STUDY GUIDE

4th Session of DTMUN, 2021

(Class- 10A)

UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY (FIRST COMMITTEE)

1|Page
WELCOMING LETTER:
Dear delegates of the DISEC Committee,
It is our great pleasure to welcome you all in this year’s DTMUN and we
would like to express our deep enthusiasm about serving as members of the Board of your
Committee. Furthermore, we are more than pleased to welcome you all in the 1st
Committee of the General Assembly (DISEC).
We guarantee to do our best so as to facilitate you during our sessions and be
part of an unforgettable experience with fruitful debates, as well as productive
cooperation. This year we will be discussing a topic of global significance, which is BAN
ON REGULATION OF BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL WEAPONS . It is generally
known that the growth of new technologies involve significant dangerous activities if they
are not used in an appropriate way.
This study guide points at helping you get a better insight into the Topic Area
under discussion of our Committee and offers you a starting point for your research.
Nevertheless, we highly recommend you to conduct a thorough examination of your
country’s position concerning the matter discussed and also elaborate on your key
national policies within the context of the position paper you will be requested to deliver
before the opening of the conference.
Should you need any clarifications or help, we remain at your disposal!
We look forward to seeing you all!!
With regards,
The Executive Board
Vikrant Gupta: Chair
Ishaan Pawar: Co- Chair

2|Page
CONTENTS:
i. Introduction to the committee……………………………………………………5
ii. Introduction to the Agenda…………………………………………………….5-6
iii. History of biological weapons…………………………………………………6-7
iv. Definition of key terms……………….….………………………………………8
a. Biological Weapons
b. Chemical Weapons
c. Weapons of mass destruction
d. Bioterrorism
v. Impact of using biological weapons……………………………………………..9
vi. History of international regulation of chemical
weapons and their use by non-state entities……………………………………..9
vii. How chemical weapons affect us………………………………………………10
viii. Important conventions……………………………………………….….…..10-12
a. Biological weapons convention
b. Chemical weapon convention
c. Geneva protocol
ix. Major countries and organizations involved………………………………..12-14
a. China
b. DPRK
c. Iraq
d. Iran
e. Russian Federation
f. Syria
g. United Kingdom
h. USA
i. NATO
j. WHO
x. Current Situation……………………………………………………………14-15
xi. Topics for moderated caucus…………………………………………………...15
xii. Questions a resolution must answer……………………………………………15
xiii. General tips while debating and research………………………………......15-16
xiv. Sites for further research……………………………………………………….16

3|Page
This diagram illustrates the UN system and demonstrates the reportage and relationships
between entities. Examine the diagram alongside the Committee Overview to gain a clear
picture of the committee's position, purpose, and powers within the UN system.

4|Page
INTRODUCTION TO THE COMMITTEE:
After the first session of the United Nations in 1946, it became apparent that there was a
need for multiple committees to deal with a multitude issue at once. As such, the First
Committee, otherwise known as the Disarmament and International Security Committee
(DISEC) was the first of six main committees of the General Assembly. Today, the First
Committee is considered to be one of the most powerful committees as it can introduce
resolutions that can call for the United Nations to intervene. These non-binding
resolutions often go to the Security Council which can then act for the United Nations as a
whole.
DISEC emerged out of a need to discuss peace and security issues among member states,
especially considering the destruction that had emerged out of the First and Second World
Wars. The UN Charter sets out the mandate of DISEC in Article 11 by stating that “The
General Assembly may consider the general principles of co-operation in the maintenance
of international peace and security, including the principles governing disarmament and
the regulation of armaments and may make recommendations with regard to such
principles to the Members or to the Security Council or to both”.
The First Committee has a close relationship with other subsidiary committees in order to
achieve its goals. In particular, the United Nations Disarmament Commission and the
Conference on Disarmament. These cooperative efforts with many smaller committees
serve to focus on the debate of the larger assembly in order to discuss a larger variety of
issues.
Even though it is a large committee, one of the main advantages of DISEC is that all
member states can have their voices heard equally. Seeing that each member state has an
equal vote, each representative has a say in the focus and flow of the debate, unlike in
other UN Committees such as the Security Council where the P5 (United Kingdom,
dominate the discussion. Thus, it could be said that the First Committee is, in principle,
one of the most democratic committees.

