You are on page 1of 20




P age |2

Letter from the Chairs


United Nations Security Council Membership, 2065


History and Powers of the Security Council Through 2015


Security Council Reform, 2015-2065


A World of Change and Innovation, 2015-2065


A Brief Note on Crisis


Key Questions and Concepts


Suggested Resources


Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P age |3

Dear Delegates,
Welcome to SMUNC 2015! It is our pleasure to have you in this year’s ad-hoc committee, and
we look forward to working with and getting to know all of you.
As your chairs, we wanted first to briefly introduce ourselves – Ken-Ben Chao (Ben) is a junior
from Honolulu, Hawaii, studying Political Science and History, and James Underwood is a
sophomore from Fayetteville, Arkansas, studying Management Science and Engineering. Both of
us were heavily involved in Model United Nations in high school and we both continue to pursue
it here at Stanford. Please feel free to approach either of us with any questions you may have
during the conference.
Now, the reason you are here – the ad-hoc committee! This weekend, we will be simulating a
Security Council fifty years in the future. This committee will be extremely challenging. Not
only will delegates be tested for their traditional Model United Nations skills such as public
speaking, resolution writing, and personal diplomacy, but delegates will also need to apply an
intimate knowledge of international relations theory to a speculative world fifty years in the
future, all of which we have invented. While we will continue to release additional information
on our simulated history of the world between 2015 and 2065, those updates are merely meant to
situate you into the future. Your greatest asset, in addition to your traditional Model United
Nations skills, will be your ability to formulate country policy in the context of theory and the
changing world we have created for you.
This initial guide serves as a very brief introduction to our committee. You will find an overview
of the Security Council, our account of Security Council reform from 2015 to 2065, a quick
exploration of some important technological changes in that same time period, an explanation of
our committee’s approach to crisis, and some suggestions for resources and research as you
prepare for our committee.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions, comments, or concerns about
committee. We look forward to seeing you all in 2065!

With warmest regards,
Ken-Ben Chao

James Underwood

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P age |4

Please note that following sections will provide more detailed information as to the history
leading to the composition of this body as listed here. Those states that are underlined are
permanent members. No member of the Security Council has veto power.
● Argentina
● Australia
● Brazil
● China
● Democratic Republic of the Congo
● Egypt
● France
● Germany
● India
● Indonesia
● Iran
● Italy
● Japan
● Kazakhstan
● Korea
● Kurdistan
● Mexico
● Nigeria
● Poland
● Russia
● South Africa
● Spain
● Turkey
● United Kingdom
● United States

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P age |5

The United Nations Security Council was founded in 1945 as an original organ of the United
Nations. Its primary purpose is to provide for international peace and security, although it is also
charged with some administrative functions such as approving new member-states and any
changes to the United Nations Charter prior to consideration by the General Assembly. The
powers, structure, and membership of the Security Council were determined at the U.N.
Conference on International Organization in 1945, at which time the Charter was first written.
The Security Council was created with 11 members, with 5 being permanent, and the other 6
serving on a rotating basis, according to geographic region. However, in 1965, the slate of nonpermanent members was expanded to 10. The General Assembly elects them, replacing 5 each
year and thus allowing for 2-year terms.
The permanent members are comprised of the major powers after World War II--the United
States, the United Kingdom, Russia, France, and China. They have maintained some of the
world’s largest militaries ever since. An important factor of the Security Council is the veto
power possessed by these states, meaning that on any substantive issue, a single “no” vote by one
of these members is enough to fail a resolution, regardless of the composition of other votes.
This was a point of contention when drafting the UN Charter, and one which specifically the
Australian delegate at the UN Conference on International Organization sought to limit.
However, due to concerns that anything less than this absolute veto power would result in the
weakening and ultimate failure of this most powerful and influential body, it was ultimately
decided that veto power should persist.
Somewhat ironically, although this veto power was created in the belief that it would strengthen
the Security Council, upon the onset of the Cold War there were significantly fewer actions taken
and resolutions passed since so much of the world was involved in these tensions between two
permanent members, who would, of course, veto any action which might have harmed their key
interests. As a result, nearly all action was taken in areas unaffected by the Cold War, such as the
United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus and the United Nations Operation in the Congo.
One key exception exists in which a resolution was passed authorizing the United States to lead a
coalition to stop the North Korean invasion of South Korea. Although the Soviet Union would
have vetoed this, the Soviet delegate happened to be boycotting the Security Council during
voting procedure and thus did not get to vote.
After the end of the Cold War, output from the Security Council expanded enormously, in terms
of both resolutions passed and peacekeeping missions begun.

