Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

A LETTER FROM THE EXECUTIVE BOARD

Dear Delegates,

Welcome to the simulation of United Nations General Assembly at Quintessence Model United
Nations 2019. We have envisioned this simulation to be one of the most productive and thoughtful
simulation of the committee and for that vision to be actualized, the impetus falls on your shoulders
to work harder, think more critically, and adapt instantly.

The agenda for the committee has been fixed as “Global Reduction in Military Budgets”. There is
plenty of existing literature on this topic. We would be looking forward to your analysis of the
global situation, in light of existing resolutions and decisions.

Please note, you may only treat the guides as introductory documents, which build an insight into
the concepts that the agenda deals with. Beyond this, you are required to dig deep and do your own
research, but more importantly, we want you to take the information you’ve researched and sit
down with it to analyze the core issues there, possibly forecast what the debate on this will entail,
and then form logical arguments and efficient solutions on it. Even though this is a rather usual
advice, it is imperative in this committee to be followed; otherwise you will not be able to keep up
with the fast-paced committee.

Lastly, we would abide by the letter and spirit of the UNA-USA Rules of Procedure. No motions
to alter the procedure, which goes against the laid out rules, shall be entertained by the executive
board at any point during the committee.

Feel free to contact us through e-mail, in case you have any doubts.

We wish you all the best. May the Force be with you!

Best Regards,

Raghav Sodhi | Chairperson | sodhiraghav@gmail.com

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

INDEX

1. About The Committee………………………………………………………………..……3

2. Research…………………………….…………………………………………..…………4
3. Valid Source of Proof in the Committee………………………………………………….9
4. Basic Things to Know……………………………………………………………………11
5. Agenda Research…………………………………………………………………….......15
6. Links for Further Research………………………………………………………………21

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE COMMITTEE:

Official Website: http://www.un.org/en/ga/first/

The First Committee of the General Assembly is one of the six main committees of the GA and
is concerned with disarmament and related international security questions, within the scope of
the Charter or relating to the powers and functions of any other organ of the United Nations. It
looks at global challenges and threats to peace that affect the international community and seeks
out solutions to those challenges. Key considerations include national capabilities and
limitations, mitigation of conflict, and oversight and monitoring mechanisms, as well as
principles governing disarmament and the regulation of armaments; promotion of cooperative
arrangements and measures aimed at strengthening stability through lower levels of armaments.

Because of the nature of the topics discussed, research and resolution writing must be very
detailed in nature and focus on the operationalization of ideas. Additionally, due to the divisive
nature of many of the discussions, the most effective ideas will be inclusive and focus on
international cooperation.

Further, the Committee works in close cooperation with the United Nations Disarmament
Commission and the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament. It is the only Main Committee
of the General Assembly entitled to verbatim records coverage.

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

RESEARCH

Proper research and preparation is essential to effectively participate in any Model United
Nations conference. Without it, the educational experience offered by the conference is largely
lost and the delegate’s ability to participate successfully in the debate is greatly handicapped.

Generally, there are two questions which arise:

1) What should I research?

2) How should I go about researching?

In short, the delegate needs to research the United Nations itself, the country being represented,
the committee topics, the country's position on the topics, and “world opinion” on these topics.

● The United Nations

The delegate must be familiar with the history and organization of the UN and of his or her
assigned committee. Most importantly, the delegate should be familiar with the past actions of
the United Nations on the committee topics as well as the present status of those topics in the
United Nations system. Sources for these research areas are quite numerous. The most useful
sources are actual UN documents and UN online sources.

A good starting point is the UN website at www.un.org. There you will find links to all the
committee homepages, histories, UN documents and resolutions. The online Dag Hammarskjöld
Library is an excellent starting point for UN document research. The Peacekeeping Best
Practices online library offers a range of indexed documents, many of which go well beyond the
scope of peacekeeping operations. Specific Country Research Concurrent with United Nations
research, the delegate should be researching the specific country that they have been assigned.

A delegate must know a great deal about the country in order to make informed decisions on the
issues. Country research is best done in two steps:

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

1) Background research into the country's political, economic, and cultural systems and
institutions.

2) Assimilation of this information so that the delegate can effectively act as an actual
representative of the country.