INTRODUCTION TO THE AGENDA:

Since the end of World War II there has been a number of treaties dealing with the
limitations, reductions, and elimination of so-called weapons of mass destruction and/or
their transport systems (generally called delivery systems). Some of the treaties are
bilateral, others multilateral, or in rare cases universal.

Despite the progress made by international conventions, biological weapons (BW) and
chemical weapons (CW) still pose a threat.

More progress has been made by Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) states-parties
and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in the destruction
of declared CW stockpiles. Progress on the implementation of the Biological Weapons
Convention (BWC), however, has been slower due to the lack of a formal verification
mechanism.

5|Page
Biological weapons disseminate disease-causing organisms or toxins to harm or kill
humans, animals or plants. They can be deadly and highly contagious. Diseases caused by
such weapons would not confine themselves to national borders and could spread rapidly
around the world. The consequences of the deliberate release of biological agents or
toxins by state or non-state actors could be dramatic. In addition to the tragic loss of lives,
such events could cause food shortages, environmental catastrophes, devastating
economic loss, and widespread illness, fear and mistrust among the public.

HISTORY OF BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS

During the 6th century BC, the Assyrians were the first that used a kind of biological
warfare by poisoning enemy wells with a fungus that would render the enemy delirious.
Later, Scythian archers infected their arrows by dipping them in decomposing bodies or in
blood mixed with manure as far back as 400 BC. Persian, Greek, and Roman literature
from 300 BC quotes examples of dead animals used to contaminate wells and other
sources of water. In 1346, the bodies of Mongol warriors of the Golden Horde who had
died of plague were thrown over the walls of the besieged Crimean city of Kaffa.
Specialists disagree over whether this operation may have been responsible for the spread
of the Black Death into Europe, Near East and North Africa, resulting in the killing of
approximately 25 million Europeans. Many other operations have also been recorded by
historians and scientists. However, in modern times things have changed. By 1900 the
biological theory and advances in bacteriology brought a new level of sophistication to
the techniques for possible use of bio-agents in war. During World War I, the German
Army developed anthrax, glanders, cholera, and a wheat fungus specifically for use as
biological weapons. They allegedly spread plague in St. Petersburg, Russia, infected
mules with glanders in Mesopotamia, and attempted to do the same with the horses of the
French Cavalry. A few years later, the first multilateral agreement that extended
prohibition of chemical agents to biological agents has been signed by 108 nations, in
1925; it is called “The Geneva Protocol”.
Unfortunately, no method for verification of compliance was addressed. Sir Frederick
Banting (the Nobel-Prize-winning discoverer of insulin) created what could be called the
first private biological weapon research center in 1940. Soon afterwards, the US
government was also pressed to perform such research by their British allies who, along
with the French, feared a German attack with biological weapons; despite that the Nazis
never seriously considered using biological weapons. The Japanese are the ones that (in
early 1930s) legally, and then illegally, tried to obtain yellow fever virus from the
Rockefeller Institute in New York.
In Manchuria that carried out human experiments on prisoners. The program employed
more than 5,000 people, and killed as many as 600 prisoners. The Japanese tested at least
25 different disease-causing agents on prisoners and unsuspecting civilians. They
attempted to develop biological weapons during the World War II and eventually used
them in their conquest of China. They poisoned more than 1,000 water wells in Chinese
villages to study cholera and typhus outbreaks. Japanese planes dropped plague-infested
fleas over Chinese cities or distributed them by means of saboteurs in rice fields and along
roads. Some of the epidemics they caused persisted for years and continued to kill more
than 30,000 people in 1947, long after the Japanese had surrendered. After the war, the
Soviets convicted some of the Japanese biowarfare researchers for war crimes.

