Study Guide

Disarmament and

International Security

Committee

Authors:

Steven Franckowiak Maastricht University

Maaz Zafar Siddiqui Technische Hochschule Wildau

2

DISEC

The Committee on Disarmament and International Security (First Committee of the General Assembly of the United Nations) is the Committee responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security. Currently, with 193 countries attending the annual meeting of DISEC in October, the DISEC’s mandate of one of the main committees of the General Assembly is devoted to disarmament and any threat to peace that may affect the international community, as we know it. In general, the principle role of DISEC is outlined in Chapter IV, Article 11 of the United Nations Charter and states the following: “The General Assembly may consider the general principles of cooperation in the maintenance of international peace and security, including principles governing disarmament and the regulation of armaments and may make recommendations with regards to such principles to its own members but also to those represented in the Security Council.” The endeavors of the 1st Committee of the GA are also focused on seeking solutions to any possible and future challenges that the regime of international security may face. The mandate of DISEC can range from forging peace treaties to recommending armed intervention, allowing the committee to have a major say in every notable conflict since the creation of the UN. Unfortunately, the committee only has the ability to make recommendations. Although the 1st Committee of the GA does not possess the exclusive and binding mandate of the Security Council, it is constantly in full cooperation with this main body of the UN, by making recommendations that concern the field of international peace and security. The normative nature of the resolutions of this committee renders them salient, let alone respected by the Security Council.

3

Table of Contents

I. HALTING THE FLOW OF ARMS TO NON-STATE ACTORS 1. Introduction 2. Non-State Actors 3. History of the Topic

a. Soviet Afghan War (1979-1989) b. Libyan Civil War (2011-Present) c. The Islamic State d. Former Yugoslavia and the Balkan Wars

4. Organized Crime 5. The Problem & Its Causes 6. Past UN Actions 7. Solutions 8. Questions a Resolution Must Answer (QARMA’s) 9. Conclusion

II. ASYMMETRIC WARFARE

1. Symmetric / Conventional Warfare

2. Unconventional Warfare

3. Theory behind Asymmetric Warfare

4. Fourth Generation Warfare

5. Types of Asymmetric warfare

a. Terrorism

b. Means used by Terrorists

c. 20 Century Warfare

d. 21st Century Warfare (Case Studies) Iraq (ISIS)

Afghanistan

Nigeria

Chechnya

Yemen

6. Questions A Resolution Must Answer

0

I. HALTING THE FLOW OF ARMS TO NON-STATE ACTORS

1. Introduction As long as humans have lived in societies, there has existed the primal urge to commit violence for the betterment of one’s own standing within the group. With the emergence of the state, this urge trailed along with it, either as a response to the actions of the state, out of differences in beliefs, or out of the desire to fight for something better. Whatever the reason, since the monopolization of the use of force by the state, and in many cases, the monopolization of the means to do so, people have seeked arms from less than reputable sources to be able to fight their wars of religion, political and material gain.

Over the last three centuries, with the emergence of the West’s dominance in global affairs, this conflict took another form, conflicts fueled by major powers and fought between them by proxy to showcase the superiority of their military might, religious views or political ideology. Now, weapons and money flowed not only from illicit sources to non-state actors and criminal organizations, but money and arms were provided directly by foreign governments as a means to destabilize governments around the world ranging from Korea1 and Viet Nam2, to Angola3, Rhodesia and South Africa4, to Nicaragua5 and beyond. This practice of nations providing the means of destabilization reached its peak during the Cold War, when ideologies blindly drove the East and West to seek conflict wherever possible in the name of revolution or liberty, and both sides stoked the flames of conflict to this end. Millions of rifles, countless bullets, missiles, bombs and landmines were distributed around the world in order to make these conflicts possible, and small nations and organizations had access to the entire arsenals of developed nations. Bloody conflicts waged in South America, Africa and Asia are a testament to the lengths individuals and organization across the world would go to pursue the primal urge to seek a better life. In this period, the seeds of many of today’s conflicts were not only planted, but also nurtured by misunderstandings between local fighters, their ideologies, ethnicities and in some cases the blatant disregard of those supplying arms to the reality of the true nature and reasons behind the conflict6.

