After exciting and taxing discussion and passage of a paper on the transfer of power after the death of Kim Jong Un, the Security Council transitioned into a new conversation on how to take action against Iran due to violations of the NPT as leaked in previous articles from Fox. Many cabinets and committee rooms have been simply talking about how they must take quick and dutiful action, but the Security Council has been extremely attentive to holding Iran accountable while ensuring the safety of the public. 

Many interesting sentiments were thrown around by representatives, including a heavy focus on either the reinstatement of the JCPOA or the recreation of a similar plan. The Security Council hopes to take note of the downfalls of the JCPOA and change them for the better, and improve upon the parts that worked exemplary until various withdrawals. Another focus has also been placed on whether or not sanctions would be in order, or do more harm than good–a similar conversation to that of the Arab League. Members such as the representative of Germany stated that punishment and sanctions have the ability to be helpful in many cases, but they fear that Iran will not wish to rejoin the JCPOA or join any future plans if sanctions are too overbearing and harm the economy too much–“The delegation of Germany is greatly concerned by Iran’s nuclear activities and thinks it is important that we act immediately. To elaborate, we view the JCPOA played a vital role in suppressing Iran’s nuclear capabilities, and hopes to work with other countries to create a new version of that deal. Germany understands the U.S and Israel’s conflict with Iran, but our main priority is de-escalating the situation and maintaining peace.”

The Security Council seemed to want to express the prominence of the people in whatever solution that comes forth during committee, many representatives warning against further economic sanctions to avoid plunging the Iranian people into more suffering–almost completely echoing sentiments expressed throughout the Arab League committee, showing that perhaps our world isn’t so divided after all. Ideas for the creation of a new nuclear deal floated around, entailing the support of Iran’s nuclear energy development–yet condemning the development of nuclear weapons, such as “intercontinental ballistic missiles,” as quoted from the representative of South Africa. The bloc working on these ideas told the committee that it was very important to allow Iran a method of redemption through peaceful means, and allowing them to be able to express their viewpoints on the matter as to come to a peaceful solution. The Security Council urges the cabinet of Iran to bring a representative into this committee as to try for peace talks and negotiation, and expresses its discontentment for all efforts to infringe upon Iran’s national sovereignty. 

The delegation of Russia’s representatives told the press that “it’s a very delicate situation–we must exercise our power with great restraint to accomplish our mission.” It is of utmost importance and international interest that the world can recognize the major security threat that a new nuclear state can bring.

The Press was able to venture into the Arab League after hearing rumors of propaganda plans, in order to “foster patriotism” within “the new age of the Arab League”. Stay tuned for a further in-depth analysis as information comes.

Following the sudden and jarring death of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, the United Nations Security Council found themselves in a very stressful–yet important–predicament. Reporters were able to hear various viewpoints from a vast array of representatives during their discussion of proposed draft resolutions. They decided to speak on how the Security Council would deal with the rise of Kim Yo-jong to power, and whether or not they felt inclined to interfere with political proceedings.

According to debate from a handful of speakers, the committee currently has two draft resolution papers on the floor–affectionately referred to as Resolution paper 1.1, and 1.2. The representative of Vietnam clarified the main differences between both pieces, telling committee that 1.1 focuses on “the need to retain peace,” while 1.2 places an emphasis onto the “need to find peace”–elaborating further that the writers of the draft paper 1.2 had a firm stance that peace does not currently exist in North Korea under the leadership of the Kim dynasty. 

It was quickly made clear to the press that the five permanent members of the Security Council–China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States–were in great support of passing the draft resolution 1.1, as per comments made by the United Kingdom’s representative in a private interview, stating that: “We believe that the best solution to avoid conflict is to recognize Kim Yo-jung as leader and begin negotiations with the new government.” Other P5 nations’ representatives expressed contentment with the 1.1 draft resolution, while the delegation of France made further comments expressing their discontentment with the second draft resolution on the table. “1.1 is a comprehensive plan that will keep peace in the DPRK and hopefully bring them to the table. 1.2 attempts to take over the DPRK, which is highly inappropriate and uncalled for. South Africa [the main writer of said draft resolution] is way out of line in many ways.”

The representative from Russia even went as far as to call the entire draft resolution a “gross violation of everything that the UN stands for,” denouncing 1.2 as nothing more than a warmongering misuse of the Security Council’s power.