6|Page
However, the USA granted freedom to all researchers in exchange for information on
their human experiments. In this way, war criminals once more became respected citizens,
and some went on to found pharmaceutical companies. A postwar research articles on
human experiments was even published; replacing 'human' with 'monkey' when referring
to the experiments in wartime China. During the 1950s-1960s, the USA military started
open-air tests, exposing test animals, human volunteers and unsuspecting civilians to both
pathogenic and non-pathogenic microbes. In 1972, a convention prohibiting the
production and storage of biological toxins and calling for the destruction of biological
weapons stocks, Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) was signed by more
than 100 countries. The depositaries were UK, USA and Soviet governments. The BTWC
also provisioned for a Review Conference to be held every five years. The objective of
these Conferences is to undertake an article-by-article review of the BTWC's operation,
ascertaining whether the purposes of the treaty's preamble and main articles are being
achieved. Each such review should "take into account any new scientific and
technological developments relevant to" BTWC. Even though they had just signed the
BTWC, the Soviet Union established Biopreparat, a gigantic bio-warfare project that. It
employed more than 50,000 people in various research and production centers. The size
and scope of the Soviet Union's efforts were truly staggering: they produced and
stockpiled tons of anthrax bacilli and smallpox virus, some for use in intercontinental
ballistic missiles, and engineered multidrug-resistant bacteria, including plague.
In 1979, the Soviet secret police orchestrated a large cover-up to explain an outbreak of
anthrax in Sverdlovsk (Ekaterinburg) with poisoned meat from anthrax-contaminated
animals sold on the black market. It was eventually revealed to have been due to an
accident in a bio-weapons factory, where a clogged air filter was removed but not
replaced between shifts. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, most of these programs
were halted and the research centers abandoned or converted for civilian use. In 1980-
1988 Iraq uses chemical weapons in its war against neighboring Iran. In 1991, Iraq is
ordered by the UN Security Council to halt all biological, chemical and nuclear weapons
programs it might have.
There is an aspect of biological warfare, in which the accusations made by the parties
involved, either are excuses for their actions or to justify their political goals. Many of
these allegations - although later shown to be wrong- have been exploited either as
propaganda or as a pretext for war; as recently seen in the case of Iraq. It is clearly
essential to draw the line between fiction and reality, particularly if, on the basis of such
evidence, politicians call for a 'pre-emptive' war or allocate billions of dollars to research
projects.
Timeline of events

Date Event

6th century The Assyrians used them for the first time
BC

World War I The German Army developed toxins to use them as

biological weapons.

1925 The Geneva Protocol

7|Page
 World War II Japanese use them against Chinese

1940 The first private biological weapon research center

1972 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC)

1980s The Soviet Union establishes “Biopreparat” & Non-state

actors’ groups start using BW

1980-1988 Iraq uses chemical weapons against Iran

1993 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)

2001 9/11 Al-Qaeda attack & Letters with biological agents

were sent to American politicians

2008 Suicide of those who helped in the above-mentioned

incident
Note: Only some of the events are mentioned in this timeline, not all of them. For further
information, read the “History of biological weapons”.
DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS:
o BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS: Biological weapons are microorganisms like virus,
bacteria, fungi, or other toxins that are produced and released deliberately to cause
disease and death in humans, animals or plants. Biological weapons is a subset of
a larger class of weapons referred to as weapons of mass destruction, which also
includes chemical, nuclear and radiological weapons. The use of biological agents
is a serious problem, and the risk of using these agents in a bioterrorist attack is
increasing.

o CHEMICAL WEAPONS: A Chemical Weapon is a chemical used to cause

intentional death or harm through its toxic properties. Munitions, devices and
other equipment specifically designed to weaponize toxic chemicals also fall under
the definition of chemical weapons. It is deployed via artillery shell, rocket or
ballistic missile. These weapons are used in any form solid, liquid or gas. They
spread so fast that can take thousands of lives in few minutes. According to the
scientists, reserves of chemical weapons can end life on Earth many times.

o WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION: A weapon of mass destruction

(WMD) is a nuclear, radiological, chemical, biological, or any other weapon that
can kill and bring significant harm to numerous humans or cause great damage to
human-made structures, natural resources, or the biosphere.

o BIOTERRORISM: It is intentional release or threat of release of biologic agents

(i.e. viruses, bacteria, fungi or their toxins) in order to cause disease or death
among human population or food crops and livestock to terrorize a civilian
population or manipulate the government.

