats would merely increase the disparity in influence, each of the G4 countries (Brazil,
Germany, India, and Japan) lobbied extensively to secure the support of their fellow memberstates. However, member-states from Africa and the Muslim world expressed their concern that
no African or Muslim country would be represented in the proposed expansion of permanent
membership. To gain the support of the larger African bloc, the G4 countries agreed to allow an
African country to join their ranks, leading to a mad scramble by African countries to secure that
last seat. Countries such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Senegal, and Rwanda were
quickly eliminated as serious contenders, leaving Egypt, Nigeria, and South Africa as the top
candidates for the position. In the ensuing campaign, representatives from each of the three
governments launched vicious diplomatic attacks on each other, but it soon became apparent that
Nigeria, with the largest economy in Africa and consistent commitments to U.N. peacekeeping,
would win the support of the rest of Africa. To avoid public humiliation, Egypt withdrew and
gave its support to Nigeria, but South Africa continued to challenge Nigeria. At the African
Union Cairo Summit of 2024, Nigeria decisively won the support of its fellow African countries,
with the South African delegation storming out of the meeting in protest. The debacle of the
Cairo Summit contributed to the growing rivalry and cold war between Nigeria and South
Africa.
With Nigeria joining Brazil, Germany, India, and Japan to form the Group of Five (G5), Bokova
publicly endorsed their campaign for permanent seats, earning her the ire of the Uniting for
Consensus movement. However, the United States, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom all
publicly issued statements in support for expanded permanent membership. Private diplomatic
negotiations assured the P5 countries that their veto power would not be threatened or extended
to new permanent members. At first, China seemed to be amenable to permanent membership
expansion, with President Hu Chunhua publicly supporting Brazil and Germany at joint press
conferences. However, it was soon reported that Japanese and Indian diplomats had privately
justified their bids for permanent membership as a means of countering Chinese influence across
the world, prompting outrage from both the Chinese government and public. The diplomatic
situation continued to deteriorate after this incident, culminating in a public promise by President
Hu to veto any expansion of permanent membership that included Japan or India. Further
discussions proved to be fruitless and the G5 members withdrew their proposed draft resolution
from Security Council debate.
P age |9
Although she continued her effective campaign at U.N. reform with vigor and dynamism, the
final years of Secretary-General Bokovas second term remained marred by the diplomatic defeat
of the G5.
LEGAL LOOPHOLE OR COUNCIL CORRUPTION?
In 2026, the Security Council and General Assembly elected Portugals Miguel de Serpa Soares,
who had previously served as Under Secretary-General for Legal Affairs, to succeed Irina
Bokova as Secretary-General of the United Nations. Serpa Soares was supposed to be a
competent administrator capable of applying his knowledge of international law to achieve
greater U.N. objectives, and by nearly all accounts, he was however, one particular event in
2034, nearly at the end of his second term, permanently discredited his reputation to many.
At a rather typical session of the Security Council, a man by the name of Shripati Naveen
represented the Indian delegation. His elder brother, Vasant, had been groomed for several years
to take on the role. In fact, he had been pivotal in the movement to gain permanent membership
for the G5 countries, both in befriending Bokova and in lobbying other member-states to approve
of the plan. However, when it ultimately failed, Vasant was publicly disgraced in India and
overcome by a deep depression, feeling as if his years of efforts to secure permanent membership
for India had been fruitless.
Shripati had since then felt an obligation to his brother to avenge this notion of worthlessness, to
prove that Vasants work was instrumental, yet unfinished. In the name of diplomacy, of course,
he never mentioned such an idea to anyone though he continued to brood on it as he rose through
the ranks and eventually was named the delegate to represent India in the Security Council
during its 2034-2036 term as a non-permanent member.
On Monday, October 16, 2034--exactly nine years after the draft resolution of the G5 was
officially withdrawn in a most extraordinary feat of diplomacy, delegates from the Permanent
Five were mysteriously absent from Council proceedings. The delegate from Spain, the Security
Councils President for the month of October, was utterly bewildered but nonetheless declared
that the session ought to go on as originally planned after delaying for nearly an hour and a half
waiting for the P5s arrivals and calling to no avail.
