By: Taliyah Winn, Student Reporter*

1 March 2003

Tensions are high in the Historical Security Council of 2003 as representatives reason over what actions to take on the situation in Iraq.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) submitted a report to verify the existence or absence of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq. According to the IAEA:

“We have to date found no evidence that Iraq has revived its nuclear weapons programme since the elimination of the programme in the 1990s … With our verification system now in place, barring exceptional circumstances, and provided there is sustained proactive cooperation by Iraq, we should be able within the next few months to provide credible assurance that Iraq has no nuclear weapons programme.”

The report underscores the importance of dedicating months to peaceful initiatives, confirming Iraq’s nuclear disarmament and preventing a potential war.

Reports from Executive Chairman of the United Nations Monitoring Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) Hans Blix (as portrayed by an AMUN staffer),  on the nature of Iraq’s disarmament are pending. In an update from the Secretary General, Executive Chairman Blix reported that full compliance is not evident, but there is some evidence of increased activity of disarmament in Iraq.

In official statements to the Council, the United States and the United Kingdom declared military action would not be taken until Executive Chairman Blix’s reports are completed. However, upon returning to session, the United Kingdom notified the body that both the United States and United Kingdom have rescinded their statements of non-intervention, signaling a potential shift towards military action before investigations are complete.

Several Member States are taking indirect actions to exert pressure on Iraq. Germany is applying pressure through embargoes while simultaneously providing humanitarian aid in the region.

Representatives appear to be puzzled by the reversal of statements by the United Kingdom and the United States, raising uncertainty about the next steps. France argued that the focus has shifted from disarmament to declaring war.

With the committee at an impasse, the Russian Federation calls for a pivot to discuss ways to implement humanitarian aid to Iraq and cooperate with NGOs for transportation. 

The Syrian Arab Republic expressed concern about the refugee crisis that would occur if Iraq was invaded. 

Bulgaria called out the inaction of the Council. They expressed the support of the information given by the Central Intelligence Agency and the disappointment of the inaction of the Security Council after receiving that information. 

The revocation of non-intervention raises questions on what information prompted the United States and United Kingdom to do so, lingering on the Security Council’s mind.

_{The views and opinions expressed in this article were part of simulation of the United Nations held from 18 to 21 November 2023 and do not reflect the views and opinions of the American Model United Nations Conference, American Model United Nations International, LLC., Taliyah Winn, Wichita State University or the governing bodies of the states mentioned in the article.}