8|Page
IMPACT OF USING BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS:
Without elaborate response strategies it is necessary to focus on the prevention. However,
as biological weapons are incredibly easily produced agents will always be able to bypass
international agreements. Considering the nature of biological weapons, they have an
incredible potential with non-state actors.
Then they could be applied in terrorism, civil wars, insurgencies, revolutions and other
non-traditional warfare. These actors and conflicts would be much more complex to
regulate efficiently. Moreover, when compared to the costs of nuclear weapons or other
chemical and standard weapons, biological weapons are extremely cheap.
It has been estimated that one gram of toxin could victimize and kill over 10 million
people. Any nation with a reasonably pharmaceutical and medical industry has the
capability to develop large quantities and qualities of biological weapons.
That fact leads straight to the problem that each country can create its own program that
includes a great number of different sorts of bacteria, virus and toxins as well as different
defense and attack strategies. Furthermore, only a few particles would need to be set free
to start firstly an infection that can result a great epidemic.
A further problem is that the scientific and technological development was in the past
decades such that their effects were too unpredictable and the problem of their storages
and their handling has become greater.
As a consequence, other weapons combine more advantages. The civil industry has made
it possible to produce weapons that are more effective and more predictable in their
results. That leads to the fact that biotechnological capabilities have now advanced to the
point where bacteria, viruses and toxins can be produced by synthetic means.
Biological weapons have also found their way into terrorism with the 2001 anthrax attack
in the United States delivered through the mail system that affected people in several
states.
HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL REGULATION OF
CHEMICAL WEAPONS AND THEIR USE BY NON-STATE
ENTITIES:
Awareness of non-state entities controlling CBRN agents arose to the international level
around 1991, a decade after the fall of the USSR. The fear of “Loose Nukes” and
abandoned research institutes falling into the wrong hands was pertinent in the outskirts of
cities and controversial border territories. However, little was done to affect change,
simply monitor. The first EU-level response to the international threat was in December
of 2003, with the European Security Strategy, after the events of 9/11. A decade later, in
December of 2015, the European Parliament enacted an Action Plan Against Illicit
Trafficking in and Use of Firearms and Explosives, to stop terrorists from accessing these
materials through reinforced importation controls into and throughout the EU. That same
session, the “Directive on Terrorism” was enacted, thus criminalizing preparatory acts of
terrorism. Such acts include training, traveling abroad with the intent to commit, aiding,
abetting, and attempting terrorist attacks. While the actions of people have been legislated

9|Page
to prevent further injustices, as of 2016, no EU legislation targeting or seeking control of
CBRN ingredients exists.

HOW CHEMICAL WEAPONS AFFECT US:

When chemical weapons are exposed to the environment, due to the presence of
poisonous gas, solid or liquid in them, not only the population but other populations of the
world gets affected. People suffer from several diseases like breathing problem, choking,
sensory irritation, causes damage to central nervous system, watery from the eyes, such
chemicals infuses with blood, excess of water comes from nose etc. and also causes death.
The main risk is when such chemicals migrate into the ground and affects the food chain.

IMPORTANT CONVENTIONS:
Biological weapons convention:
over 160 members and signatories of the United Nations created the Biological Weapons
Convention (BWC). The Convention on t
he Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological
(Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction opened for signature in 1972
and entered into force on March 26th 1975. It was the first multilateral treaty regarding
the disarmament of biological weapons. The Convention strictly prohibits the
development, the production, the acquisition, the transfer, the retention, the stockpiling as
well as the use of biological or toxin weapons.
Moreover, it builds the key element in the international community’s efforts to reduce the
proliferation of weapons. The main thought about the BWC was that the United Nations
wanted to release a further convention that should supplement the Geneva protocol of
1925. On the Second Review Conference in 1986, the States Parties agreed to implement
a number of confidence-building measures in order to prevent and reduce any doubts and
suspicions and in order to improve the collaboration in the field of peaceful and
cooperative biological activities. In 1991, the Third Review Conference took place that
strengthened the measures and multilateral collaborations.
The agreements that were signed at the Conferences regulate that the member states have
to provide annual reports on the specific activities of production facilities, information on
national biological defense research and information on the outbreak of new or virulent
diseases and infections. However, the Biological and Toxic weapons convention could be
more effective if it included monitoring instruments and inspections. It can be useful to
look at nuclear weapons treaties and their anti-proliferation methods to find suitable and
efficient methods. Unfortunately, the convention lacks investigatory measures. Since the
convention has been violated on numerous occasions and there have been no sanctions.
Investigations by the United Nations Special Commission in charge of Iraqi disarmament
showed that Saddam Hussein had established an extensive program in the 1980s (Block
2011). The main reason why the convention proves to be less effective than other similar
agreements such as the Chemical weapons Convention is the lack of a monitoring body.
The International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA monitors the Convention concerning
Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and the CWC is monitored by the Nobel-peace-price-winning
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons OPCW. The formation of a similar
organization dealing with biological weapons has been opposed by various states such as