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

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
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 Council’s resolutions as well as uphold the general goals of peace and
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.

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P age |7

As Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s second term came to a close, the United Nations began the
process of electing its next Secretary-General in 2016. Although convention and precedent
suggested that a candidate from Eastern Europe should be elected, tensions between Western
countries and Russia opened up the possibility of candidates from other regions to stand as
serious options. The lack of a female Secretary-General in the organization’s history also led to
increased calls for women to be elected to the prestigious post.
In the 2016 election, Western countries predominantly favored New Zealand’s Helen Clark, who
was then serving as the Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme.
Meanwhile, Russia supported Vuk Jeremic, a former President of the General Assembly and
former Foreign Affairs Minister of Serbia. Latin American countries proposed Mexico’s Alicia
Barcena Ibarra, the Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the
Caribbean, as an alternative. After some preliminary discussions and strawpolls, it became clear
that Russia would veto Clark’s candidacy, while the United States, France, and the United
Kingdom would veto Jeremic’s candidacy. Eventually, the P5 were left with a choice between
Alicia Barcena Ibarra and Bulgaria’s Irina Bokova, the Director-General of UNESCO. Although
the P5 preferred Barcena Ibarra’s unchallenging and diplomatic style, Bokova’s supporters
campaigned on her history of cooperation with the P5 countries, especially with Washington and
Moscow. Eventually, after a series of discussions and strawpolls, the P5 settled on Bokova.
Shortly thereafter, the Security Council recommended her to the General Assembly, who then
elected her the ninth Secretary-General of the United Nations. She also became the first Eastern
European and the first woman to lead the organization.
Bokova began her term focused on revitalizing the outdated bureaucracy of the United Nations
Secretariat. In the succeeding reshuffle of top management positions, Bokova dramatically
increased the number of important positions held by women. She also convened a panel of
leading experts and policymakers to examine ways the United Nations could accelerate the
implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals adopted in September 2015 and the Paris
Protocol adopted at the Twenty-First Conference of the Parties (COP21) in December 2015. In
February 2017, just over one year she took office, Bokova issued These Common Ends, a report
that focused on U.N. reform and restructuring in light of new challenges faced by the
organization in the second and third decades of the twenty-first century. These Common Ends
also included a number of proposals as to how the Security Council might be reformed in the
coming future.

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

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 movement’s 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
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.

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P age |9

Although she continued her effective campaign at U.N. reform with vigor and dynamism, the
final years of Secretary-General Bokova’s second term remained marred by the diplomatic defeat
of the G5.
In 2026, the Security Council and General Assembly elected Portugal’s 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 Vasant’s 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
Council’s 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 P5’s 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

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

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 proposal’s 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

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

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

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P a g e | 12

Upon the success of NASA’s New Horizons mission to Pluto in July 2015, a newly sparked
interest in space and its exploration arose in the general public. Private companies such as Elon
Musk’s SpaceX and Mars One became more and more involved in the industry, although
national organizations continued to receive ample funding. These two distinct types soon
diverged in their intent; while governmental agencies operated to conduct general research and
set up high tech defense systems, others focused on developing the potential for massive future
profit through mining and tourism. The two groups are often at odds with one another.
Among the most notable developments:
● In 2016, SpaceX, founded by the billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, launches the first
manned flight of its Dragon V2 spacecraft, taking seven astronauts to the International
Space Station.
● The Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) Space Systems launches the first manned flight of
its Dream Chaser, designed to provide orbital taxi services, in 2017.
● NASA sends four people – two men and two women – to the moon in 2019, on the
fiftieth anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing. The purpose of the mission is publicly
declared to be research, but it is widely rumored that they are setting up surveillance and
intelligence systems.
● China, Germany, Russia, and Japan all send their first men to the moon between 2020
and 2023. The cost plays a major role in the 2021 recession in China. It is confirmed that
NASA set up defense technology, and these four countries do the same after a U.N.
ruling that states are free to do so as long as they do not interfere with already existing
infrastructure set up by other states. This raises concerns over space colonization and the
militarization of space.
● Deep Space Industries begins mining asteroids in 2024. Investors are flourishing.
● Mars One sends its team of four astronauts to the Red Planet in 2028, two years behind
schedule. They arrive in 2029 with the mission of setting up infrastructure for a future
permanent colony. However, they die suddenly in 2030, supposedly of a freak infection.
The public is outraged, and Mars One is immediately disbanded. Research and
development of Mars colonization is briefly postponed.
● In 2036, NASA opens the first space elevator. China, Germany, Russia, and Japan are
allowed limited use. It reaches up about 24 miles and is designed to remove the need for
massive rockets to get spacecraft out of orbit. Manned moon missions become common.
● Space Entertainment Corporation (SEC) opens a tourism space elevator in 2039.