Step One: Background Research

The first step is the most time-consuming, but it will provide the basis for both your later
research and for your effectiveness as a delegate at the conference. The country research should
encompass the economic and political systems of the country, the history and culture of the
society, the demographics of the society, the geography of the country, the international and
regional organizations the country belongs to, and the present influences the domestic situation
has on the formulation of international policy. Delegates should pay particular attention to the
decision-making structure within the country. It is important to understand the actual, rather than
the theoretical process of political decision-making. Sources of this information are discussed
later in this document. In general terms, the more you know and research about your country, the
easier it will be for you to accurately formulate your country's positions relating to the topics
under discussion. Items that are crucial to know include:

1) Geography: size and description, location, natural resources, and neighboring states and
regions

2) Demographics: Statistics of the state’s population, population density and growth rate, life
expectancy, infant mortality, literacy rate

3) Culture: majority and minority components, religions and their influences, language(s), and
customs and traditions

4) Economy: type of economy, gross national product (GNP) and strength of economy, debt
owed, average per capita income, major imports and exports, and trading partners

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

5) Government: type of government, leaders, political parties and opposing political faction,
allies and enemies, membership of political and economic organizations, role in international
politics

6) History of state: general history and reasons and philosophy behind present-day foreign
policies.

It is important to realize that these previous examples are by no means the only items necessary
to formulate correct policies. Each country has specific problems that only it deals with; these
idiosyncrasies must also be accounted for during effective research on a country. Additionally,
your delegation should research your country’s relationship and role in the United Nations. This
should include when your country became a member, committees and organizations of which
you are a member, and how much money you annually contribute to the UN. Flagship programs
with the UN and any other collaborations or interactions of note (ex. peacekeeping operations,
major World Bank or IMF loan programs, public health campaigns, etc.) should also be
addressed, especially if it pertains to individual committee topic research.

Step Two: Assimilation of Research

The assimilation step of research is often the hardest thing for a delegate to accomplish. Try to
put yourself in the place of someone from the country you are representing. It may seem
difficult, but the more you talk about the various topic areas with your delegation, the more you
will be able to understand why other countries behave the way they do. By using the knowledge
gained through the background research, the delegate should be able to extrapolate how their
nation might form a policy on a specific topic (even if the state’s actual policy on a topic is
unknown). If this step is accomplished, a delegate, for instance, will be able to represent India
and act as a representative of a developing, over-populated state desiring both stable international
relations and economic growth. In this sense, an interdisciplinary approach to preparation is
recommended. For example, the Commission on the Status of Women may be addressing female
illiteracy; while the topic may not directly concern economic, political, or security issues, these
aspects nonetheless inform how a state will approach the topic and possible solutions. A state
with great political instability will bring this experience to the committee and advocate against

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

solutions that rely too heavily on government support. If a delegate goes into the conference with
concerns and attitudes of the country he or she is representing, then he or she will likely excel at
the simulation.

● Topic Research

With background and basic United Nations research accomplished, the delegate is in a position
to begin formulating a policy for his/her country on the issues to be discussed in the committee.
This process involves recognizing the various factors and processes that influence decision-
making within the country, and applying this knowledge to the topics at hand. Often specific
information on national policy is not available and it becomes necessary to display some
educated creativity.

A delegate must first note the existing policy problem areas in order to formulate the country's
policy. Although the problem will be explained in the committee Background Guide, the
delegate must discover the importance of the issue in his or her own country. The delegate
should understand the nature and the extent to which the topic affects his or her country. He or
she should also be aware of the existing policies designed to meet the problem in his or her own
country, the UN, and other international organizations. It is very important to note whether a
conflict exists between those policies made in the UN and those within one’s “home” countries.

If no national policy exists on the topic the delegate should look at the various groups in the
country with stands on the issues. The delegate must determine the level of access and power
these groups have over the government. By weighing the power and access of the different
groups, a delegate can infer the probable policy decision in the country on the issue.

In some cases, if there is limited information about the country's decision-making process or of
its interest groups, the delegate may only be able to determine some of the variables involved. If
this occurs, he or she will have to rely on the ideology of government, power, and the role of the
individual upheld by the country in order to make an educated and defensible guess about the
country’s policy on that particular issue.