10 | P a g e
the USA. Moreover, it would be very difficult to establish such an organization since clear
lists of prohibited substances or equipment could not be made, since a lot of the
substances and equipment used to create biological weapons are also used for civilian
purposes.
Botulinum Toxin for example, a very dangerous biological toxin, is produced and
marketed under the name Botox as a beauty product. The toxin Ricin is a byproduct of the
production of castor oil and the fermentation tanks used in beer-production can easily be
used in the production of biological weapons.
Key provisions of the convention

Chemical weapon convention:

The modern use of chemical – and not biological – weapons begun during World War I.
Basically, this kind of weapons consist of very well-known commercial chemicals that are
combined with different sort of standard ammunition as for example grenades. The results
of chemical weapons are always discretionary and devastating.
Chemical weapons caused the most victims per attack besides biological weapons. Since
World War I, they have caused over one million casualties worldwide. Since the 1970s
and 1980s, an estimated amount of 25 countries have developed different types of
chemical weapons but fortunately, since World War II, only a few cases of the use of this
warfare has been reported. Already the Geneva Protocol of 1925 regulated the use of
chemical weapons. Yet, the convention has only prohibited the use of chemical weapons
but they haven’t included any prohibition of production etc.
The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), therefore, lists chemicals that signatories
must declare to have in their possession and provides other provisions to verify
compliance and increase information exchange. It would be useful to the delegates to
consider these kinds in strategies when tackling the problems specific to biological
weapons. To supplement the Geneva Protocol, the Convention strictly forbids the
development, production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons. Furthermore, it

11 | P a g e
focuses on the destruction of these types of warfare. The Convention entered into force on
April 29th 1997 and it is the first disarmament agreement negotiated within a multilateral
framework to provide the elimination of an entire category of weapons and of mass
destruction under universal control.
Geneva Protocol 1925:
The Geneva Protocol of 1925 was the first Convention stating the prohibition of the use of
chemical and biological weapons. The Protocol was signed at a Conference that was held
in Geneva under the auspices of the League of Nations from May 4th to June 17th 1925.
The Geneva Protocol entered into force in 1928. The conference adopted the convention
for the supervision of the international trade in arms, munitions and implements of war.
Additionally, it has also released a separate document regarding the use of gases. After
World War I the Geneva Protocol included a “A Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in
War of Asphyxiating gas, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare.” The protocol
didn’t forbid the production and development of biological weapons but its use was
banned during war. After World War II there was little public debate on biological
weapons as nuclear arms were the main concern.
Consequently, there was intense development of biological weapons. However, the
Convention only prohibits the „asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all
analogous liquids, materials or devices" and "bacteriological methods of warfare “. The
Geneva Protocol does, therefore, not mention the production, storage and transfer of
biological weapons. According to this lack of regulation, the Biological Weapons
Convention was ratified in 1972 in order to supplement the Protocol.
The Geneva Protocol was violated different times by various countries. Several countries
have deployed and prepared chemical weapons despite of the treaty. As explained in the
history of the biological weapons, Germany, Japan as well as the United Kingdom
prepared several biological and chemical weapons and stockpiled them in order to attack
enemies and defend the country.
MAJOR COUNTRIES AND ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
China
China the existence of a biological weapons program although some international
intelligence sources said they have evidence to the contrary. According to the United
States, China’s BW activities have been extensive. The 2010 report indicates that little
information is known about China’s activities, and that recent dual-use activities may
have breached the BWC. Existing infrastructure would allow it to develop, produce, and
weaponize agents. The 2017 report does not discuss China’s BWC compliance or
noncompliance.
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK)
DPRK is suspected of possessing a large stockpile of biological and chemical weapons.
The 2010 State Department report on compliance with the BWC remarks that North
Korea may “still consider the use of biological weapons as a military option.” In a 2012
Ministry of National Defense White Paper, South Korea asserted that “North Korea likely
has the capability to produce […] anthrax, smallpox, pest, francisella tularensis, and
hemorrhagic fever viruses.”
Iraq