Due to such a large controversy, Fox hoped to be able to get a few words from the main writer of the 1.2 draft resolution, South Africa. “South Africa, Tunisia and Vietnam have been working together to ensure the rights of man are upheld at any cost. We are hoping the UN will start doing something and help the people of North Korea instead of letting the people of North Korea suffer,” the representative told the press.

While the Security Council closed the room to press during voting procedure, Fox News was able to gain leaks from a representative that wished to remain anonymous in this article as to avoid controversy. This representative told reporters that Draft Resolution 1.1 passed with only 3 representatives voting no, and Draft Resolution 1.2 ended up failing and not going into motion. Perhaps this is for the best, as the draft resolution stated that it wished to force elections in the name of “sovereignty.”

Specific plans that are now going to be put into actions include: incentivizing nonproliferation in North Korea, allowing for the stabilization of the nation under Kim Yo Jong, cohesive contingency plans in the case of civil conflict, and investigating the sudden death of Kim Jong Un.

After all of this distressful debate, the public and Fox News both still worry about the rising conflict of Iran and its nuclear developments–and it seems that many members of the Security Council agree with this sentiment, hoping to begin drafting resolutions to alleviate the situation. The representative of France hopes that “an Iranian representative [could] join us and discuss reducing sanctions and limiting nuclear weapons–but not nuclear power.”

Fox News stands in support of the great work that the representative from the United States is performing in this committee, and they told the press that “the US is willing to take any means necessary to ensure the safety of Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the Strait of Hormuz. Whether it be through the reintroduction of the Iran Deal or other programs.” 

While cabinets remained closed, the press was able to obtain a leak from the Israeli cabinet surrounding Iran and the nuclear weaponry crisis. The full statement reads as follows: “Israel desires to maintain peace throughout the entire middle east, but recently the international intelligence community and press has stated that Iran is likely developing new Nuclear weapons. We desire to come to a diplomatic solution and craft new treaties with the United States and Iran and will remain strictly defensive, but if the situation presents itself we are prepared to defend our nation”

While this committee discusses the up-and-coming situation regarding Iran, we hope that they can come to peaceful negotiations surrounding sanctions–to ensure the safety of the world, and to avoid a third world war; this time, an all out nuclear one. Stay Tuned.

The favored paper, which eventually passed with an overwhelming majority, is sponsored by the UK, France, Russian Federation, and others. The resolution comprehensively advocates for a plan to push North Korea towards democracy. The leaders of the majority paper hope to use diplomacy and the removal of sanctions to push the North Korean leadership towards establishing democratic rule. The French delegation commented that, “we can’t make change without them (North Koreans) at the table,” highlighting the importance of working with the North Korean leadership and not against it. 

There are concerns that the majority paper isn’t hard enough on North Korea and would be unable to stop the North Korean military from retaking power. Specifically, there is concern that North Korea would expel the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors called for by the resolution. In a statement made to the New York Times by the United Kingdom’s delegate, the representative reassuringly noted that there is a clause in the resolution allowing for the deployment of UN Peacekeepers in the case of IAEA inspector expulsion. 

The minority paper, which failed to garner a majority vote, advocated a much more aggressive stance. The paper, led by South Africa, Vietnam and Tunisia, advocates war as a contingency for North Korea’s unwillingness to transition to democracy. In a comment, the South African delegate said, “War is a necessary evil (but) we must make sure that North Korea stops its current death camps.” South Africa likened the majority paper to appeasement, implying that its passage will only lead to an inevitable rise in totalitarianism in North Korea.

Nonetheless, the majority paper passed, promulgating policies that aim to promote peace. The North Korean situation is undoubtedly rocky, and there will no doubt be rapid developments on the Korean peninsula. Hopefully, the resolution passed by the UNSC will bend the arc of geopolitical development towards peace. 

Tunisia, South Africa, and Vietnam are heavily in favor of electing a new leader, because they believe Kim Yo-jong will initiate violence and take advantage of the nuclear warfare North Korea has access to, as Kim Yo-jong has threatened to move North Korean troops to demilitarized zones.

“The last thing Tunisia wants is more Korean conflict,” said the representative of Tunisia. 

On the other side, the United Kingdom, United States, and Russia could not be more opposed to the bill. In the bill drafted by the U.K., France, Russia, U.S., Estonia, Belgium, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Germany, and Indonesia, Kim Yo-jong would “allow for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to stabilize itself under the new leadership of Kim Yo-jong without outside influence to denounce foreign intervention.”

The Security Council is moving as fast as possible, as the next topics they will be debating are extremely important. Soon, we will have more information about the cause of Kim Jong-un’s death and who the next Supreme Leader will be.