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

Another possible approach to take when information is lacking is to look at the policies of
countries with similar ideologies and regional interests. For example, many African states hold
similar ideological and regional interests. For example, they may hold similar positions on many
issues including the question of Namibia and South Africa. This manner of inferring policy
should be used carefully, however, so that errors are not made. It would, for example, be a grave
error to assume that Thailand and Vietnam are always in agreement with each other simply
because they are both located in the same region of the globe.

By following this process as closely as possible, a delegate will be able to formulate policy for
his or her country. The delegate will also discover the complex variables that affect policy
formation throughout the world.

● World Opinion

Once the delegates have completed the research on the United Nations, their own country, and
the topics to be discussed, they must turn to the allies of their country and the various blocs. The
delegate should know which countries will be supporting their position and what the position of
the other blocs (groups of nations with similar interests) will be on the various problems to be
discussed. He or she should also know which of these countries will be represented in the
committee. It would also help to know where the different blocs will form on the issues in your
committee.

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

VALID SOURCE OF PROOF IN THE COMMITTEE

Evidence or proof is from the following sources will be accepted as credible in the UNGA:

1. State-operated News Agencies – These reports can be used in the support of or against the
State that owns the News Agency. These reports, if credible or substantial enough, can be used in
support of or against any country as such but in that situation, they can be denied by any other
country in the council. Some examples are,

i. RIA Novosti (Russia) [http://en.rian.ru/]

ii. IRNA (Iran) [http://http://www.irna.ir/en/]

iii. BBC (United Kingdom) [http://bbc.co.uk/]

iv. Al Jazeera (Qatar) [http://www.aljazeera.com]

v. Xinhua News Agency (PR China) [http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/china/]

2. Government Reports:

These reports can be used in a similar way as the State Operated News Agencies reports and can,
in all circumstances, be denied by another country. However, a nuance is that a report that is
being denied by a certain country can still be accepted by the Executive Board as credible
information. Some examples are,
i.) Government Websites like the State Department of the United States of America
[http://www.state.gov/index.htm] or the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
[http://www.eng.mil.ru/en/index.htm]

ii.) Ministry of Foreign Affairs of various nations like India [http://www.mea.gov.in/]

or People’s Republic of China [http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/].

iii.) Permanent Representatives to the United Nations Reports

http://www.un.org/en/members/ (Click on any country to get the website of theOffice of
its Permanent Representative.)

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

iv.) Multilateral Organizations like the NATO

[http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/index.htm], ASEAN [http://www.aseansec.org/],
OPEC [http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/], etc.

3. United Nations Reports:

All UN Reports are considered are credible information or evidence for the Executive Board of
the UNGA:

i) UN Bodies like the UNSC [http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/] or UNGA

[http://www.un.org/en/ga/].

ii.) UN Affiliated Bodies like the International Atomic Energy Agency

[http://www.iaea.org/], World Bank [http://www.worldbank.org/], International Monetary
Fund [http://www.imf.org/external/index.htm], International Committee of the Red Cross
[http://www.icrc.org/eng/index.jsp], etc.

iii.) Treaty Based Bodies like the Antarctic Treaty System [http://
www.ats.aq/e/ats.htm], the International Criminal Court [http://www.icc-
cpi.int/Menus/ICC]

NOTE — Sources like Wikipedia [http://www.wikipedia.org/], Amnesty International

[http://www.amnesty.org/], Human Rights Watch [http://www.hrw.org/] or newspapers like the
Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk/], Times of India [http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/], etc.
are typically not accepted as PROOF/EVIDENCE. However, they can be used for better
understanding of any issue or on rare occasions, be brought up in debate if the information given
in such sources is in line with the beliefs of a Government.

Further, the information submitted as evidence citing reportage from sources such as
specified in this note may be at best, treated as having significance in terms of persuasive
value - e.g. to cement one’s assertions, but never as binding, indisputable fact.