Less than an hour into the day, Shripati brought forward a draft resolution remarkably similar to
the one disposed of nine years earlier. However, this was even more revolutionary in addition
to adding the original G5 countries (Brazil, Germany, India, Japan, and Nigeria) to the slate of
permanent member states, the proposal would add five more slots for non-permanent members,
thus significantly raising the number of seats on the Council. But most dramatically of all, the
P a g e | 10
draft resolution sought to remove veto power entirely with the caveat that 19 of 25 members
would need to pass any substantive matter, thus strengthening a no vote from any member.
This immediately caused uproar in the room a new proposal to include the G5 as permanent
members could have potentially been passed with China absent from the room, as they were
originally the state with the most serious reservations. However, the mere prospect of removing
veto power would have been immediately shut down if even one permanent member state had
been present. At that moment, none of them were.
In the ensuing chaos, delegates discussed numerous points: the fact that it was the nine-year
anniversary of the initial proposals failure, the need to act quickly if this was actually going to
happen, as who knew when the other delegates were going to return, questions of the legality of
such a measure, reservations that, even if legal, the moral problems associated with such a drastic
change without the consent of the P5. Nevertheless, the ten members present established a
consensus that such a change had been necessary and long awaited. They suspected the
possibility of inappropriate actions by Shripati Naveen in arranging such a situation, but agreed
that on a purely technical level, those actions were independent of the present situation.
Finally, the President of the Security Council brought in Serpa Soares to determine whether or
not they could legally proceed with the matter. Secretary-General Serpa Soares cited precedent
and the legality of the vote when the Soviet Union was absent for a substantial vote during the
Cold War, claiming he knew of nothing that could technically nullify any matter passed with
those states absent. After all, the P5 would merely be considered abstaining and there was no
procedural rule that required the presence of the P5 to establish quorum. He did strongly caution
delegates, however, reminding them of the likely backlash they would face and the worldwide
uproar that would ensue (though a portion would likely be positive), as well as criminal action
that could be taken against individual delegates if foul play was assumed.
The resolution passed, with nine members voting yes and Spain abstaining (as the delegate felt
that was his duty as the President of the Council in such uncertain circumstances). The new
provisions were to be adopted two years thereafter, in 2036.
The delegates from the P5 returned the next day. When they were notified, they were so
distraught and caused such chaos that the Security Council did nothing substantial for the rest of
the session. Over the next several years, investigations by United Nations legal specialists
pushed the adoptive date back time after time. None of the fifteen delegates returned to the
United Nations after that year, with most opting to live private lives in their home countries and
stay far removed from the debacle. The majority felt that the decision made in the heat of the
moment would prove to be successful long-term, though they felt enormous guilt over the
circumstances. Of course, Shripati was not afforded this luxury, as he was tried on five counts of
P a g e | 11
assault through poison (chemical tests had confirmed that a new drug which knocks its users out
for around 36 hours, often compared to but stronger than traditional sedatives, had been
identified in all five delegates) and one count of interference with diplomacy. Though all knew
that foul play of some sort had occurred, there was never sufficient proof that Shripati was
directly involved. He returned to India a hero.
In 2038, it was at last ruled that although the circumstances surrounding the historic vote were
definitely uncertain and potentially criminal, that was not sufficient cause to lawfully overturn
the decision. The International Court of Justice refused to review the case and the General
Assembly gleefully passed annual resolutions reaffirming the Security Council vote of 2034,
much to the dismay of the P5. Thus, the new regulations would go in place in 2040, after a delay
of four years. By this time, although the P5 were continuing to fight the case, the states had
begun coming to terms with the inevitability of the situation. Thus, although the change in 2040
was bitterly spoken of by some, it was not disputed and the change went smoothly.
Though eventually allowed, the lack of action by Serpa Soares to dissuade delegates from voting,
even though it was within their bounds, cost him his reputation among several prominent leaders.
Secretaries-General since have largely avoided the issue of Security Council reform, and now,
twenty-five years later, the world accepts it as a much more excellent system than it had been
before.