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

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 China’s 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.
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.

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

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.
● 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

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P a g e | 15

coupled with the development of nuclear fusion energy, allows countries to dramatically
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
● The world’s 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.

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P a g e | 16

As you have probably noticed, this committee is going to be different, in many ways, than those
to which you are most accustomed. Therefore, we want to clear up any confusion over the style
of committee that we will be running, particularly regarding “GA” and “Crisis.” This committee
will combine elements of the classic “GA” and the “crisis” committee. As in a GA, you are
representing your country as a delegate, or in the case of our committee, the Permanent
Representative of your member-state to the United Nations. This means you should base your
arguments and writings on the agenda of your state, rather than any personal agenda.
However, to keep things entertaining, we will allow very limited crisis notes. Each of you will be
assigned the personal character of a Permanent Representative to the United Nations, which
means you will bring with you the political resources and connections of your personal character.
While you may not be able to tap the economic or military power of your country at will, you
will certainly be able to communicate with your respective governments and other outside forces.
However, there will be crises throughout the weekend! It will be up to you all, as delegates, to
find fast but thorough solutions to a handful of problems that will spring up throughout the world
During crisis situations, directives are acceptable; however, outside of these time periods, we do
ask for full resolutions.

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P a g e | 17

The following questions are designed to give you a sense of direction to your research and
preparation for committee. As stated before in this initial guide, this committee will test for your
ability to apply international relations theory to the world we will gradually unveil to you over
the next few weeks. Key concepts and terms are provided for you in bold. Please be aware that
this is not an exhaustive list of concepts and questions in international relations theory, but
rather, a list of suggested concepts that you familiarize yourself with prior to our committee.

What is anarchy in international relations? How does international anarchy affect
international politics?

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 liberalism in the context of international relations? What role do international
institutions play in maintaining peace and security across the world?

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?

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

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?

What is the polarity of the international system? Is it unipolar, bipolar, multipolar, or
nonpolar? How does this polarity affect the security environment of the world?

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

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 is deterrence and how do new technologies affect deterrence strategies?

How do states achieve political, economic, and social development? What is
modernization theory and is it an accurate model for how states develop?

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?

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P a g e | 19

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.

After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy, by Robert

Arms and Influence, by Thomas C. Schelling

Man, the State, and War, by Kenneth Waltz

Neorealism and Its Critics, by Robert Keohane

Perception and Misperception in International Politics, by Robert Jervis

Politics Among Nations, by Hans Morgenthau

“Rationalist Explanations for War,” by James D. Fearon

Rational Theory of International Politics: The Logic of Competition and Cooperation, by
Charles L. Glaser

Social Theory of International Politics, by Alexander Wendt

The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics, by Hedley Bull

The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order, by Samuel P.

The Future of Power, by Joseph S. Nye, Jr.

The Post-American World: Release 2.0, by Fareed Zakaria

Theory of International Politics, by Kenneth Waltz

The Revenge of Geography: What the Map Tells Us About Coming Conflicts and the
Battle Against Fate, by Robert D. Kaplan

The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, by John J. Mearsheimer

World Order, by Henry Kissinger
Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015

P a g e | 20


“A Problem from Hell”: America and the Age of Genocide, by Samantha Power

Diplomacy, by Henry Kissinger

From Beirut to Jerusalem, by Thomas L. Friedman

No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam, by Reza Aslan

The History of the Peloponnesian War, by Thucydides

The Parliament of Man: The Past, Present, and Future of the United Nations, by Paul

The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from
1500 to 2000, by Paul Kennedy

The Twenty Years’ Crisis: 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study of International
Relations, by E. H. Carr

United Nations: A History, by Stanley Meisler


Civilization: The West and the Rest, by Niall Ferguson

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

Political Order in Changing Societies, by Samuel P. Huntington

The Age of Sustainable Development, by Jeffrey D. Sachs

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

This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate, by Naomi Klein

Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, by Daron Acemoglu
and James. A. Robinson

Stanford Model United Nations Conference 2015