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

BASIC THINGS TO KNOW

1. Basic documents, treaties, conventions etc.

Following is the list of documents that need to be perused by all delegates before they come to
the council. Please understand that you need to know the following aspects regarding each of the
mentioned documents:

● The reason why this document exists (for e.g. the Geneva Conventions were enacted to
lay down the rules of war and for the treatment of all parties concerned in the wars.) 
The nature of the document and the force it carries, i.e. whether it is a treaty, a
convention, a doctrine, or a universally accepted custom or norm.
● The areas where the document can be applied or has jurisdiction on (for e.g. international
humanitarian law applies only to situations of armed conflict, whereas the human rights
laws applies at all times of war and peace alike.)
● The contents of the document at hand. You need not memorize any articles or rules of
any convention or treaty, but should know what the document has to say in various
situations that may arise in the council. The delegates must have the understanding of the
following:

2. UN Charter

The Charter of the United Nations was signed on 26 June 1945 at San Francisco by the nations
represented at the United Nations Conference on International Organization, most of them earlier
allies in the Second World War. The allies began being referred to as the 'United Nations'
towards the end of that war. The Charter came into force on October 24 1945. Since that time all
members joining have had to declare themselves bound by both documents - though practice has
demonstrated on too many occasions that that declaration has not been taken too seriously. Once
again, a written constitution is one thing, actual behavior is another.

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

3. Responsibility to Protect

The Responsibility to Protect (R2P or RtoP) is an emerging norm that sovereignty is not a right,
but that states must protect their populations from mass atrocity crimes— namely genocide,
crimes against humanity, war crimes and ethnic cleansing.

The R2P has three foundation "pillars":

1. A state has a responsibility to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, crimes against
humanity, and ethnic cleansing.

2. The international community has a responsibility to assist the state to fulfill its primary
responsibility.

3. If the state manifestly fails to protect its citizens from the four above mass atrocities and
peaceful measures have failed, the international community has the responsibility to intervene
through coercive measures such as economic sanctions.

Military intervention is considered the last resort. While R2P is a norm and not a law, it is firmly
grounded in international law, especially the laws relating to sovereignty, peace and security,
human rights and armed conflict. R2P provides a framework for using tools that already exist,
i.e. mediation, early warning mechanisms, economic sanctioning, and chapter VII powers, to
prevent mass atrocities. Civil society organizations, states, regional organizations, and
international institutions all have a role to play in the R2P process. The authority to employ the
last resort and intervene militarily rests solely with United Nations Security Council.

Criticisms of the R2P include a "moral outrage and hysteria [that] often serve as a pretext for
‘interventions by the civilised world’ or 'the international community' and for ‘humanitarian
interventions’, which often conceal the true strategic motives, and it thus becomes another name
for proxy wars."

● http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_to_protect
● http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/ICISS%20Report.pdf
● http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/2010_a64864.pdf
● http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/2011_a65877.pdf

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

● http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/unsg-report_timely-and-decisiveresponse.pdf
● http://www.globalr2p.org/media/files/n1338693.pdf

Any other treaty or convention or custom that has relevance to the theme of armed conflict,
terrorism and/or external aggression must also be perused by the delegates in the same manner as
described above. One relevant examples could be:

(i) Customary International Law / Customary International Humanitarian Law

Customary international law consists of rules that come from "a general practice accepted as
law" and exist independent of treaty law. Customary IHL is of crucial importance in today’s
armed conflicts because it fills gaps left by treaty law and so strengthens the protection offered to
victims.

● https://www.icrc.org/en/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/customarylaw
● https://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/Home
● http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/customary_international_law

(ii) Doctrine of State Responsibility

The laws of state responsibility are the principles governing when and how a state is held
responsible for a breach of an international obligation. Rather than set forth any particular
obligations, the rules of state responsibility determine, in general, when an obligation has been
breached and the legal consequences of that violation. It is one of the most fundamental aspects
of international law today.

However, it is well established that a state is supposed to exercise control over all its subjects.
Since all citizens and non- state actors are subject of state, the question that arises here is whether
states can be held responsible for the acts of those non- state actors/ individuals or group of
individuals which are its direct subject?

This question has been countered by the ICJ twice- once, in the Nicaragua v. USA case and more
recently, in the case Genocide Case (Bosnia v. Serbia). In the Nicaragua case, the ICJ held that
if the non-state actor is so much of (complete) dependent on one side and controls on the other,

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

so as to render themselves de facto organs of the state, in that case the state can be held for the
wrongful acts committed by non-state actors.

The concept of ‘jus cogens’ or peremptory norms and so on.