P a g e | 12
P a g e | 13
In 2046, Deep Space Industries has a mining mission go incredibly wrong, and
mistakenly sends an asteroid hurtling toward the SEC elevator. NASA steps in to destroy
it, but the emergency mission costs millions. Though DSI pays back the damages, there is
growing concern about the dangers of profit as a sole motive for space companies when
such a risky environment is at hand.
In 2052, SEC begins offering tourists a moon shuttle from its elevator. It features a close
look at the Chinese defense systems from within a contained area.
In 2056, a tourist leaves the allowed observation area on the moon, approaches the
defense systems, and destroys Chinas infrastructure. He then takes off his suit, killing
himself. This is the first death on the moon. Billions of dollars in damage are done. The
SEC halts all operations to devise more stringent requirements and checks for those
travelling to space.
China rebuilds its defense systems by 2058, and all states incorporate advanced security,
which was unnecessary before moon tourism but an absolute must after the recent event.
In 2060, a joint effort by the United States and the European Union establishes the first
permanent human colony on Mars.
The SEC never reopens as an independent company. However, it is acquired in 2061 by
the Walt Disney Company, which opens DisneyUniverse on the moon in 2064.
ADVANCES IN TECHNOLOGY
Large strides have been made in innumerable areas, including medicine, biotech, and artificial
intelligence. Many changes are perceived as welcome by all, others are hotly contested, and a
few bring out fear and anger in the vast majority of people. A summary is below.
In 2015, a new method of in-vitro fertilization is developed that allows for three-person
babies. This method allows for DNA from both parents to be combined with donor DNA
for mitochondria, preventing a rare, potentially fatal disease that causes muscle weakness,
a severe lack of energy, and heart failure. The process is highly controversial but is
proven to be safe.
In 2017, the i5K Project, designed to sequence the genomes of five thousand insects and
related arthropod species, is completed. The project is expected to allow pesticides to
target weak areas of insect DNA and dramatically improve the quality of pesticides in
targeting specific pests while reducing damage to beneficial insects.
In 2020, there is a measles epidemic originating in the United States, leading to the repeal
of any and all religious exemptions permitted for vaccinations.
In 2024, Apple Technologies begins hiring en masse top-level artificial intelligence
experts. Google quickly follows suit.
P a g e | 14
In 2030, Biogen, Inc. announces they have discovered how to efficiently weaponize HIV.
Scientists marvel, the public is outraged, and governments largely remain silent, leading
many to suspect some states have invested in this new technology.
In 2037, Apple Technologies and Google announce a partnership for the sole purpose of
AI, publicly stating that competition between the two had yet to cause any breakthroughs
for either.
In 2042, the United States and India announce that they have jointly developed a nuclear
fusion power plant, capable of producing significantly more energy than all previous
nuclear fission facilities. The technology is expensive, but plans for widespread
implementation are drawn.
In 2044, GeneTech Operations (GTO) announces all large mammals on the endangered
list have had their genomes sequenced.
By 2046, advances in nanotechnology and genetics have allowed sophisticated
technologies to be implemented into the human body, allowing people to combat disease
in more effective ways and achieve full immersion virtual reality.
In 2049, GTO claims it has successfully sequenced the genomes of the tyrannosaurus rex,
the triceratops, and the brontosaurus.
In 2051, French doctor Leone Saucier discovers a breakthrough in cancer treatment. The
Saucier procedure earns her the Nobel Prize in Medicine and is believed to be three times
as effective as chemotherapy, with a process that takes approximately half that time.
By 2055, the growing power of AI has allowed it to play significant roles in business and
government decision making, generating great public concern over the widespread
infiltration of AI into society.
In 2062, the ever-silent Apple/Google partnership announces a machine they have created
which appears to be completely conscious--through extensive testing, they say, they have
shown that it looks and acts like a regular human. The caveat is that they are unsure
whether these feelings are genuine, developed by the AI itself, or if they are perfectly
simulated. There is public concern about the secrecy of these operations.
CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Though the cost of solar power has been lowered, it has not yet been enough to cause
widespread change, although further research is ongoing.
The 2020s are marked by increasing competition for resources, particularly crude oil and
natural gas. Climate change is leaving a dramatic effect on world food and water
supplies, sparking local and regional conflicts.