12 | P a g e
Iraq has acknowledged claims that it possessed missiles tipped with biological weapons
during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. After the war, the U.N. Security Council established a
special commission, UNSCOM, to oversee the destruction of Iraq's stockpiles of chemical
and biological weapons, which some experts believe include mustard gas and sarin among
other lethal agents. UNSCOM is no longer operating in Iraq, and the current size and
scope of the country's chemical and biological weapons program is unknown.
Iran
Iran has publicly denounced BW. However, it is believed to have large stockpiles of
chemical and biological weapons. The report of 2010 assesses that there is evidence
showing Iran continues dualize activities, but there is no conclusive evidence showing
BWC violations. The 2017 State Department report on compliance with the BWC does
not mention any problems with Iran’s compliance with the BWC.
Russian Federation
During the past decade, Russia has committed to dismantling its chemical and biological
weapons program and destroying its stockpiles of such weapons, believed to be the largest
in the world. The United States has repeatedly expressed concern about Russia’s inherited
biological weapons program and uncertainty about Russia’s compliance with the BWC.
The 2010 State Department report on compliance with the BWC details that Russia
continues to use them, yet there is no evidence that such work is inconsistent with BWC
obligations. The 2017 report states that “Russia’s annual BWC CBM submissions since
1992 have not satisfactorily documented whether the BW items under these programs
were destroyed or diverted to peaceful purposes, as required by Article II of the BWC.”
Nevertheless, nobody really knows what the Russians are working on today and what
happened to the weapons they produced.
Syria
In July 2012, a spokesman for the Syrian Foreign Ministry confirmed that the country
possesses biological warfare materials, but little is known about the extent of the arsenal.
On 14th July 2014, Syria declared the existence of production facilities and stockpiles,
although little is known about the continued existence of such facilities in 2018.
United Kingdom (UK)
The UK was also in possession of biological weapons in the past. They were later making
plans for biological weapons and developed new biological agents and weapon designs.
Many tests were also conducted by the UK. Today, the British government continues the
operation of biological weapons defensive programs, while conducting research on the
potentially offensive pathogens.
United States of America (USA)
The USA said it does not maintain a stockpile of biological weapons although it does
pursue defensive biological research; as it gave up its biological weapons program in
1969. The destruction of all offensive BW agents occurred between 1971 and 1973. The
United States currently conducts research as part of its biodefense program. According to
a compliance report published by the Russian government in August 2010, the United
States is undertaking research on Smallpox which is prohibited by the World Health
Organization. Russia also accused the United States of undertaking BW research in order
to improve defenses against bio-terror attacks which is “especially questionable from the
standpoint of Article I of the BTWC.”

13 | P a g e
NATO
The Arms Control, Disarmament, and WMD Non-proliferation Centre (ACDC) at NATO
Headquarters, strengthens dialogue among allies, assesses risks to allied populations,
forces and territories, and supports biological defense efforts. NATO is, also,
strengthening its capabilities to defend against biological (CBRN) attacks, including
terrorism and warfare. Finally, it conducts training and exercises designed to test
interoperability and prepare forces to operate in a CBRN environment.
World Health Organization
WHO attempts to analyze the health effects of the possible use of chemical and biological
weapons on population groups at different levels of social and economic development,
and the resulting implications for WHO and its Member States.

CURRENT SITUATION:
The BWC, despite its greater efforts, has not completely halted the creation of biological
weapons, since states continue to have covert programmes in place, and incidences of
state-sponsored and non-state-sponsored use of biological weapons for terrorist purposes
continue to occur. Anthrax outbreaks have recently occurred in Tokyo in 1993 and the
United States in 2001, both as a result of infamous letters sent to news media offices and
the US Congress. In reality, some countries have started research into the use of biological
agents against materials or plants.
The fact that the US has been doing such research under the cover of “defensive”
purposes since 1998, research proposals have surfaced since 2002 that are likely to be
used for offensive purposes. Bioterrorism is on the rise in the current day, when typical
routes are more easily blocked. Biological agents are relatively easy to procure and
disseminate, and they may instill broad fear and terror in addition to causing physical
harm.
The issue of the employment of agents that do not hurt humans but disrupt the economy
has been particularly important. The foot-and-mouth disease virus, for example, is an
important pathogen with the potential to be weaponized. Although this virus has
practically minimal ability to infect people, it has the potential to cause extensive
economic harm and public worry, as demonstrated by the FMD outbreaks in the United
Kingdom in 2001 and 2007.
As previously stated, the threat of an assault is particularly significant due to the uncertain
situation in the Middle East. The use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government
during its continuing civil conflict in 2016 has raised concerns about the possibility of
bioweapons in the same territory. Not only are there strong suspicions that bioweapons
are being developed in the region, but the situation might potentially spiral out of control
if warring factions begin to use such weapons openly.
If other global powers with secret biological weapons research programmes have
significant interests in the region, the risk of global biological outbreaks increases
dramatically. Despite the fact that the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention has
been more effective than the Geneva Protocol of 1925, it is becoming clear that even the
BWC has fallen short of the task at hand.
A wide range of groups or individuals might use biological agents as instruments of
terror. At the most dangerous end of the spectrum are large organizations that are well-

