Committee: SPECPOL

Topic # 1: North Korea, its Nuclear Programme and its

Energy and Food Security.
Country: Germany
Delegate: Hadi

The Cold War ended 20 years ago. Today no one talks about the "balance of terror"
or "theatre nuclear force modernization" anymore. But anyone who believes that
disarmament and arms control are yesterday's issues, is wrong. Not only are there
still thousands of nuclear warheads stored in the weapons arsenals of the former
superpowers, an increasing number of states aspire to possess "the bomb".

A new sense of distrust undermines the disarmament architecture arduously

constructed over years. Tensions and conflicts rob many people of the hope for
development and peace. And the war in Georgia was not the first reminder that the
danger of military clashes right in our own backyard is still very real.

For these reasons Germany believes disarmament and arms control of nuclear
weapons belong at the very top of the international agenda. That's why we urgently
need specific, practical initiatives.

The first stage here is the 2010 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference.
We are deeply convinced that only if the nuclear-weapon states are willing to reduce
their arsenals, will we be able to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the
long run.
"Our century's keyword is cooperation," write Schmidt, von Weizsäcker, Bahr and
Genscher. The authors claim that no global problem can be solved militarily or
through confrontation.

Germany not only supports these steps, we have also presented our own concrete
proposals – as stated by the Foreign Minister Steinmeier specifically, for better
controlling uranium enrichment by "multilateralizing" the fuel cycle. I have suggested
building an international enrichment plant which would be under the direct control of
the IAEA. This would not only reduce the risk of the uncontrolled proliferation of
nuclear fuels, it would also build trust between those states that possess enrichment
technology and all the others that do not.

We must work together to bring back the countries that have strayed from the
international non-proliferation regime. We need diplomatic solutions to the disputes
over the nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea as quickly as possible – not least
to stabilize the regions of the Middle and Far East.

U.S. defense officials determined a N. Korean nuclear arsenal would create the
following threats:
• Direct threat to South Korea and U.S. forces stationed there
• Possibility of igniting a nuclear arms race throughout Asia
• Would compromise enforceability of all international nuclear arms control
treaties
• N. Korea could export its weapons technology to other terrorist states and
organizations
• With improved missile systems, N. Korea could threaten all of Northeast Asia
Needless to say, North Korea's admission of its continued development of nuclear
weapons in direct violation of the Agreed Framework, may bring an end to the flow of
U.S. humanitarian and economic aid.
The German Government is observing all endeavors to reduce tension on the Korean
Peninsula with particular interest. Now it is up to the parties involved in the inner-
Korean conflict to create the prerequisites for early negotiations on a peace treaty.
Germany is more than happy to share its experience of inner-German relations with
Korean counterparts.

The German Government also strongly welcomes the agreement reached in the six-
party talks on further steps to end the nuclear conflict with North Korea. We now
expect North Korea to fully disclose its nuclear programme and to return to the
international non-proliferation regime as agreed.
Topic # 2: Pakistan-Afghanistan Border: Efforts of Counter-
Terrorism
Pakistan is crucial to peace and stability in the entire region. The border region
between Pakistan and Afghanistan is suspected of being a safe haven for terrorists.

My country has an interest in Pakistan’s stabilization and sustainable development.

The situation in Pakistan at the moment is not easy. German Government wants to
help strengthen civil society, education and economic reforms and, above all, provide
assistance "which reaches everyone here."

Afghan-Pakistan cooperation cannot be engineered from outside or forced upon you

from abroad. It depends on the willingness of both Pakistanis and Afghans to take on
a sense of ownership for a common future. We can only provide assistance.
Beginning with our G-8 meeting in Potsdam, near Berlin, last year, the G-8 has
proposed more than 150 projects to promote better bilateral cooperation, from
student exchanges to border controls. Germany is counting on both sides to intensify
their bilateral cooperation — Germany and the G-8 as a whole stand ready to assist.

On the basis of the Afghan Constitution, talks with forces that are prepared to forego
violence and terror can well be part of an inter-Afghan reconciliation process. Bearing
in mind past experiences and knowledge of the Taliban's close contacts to Al Qaeda,
one might be less than optimistic, but in the end responsibility lies with the Afghan
Government. What is important to us is that the successes of reconstruction are not
jeopardized by such talks. We share this view with the United Nations and we are
thankful that the Afghan Government has also taken this position.

We have never defined the issue at stake here as a problem between "the Muslims"
and "the West." We oppose militant extremism, not Islam. Terrorism is immoral — no
matter what apparently divine will it claims to serve! Terrorism diminishes
development perspectives for all.

It is clear that Germany and its partners have a common interest in protecting
themselves from the threat of international terrorism. But we shouldn't simplify
things: there are numerous threats that require careful strategies. You will not stop Al
Qaeda by drilling a well, but you might help reduce militant opposition if you provide
job prospects to the young and uneducated in the border region between Afghanistan
and Pakistan.

We - America, Germany, and our allies have been engaged in Afghanistan for eight
years now. I know, this is a long time, and the publics’ patience begins to wear thin.
Yet you all know as well as we do, the reasons why we started our engagement eight
years ago are just as valid today.

And just as important, we have achieved vital progress. After all, Afghanistan was a
devastated country in 2001, as a result of decades of war, internal conflict, and the
Taliban’s reign of terror. Our joint engagement has brought back a remarkable
degree of security, development, and individual freedom to the Afghan people.

All the progress achieved reminds us that Afghanistan is far more than a mere
theatre of battle in which to fight – it is a place of strategic opportunity:
• It is an opportunity to make America and Europe and our friends in the world safer
by winning Afghanistan as a lasting friend and ally in a strategically critical region of
the world.
• It is an opportunity to help establish a moderate Muslim country based on a
democratic constitutional order and to bring dignity and a better life to millions of
Afghans.
• And – in a regional perspective but equally in our interest – it is an opportunity to
establish a land bridge of trade, energy transmission lines, and travel routes between
South and Central Asia, two regions that were virtually disconnected until 2001.

However, the situation has become increasingly difficult; the overall security situation
has now deteriorated. The conduct of the recent presidential elections leaves us
concerned as well. In addition, the Afghan Government – even with the help of the
international community – has not yet been able to sufficiently tackle the scourges of
corruption and narcotics production and trade.

The Taliban seem to grow stronger and have started to act more assertively. They try
to undo the reconstruction efforts, they try to create a climate of fear and they try to
reinstate their rule of terror.

To deal with this, Germany has long promoted the so-called “comprehensive
approach”. And we are pleased that the U.S. under the command of General
McCrystal now shares this approach. This means we need a coordinated mix of
instruments covering every aspect of Afghan life: military, police, justice, economic
development, governance – all while mindful of Afghanistan’s historic and cultural
setting.

We are pursuing certain objectives with our comprehensive civilian-military

engagement:
• First, we are helping Afghanistan to improve the quality of life of its
population.
• Second, we are taking part in the international community‘s efforts to
guarantee regional stability and security in a difficult environment.
• Above all, however, we are defending our own security interests by helping to
contain global fundamentalist extremism.

Only the Comprehensive Approach can deliver the necessary package of incentives
needed for the desperate foot soldiers to realize that they will be far better off
without Taliban atrocities.

To be successful, the Comprehensive Approach must also take the regional setting
into account. No conflict can be confined to the borders of just one country. When we
think about Afghanistan, we must equally think about neighboring Pakistan. In the
end, it is the Afghans themselves who will have to take their security as well as the
welfare of their country into their own hands. Once the Afghans are able to take care
of their own security, we will be able to bring our troops home.