The 2030s see the beginning of mass human migration away from areas heavily affected
by climate change, creating widespread social unrest. Natural disasters, with destructive
power significantly augmented by climate change, leave devastation across the world.
Countries begin to implement clean and renewable energy on a mass scale, which
P a g e | 15
coupled with the development of nuclear fusion energy, allows countries to dramatically
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The worlds population leveled off at around 10 billion in 2060, but even then, this has
put a lot of pressure on agriculture. Nearly all food is now genetically modified, a
necessity to ensure production keeps up with demand. However, many have raised
concerns over this and maintain that the inherent problem is the logistics of food supply
given how much global waste there is, and that a more efficient mechanism would largely
remove the need for GMOs.
By 2060, entire countries and ecosystems have been devastated by climate change. Many
famous species, including polar bears, Bengal tigers, and rhinoceroses are now extinct
outside of captivity, primarily due to habitat loss. They are also projected to go extinct in
captivity due to low mating rates within the next 50 years. There is discussion about
using new genetic technology to recreate herds and herds of these animals and get them
flourishing again. Biological diversity has been severely reduced by climate change, and
scientists are considering new ways to reverse this damage.
P a g e | 16
P a g e | 17
What does sovereignty mean? How have definitions of sovereignty evolved over the past
century, and how might those definitions change in the future?
What is realism in the context of international relations? What are the differences
between classical realism, neorealism, defensive realism, and offensive realism?
What is constructivism in the context of international relations? What norms and values
drive state action on the international level?
What is the balance of power and does balance of power politics create a stable or
peaceful international environment? Why or why not?
What are the core national interests? What are the tools of national policy which may be
used to achieve those national interests?
What is the security dilemma, and how is it affected by the offense-defense balance?
How have previous innovations in military technology affected the security dilemma and
the offense-defense balance?
How can an arms control regime be effective and enforceable? Do arms control and
disarmament regimes actually contribute to a more peaceful international environment?
What is collective security and how does it affect war and peace between states?
P a g e | 18
What do democratic peace theory and commercial peace theory predict about
international relations? What is the evidence in favor of and against these theories? What
policy implications do these theories have, if they are correct?
Hegemonic stability theory (HST) suggests that the world is more stable when there is a
single dominant world power. What is the evidence in favor of and against HST? What is
the relationship between the declining and rising hegemon? What factors contribute to the
power of a hegemon?
What is just war theory and what are the considerations behind the theory? How do
preemptive and preventive wars factor into just war theory?
How will new technologies affect hard power and soft power? Is power becoming more
diffuse in the future? Why or why not? How do these shifts in power affect the security
environment?
What factors drive cooperation between states? What are the various forms that
cooperation can take? How can game theory be applied for a rational analysis?
What factors drive social unrest and political instability, and what steps can be taken by
the Security Council to address these problems? How can peacekeeping be adapted to
better suit the needs of maintaining international peace and security?
P a g e | 19
SUGGESTED RESOURCES
The following resources are listed for your convenience and research. Please note that we are not
asking you to read every single title listed below. A good understanding of the many concepts
and ideas covered by the following resources will leave you more than adequately prepared for
committee. If there is a particular title that interests you, perhaps you may choose to explore that
resource further. Otherwise, reading a synopsis or summary can prove more than adequate. We
hope that this list of resources will prove useful to you not only in your preparation for our
committee, but also in your future academic and educational pursuits.
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS THEORY
After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, by Robert
Keohane
The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order, by Samuel P.
Huntington
The Revenge of Geography: What the Map Tells Us About Coming Conflicts and the
Battle Against Fate, by Robert D. Kaplan
P a g e | 20
A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide, by Samantha Power
No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam, by Reza Aslan
The Parliament of Man: The Past, Present, and Future of the United Nations, by Paul
Kennedy
The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from
1500 to 2000, by Paul Kennedy
Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fate of Human Societies, by Jared Diamond
Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization
of Democracy, by Francis Fukuyama
The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution, by
Francis Fukuyama
The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas L. Friedman
Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, by Daron Acemoglu
and James. A. Robinson