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

AGENDA RESEACH

INTRODUCTION

From the 2002 high of 81 states down to only 49 in 2012, the number of countries reporting
military expenditure data to the United Nations Report on Military Expenditures has been
declining. Given the inability of the UN to demand this information from its member states on the
principle of sovereignty as established in its Charter, the transition to a more transparent
international community has been slow and difficult. The dwindling number of states willing to
overturn information on defense spending potentially points to an escalating concern for national
security. The strategic protection of this data is crucial to maintaining an advantage in the field. A
flaw in the existing systems causes hesitation or confusion keep the countries from submitting
data.

Defense spending is not exclusively for the benefit of military power, but is driven by the economic
sector as well. In times of economic downturn and recession, military expenditures actually tend
to increase. This is due in part to the inability of countries to predict economic crises, which are
frequently preceded by economic growth. Additionally, during times of hardship, both national
violence and geopolitical tensions have the tendency to intensify, leading states to feel they must
spend more on defense to remain safe as well as ready to go on the offense. Finally, 2009 estimates
put the value of the defense industry at USD 2.4 trillion, illuminating the immense size and
influence of the sector, especially given the knowledge of its growth in recent years. Countries
often augment public spending in times of recession to boost the economy, including packages for
defense, which is referred to by the moniker “Military Keynesianism.” The belief is that “military
spending can lift an economy out of recession by creating demand for goods and services provided
by military contractors,” also generating stable and well-paying employment.

Related is the idea of the military-industrial complex, which makes states’ decisions to reduce
military expenditures increasingly complex. This is especially true in the United States, whose role
as the single surviving hegemon and largest defense spender plays a large part in this topic.

HISTORY OF THE AGENDA

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

As World War II drew to a close, U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, British Prime Minister
Winston Churchill, and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin met in Yalta from 4-11 February 1945 at
what would become known as the Yalta Conference to discuss the future of the war and what the
postwar world would hold. The conference brought with it optimism for peace, and many believed
that the cooperation between the United States and the Soviet Union would endure after the war.

After Roosevelt’s death and the commencement of the Truman Presidency in April 1945, tensions
rose between the Soviets and Americans only to be agitated at the Potsdam Conference later that
year. It was there that affirm and confident Truman informed Stalin that on 16 July 1945 the United
States had successfully detonated the first hydrogen bomb, trusting that the nuclear capability of
the U.S. would improve its bargaining power. Due to Soviet intelligence networks, the knowledge
of the United States ’nuclear program was no surprise and Stalin too held firm, making cooperation
at the Conference difficult and future cooperation impossible, as that was the last time the leaders
of those nations were to meet to discuss post-war reconstruction. The United States’ nuclear
monopoly bolstered its self-assurance and contributed in part to its status as a hegemonic power in
the post-war era, but its duration was cut short in 1949 when the Soviet Union successfully
detonated its first hydrogen bomb, triggering the subsequent nuclear arms race that has become
synonymous with the Cold War.

The Cold War has been characterized by the indirect confrontation between, primarily, the United
States and the Soviet Union fought through a number of substitute conflicts, or proxy wars, to
avoid the potential “mutually assured destruction” scenario of nuclear warfare. Therefore, there
was not only a buildup of nuclear weapons at this time, but also a large increase in small arms
across the globe. The Western and Communist superpowers financed, armed, and otherwise
assisted proxies to support allies and strengthen their sphere so influence. Throughout this period
of increasingly costly wars and interventions, both the sides also focused on creating increasingly
costly and deadly nuclear weapons. By 1953, both the United States and the Soviet Union had
developed hydrogen bombs, by the end of the decade they had tested and begun stockpiling
Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, and ten years later they had also developed Anti-Ballistic
Missile systems. By 1996, the expenditures of the U.S. alone on the nuclear arms race was
estimated at around USD 5.45 trillion, or about one-tenth of all payments by the United States
Federal Government between 1940 and 1996 withnon-nuclear defense spending totaling even

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

more. As the Cold War began to wind down, cooperation between the American and Soviet
governments began to pick up. In 1986, negotiations were initiated to eliminate the Intermediate-
Range Nuclear Forces (INF) held by both states, culminating in the 1987 INF Treaty; it was the
first agreement by the hegemonic powers to reduce arsenals, entirely destroy a category of nuclear
weapons, and allow inspections for confirmation. Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine have also 12
signed the treaty, and the other countries across Europe that possessed INF-Treaty relevant
missiles have moved to destroy these weapons as well. The end of the Cold War in 1991 also saw
an apparent end to the ever-present threat of nuclear war, and military expenditures subsequently
began to decline. This trend of reduction in defense spending internationally continued until totals
reached a low point in 1998. From 1998 to 2011, the pattern reversed as global 13 expenditures
rose even during the economic crises until 2012 when spending once more decreased, though only
by 0.4% in real terms.