14 | P a g e
funded and possibly state-supported. They would be expected to cause the greatest harm,
because of their access to scientific expertise, biological agents, and most importantly,
dissemination technology, including the capability to produce refined dry agents,
deliverable in milled particles of the proper size for aerosol dissemination. The Aum
Shinrikyo in Japan is an example of a well- financed organization that was attempting to
develop biological weapons capability.
However, they were not successful in their multiple attempts to release anthrax and
botulinum toxin. On this end of the spectrum, the list of biological agents available to
cause mass casualties is small and would probably include one of the classic biological
agents. The probability of occurrence is low; however, the consequences of a possible
successful attack are serious.
TABLE DEBATE AND TOPIC DISCUSSION, TOPICS:
o Coronavirus relations to biological warfare.
o Islamic State’s (ISIS) acquisition of chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons.
o Motivation behind non-State actors’ capacity to develop and use chemical,
biological, radiological or nuclear (CBRN) improvised weapons in attacks and their
humanitarian consequences.
o Ways to make mechanism under to conventions more transparent and effective.
o Improving the collaboration between policy, law enforcement, defense, industry,
science, and academia, in order to ensure modernization.
QUESTIONS A RESOLUTION MUST ANSWER:
o How can the UN adequately regulate and monitor biological research while
promoting trust and reliability in reporting among the international community?
o How can the UN prevent terrorist groups from obtaining access to materials to
develop biological weapons?
o Under what conditions, if any, should states be allowed to develop biological
agents for defensive purposes or non-lethal uses?
o How can the UN ensure that the BWC can keep pace with modern
biotechnological advancements now and in the future?
o How will states be incentivized to report accurately on their stockpiles of potential
biological weapons, both defensive and offensive in nature?
o How can the global community be prepared to respond in the event of a
bioterrorism attack?
GENERAL TIPS WHILE DEBATING AND RESEARCH:
Come Prepared: Do not just come prepared with papers or speeches written down, but
with your delegation’s weaknesses, previous issues, economic weaknesses, and
questionable actions about the case and prepare rebuttals for them. Anticipate attacks
from other delegates, and come up with answers to refute them.
The best defense is a good offense: Start the criticism of opposing delegations with facts
you have discovered weaken their stance. Demand that specific actions or statements of
their country are explained.
Agree, and then refute: Start by agreeing with the other delegation, with what can be
agreed with (and what won’t hurt you) and then, refute it. It will make the power of your
refute multiply.

15 | P a g e
Find a “universal principal” everyone agrees on: First, know your audience, then start
your speech by stating a universal principle that everyone in the room will agree with.
However, before you have started discussing your actual relevant points of debate, the
entire audience will have for a moment, agreed with you.
Capitalize on your strengths: When in doubt, always remember your side’s strengths,
what good things you have, or did, or can do… And turn the focus on them.
Find common ground, and keep using it: When you find the debate is getting too
overwhelming, and you need a certain delegation on your side, try to find something you
both agree on, either from your foreign policy research or the other’s speeches.
Admit fault: When necessary, when you are cornered, or when your side truly has made a
mistake, admit the fault. Admitting fault in this little part in which you can no longer
prove you were right, will actually strengthen your other arguments.

SITES FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:

o https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/
o https://www.who.int/health-topics/biological-weapons#tab=tab_1
o https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/chemical/
o https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/cbwprolif
o https://www.un.org/disarmament/biological-weapons/
o https://www.icrc.org/en/document/humanitarian-impacts-and-risks-use-nuclear-
weapons

16 | P a g e