CURRENT SITUATION

The global financial and economic crisis resulted in many nations cutting back on all sorts of public
spending, and yet military spending continued to increase. Only in 2012 was a fall in world military
expenditure noted — and it was a small fall. How would continued spending be justified in such
an era? Before the crisis hit, many nations were enjoying either high economic growth or far easier
access to credit without any knowledge of what was to come. A combination of factors explained
increased military spending in recent years before the economic crisis as earlier SIPRI reports had
also noted, for example:

1) Foreign policy objectives

2) Real or perceived threats

3) Armed conflict and policies to contribute to multilateral peacekeeping operations

4) Availability of economic resources

The last point refers to rapidly developing nations like China and India that have seen their
economies boom in recent years. In addition, high and rising world market prices for minerals and

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

fossil fuels (at least until recently) have also enabled some nations to spend more on their
militaries. China, for the first time, ranked number 2 in spending in 2008.But even in the aftermath
of the financial crisis amidst cry for government cut backs, military spending appeared to have
been spared. For example, "The USA led the rise [in military spending], but it was not alone. Of
those countries for which data was available, 65% increased their military spending in real terms
in 2009. The increase was particularly pronounced among larger economies, both developing and
developed: 16 of the 19 states in the G20 saw real-terms increases inmilitaryspendingin2009." The
trends emerging in 2014 show complex patterns. In 2012 and 2013, the global tendency had been
one of reduced spending. However, it appears that 2014 will see a growth in military expenditures
once again, with a 0.6%increase overall from USD 1.538 trillion to USD 1.547 trillion.

This rise in spending is despite reductions by Oceanic and Western states, such as those that
comprise the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The United States, though it will remain
the top spender in 2014, plans to reduce expenditures to a number that will shrink the U.S. Army
to a pre- World War II size as the country moves away from its long-term wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan. This decision illustrates the trend of many Western countries to cut defense spending
in order to balance national budgets given the draw down from these conflicts, but it does not
signify an end to global crises nor Western involvement. 2014 is estimated to see the continuation
of increased spending in the Asia-Pacific and Russia, but also to the East and South. Four of the
five fastest growing military expenditures are in the Middle East, while defense budgets in Africa,
the region with the largest growth rate in 2013 at 8.3%, and Latin America are increasing as
development in those regions accelerates as well. The military expenditure database from SIPRI
also shows that while percentage increases over the previous decade may be large for some nations;
their overall spending amounts may be varied.

UN INVOLVEMENT

The United Nations has also remained incredibly involved in the topic of reductions in military
expenditures since its creation following the Second World War. The Charter of the UN calls for
“the establishment of international peace and security through the least diversion of the world’s

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

human and economic resources to armaments,” illustrating recognition from the very beginning
that attacking defense spending needed to remain a priority.

Early proposals attempted to curtail spending by militarily important states to free up capital for
development aid, and though these plans were not achievable, they prompted attainable actions.
1978 saw the beginning of a process to create a reporting system that would allow the international
community to help facilitate greater transparency as well as reductions in military budgets in order
to aid economic and social development with A/RES/33/67. The resolution called for an
experienced panel of practitioners in the field of military budgeting to carry out a test of the
proposed reporting mechanism and develop recommendations for its formation and thus paved the
way for the current instrument of the UN.

The next year, the General Assembly adopted A/RES/34/83 F on the “Freezing and Reduction of
Military Budgets,” which reaffirmed the possibility of achieving “reductions in military budgets
without affecting the military balance to the detriment of the national security of any State” and
asked that the Disarmament Commission identify ways to freeze or restrain military expenditures.

Though the United Nations was never able to develop multilateral agreements for the reduction of
military spending, the idea continues to influence efforts to encourage cutbacks. At a meeting in
1980, the General Assembly once again recognized the security issues perpetuated by extensive
defense budgets alongside the possible economic repercussions in addition to requesting a report
on the topic in resolution 35/142.

This request formed the basis of the current reporting mechanism, the United Nations Report on
Military Expenditures, previously known as the United Nations Standardized Instrument for
Reporting Military Expenditures. Even before the instrument was completely developed, the UN
realized the impossibility of its original goal to “facilitate reduction of the biggest military
budgets,” favoring instead a confidence building mechanism that “provides insight on military
spending patterns and leads to increased international trust and security.” The level of success
achieved by the program, overseen by the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs
(UNODA), is difficult to ascertain. Since the Report’s inception, an impressive total of 126
member states have voluntarily submitted their information to the Secretary-General at least once.

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

Nonetheless, according to the UN “only a minority of States report in any given year, and a small
number of States consistently report every year.”

According to statistics released by the United Nations Report on Military Expenditures, 2001-2010
saw the highest rate of contributions by states at least once in a given period, while 2011 and 2012
saw declining participation across the board; however, as 2011 and 2012 are only the first two
years of the current decade, time will tell if transparency is actually increasing.

In 2008, the GA adopted resolution 62/13 on the report of the First Committee that once again
reaffirmed the importance of the Report on Military Expenditures, requested states’ cooperation,
and called for the establishment of a group of governmental experts on matters of military
budgeting from all regions of the world –later to be known as The Group of Governmental Experts
(GGE) – in order to “review the operation and further development of the Standardized Instrument
for Reporting Military Expenditures,” beginning in 2010.30 Before the commencement of the
report that year, UNODA and the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)
released an assessment of the UN Standardized Instrument for Reporting Military Expenditures,
which looked at the importance of confidence-building, response patterns to the requested
information and transparency of the shared data, as well as the overall effectiveness achieved by
the reported figures.

The GGE on the “Operation and Further Development of the United Nations Standardized
Instrument for Reporting Military Expenditures,” Chaired by German Ambassador Claus
Wunderlich, contained members from all regions and held three sessions: the first on 8-12
November 2010, the second on 7-11 February 2011, and the third on 9-13 May 2011.The main
objective of its report was to examine the reasons that keep many countries from reporting military
spending and was submitted to the General Assembly for consideration at the 66th session. In
2011, the GA endorsed the paper of the GGE and adopted A/RES/66/20, which included
recommendations to improve the UN Report on Military Expenditures, and encouraged more
international cooperation in the matter, such as the creation of symposiums and the inclusion of
regional organizations. Finally, 12 April 2011 marked the first ever Global Day of Action on
Military Spending, the object of which is to shift “global and national priorities from massive
military spending to creating human security and safety for all.

UNGA 12th - 13th October

 Quintessence Model United Nations 2019

LINKS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:

● Yannis A. Stivachtis, “American Hegemony and International Order,” Research Institute

for European and American Studies, 2012, http://www.rieas.gr/research-areas/global-
issues/transatlantic-studies/79.html.
● Statement by the High Representative for Disarmament Affairs: Global Day of Action on
Military Spending, 12 April 2011,” United Nations, 12 April 2011,
http://www.un.org/disarmament/HomePage/HR/docs/2011/2011-04-
12_Global_Day_of_Action_on_Military_Spendin g.pdf.
● UNODA and Sam Perlo-Freeman, Promoting Further Openness and Transparency in
Military Matters (New York: United Nations, 2010),
http://www.un.org/disarmament/HomePage/ODAPublications/OccasionalPapers/PDF/OP
20.pdf.
● Increased spending before and even during global economic crisis”.
http://www.globalissues.org/article/75/world-military-spending
● “The State of the World’s Children 1996,” United Nations Children’s Fund, 1996,
http://www.unicef.org/sowc96/8mlitary.htm
● “At the Double,” The Economist, 15 March 2014,
http://www.economist.com/news/china/21599046-chinas-fastgrowing-defence-budget-
worries-its-neighbours-not-ev ery-trend-its-favour; “China Military Spending Rise Signals
Firm Stand on Disputes,” Bloomberg, 6 March 2014,
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-05/china-boosts-defensespending-as-xi-
pushes-for-stronger-military.html.
● Heidi Garrett-Peltier, “Is Military Keynesianism the Solution?, ”Dollars & Sense,
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2010/0310garrett-peltier.html.

UNGA 12th - 13th October