With the fall of communism, vast arsenals disappeared from the former communist-bloc nations which trickled their way to the conflict areas of the world. From the marshes and dusty plains South East and Central Asia to the jungles of South America, these weapons helped prop up so called popular fronts and liberation organizations with the goal of overthrowing the state to create their own utopias – warranted or not. This has caused innumerous deaths up until the today, and we are still feeling the cold hand of the illicit arms trade in our daily lives ranging from news reports of civil wars in central Africa to the drug war in the Americas.

1 Source: http://korean-war.commemoration.gov.au/armed-forces-in-korea/north-korea-china-ussr.php 2 Source: http://alphahistory.com/vietnamwar/chinese-and-soviet-involvement/ 3 Source: http://www.sras.org/the_soviet_union_in_angola 4 Source: http://www.sahistory.org.za/topic/union-soviet-socialist-republic-ussr-and-anti-apartheid-struggle 5 Source: http://www.soaw.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=325 6 Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35144420

1

2. Non-State Actors Non-State Actors, or NSA’s, are defined as ‘an individual or organization that has significant political influence but is not allied to any particular country or state’ by the Oxford Dictionary7. Under this definition, any individual or body which expresses itself politically, through peaceful or military means, is considered to be a non-state actor, although the latter of these has its own category and is often referred to as Violent Non-State Actors8. In the context of this topic, we will be discussing VNSA’s.

Due to the nature of the issue and that of non-state actors themselves, halting the flow of arms to these groups will require a multifaceted and well-thought out approach if any real progress it to be made. The sources of resources which these groups have access to varies as much as the nature of the various groupings and ideologies which motivate them. In the next section, a brief history of the topic will be outlined.

3. History of the Topic To give an idea of the contemporary challenges and dangers the issue of the illicit arms flow to non-state actors creates, a brief history of several notable instants will be provided, together with their modern-day repercussions. The examples will be the Soviet-Afghan War (1979-1989), the Libyan episode of the Arab spring, and their results today, plus the emergence of the Islamic State and allied groups. Additionally, the guide will briefly touch upon the heavily-armed drug cartels and the FARC group of Columbia.

a. Soviet Afghan War (1979-1989) In 1979, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan at the request of the communist-aligned government to aid in the suppression of rural religiously driven rebels. The presence of these non-Muslim soldiers in the country led to many foreign fighters arriving in Afghanistan to become Mujahedeen to lead the fight against those who would seek to replace the laws of Islam with the laws of man. While this is an extremely simplified explanation of an extremely complex conflict, the key point to take from this is that the United States saw this as the perfect scenario for a proxy war right on the doorstep of the Soviet Union.

It did not take long for the Central Intelligence Agency to contact various groups of fighters and the flow of money and arms into Afghanistan started under the name “Operation Cyclone”. At the beginning of the conflict, the Mujahedeen were armed with old leftover rifles from the Second World War and before, and anything they could steal from the Soviets. Once the CIA began supplying the fighters with new modern weapons, their arsenal expanded to include modern rifles, and to the detriment of the Soviet soldiers, effective anti-tank and anti-air weaponry. The effects of Operation Cyclone are quite striking with the spike in Soviet casualties in 1982 and reaching its peak in 1984 with over 2,300 soviet soldiers killed in that year alone, and 13,310 killed in total and 35,478 wounded by the end of the conflict9. Additionally, by the end of the conflict Soviet forces had been losing an aircraft nearly every day to American-provided Stinger anti-air missiles10.

7 Source: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/non-state_actor 8 Source and further reading: https://www.academia.edu/5124220/The_Role_of_Non-state_Actors_in_International_Relations 9 Source: http://www.nytimes.com/1988/05/26/world/soviet-lists-afghan-war-toll-13310-dead-35478-wounded.html 10 Source: https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2014/08/the-soviet-war-in-afghanistan-1979-1989/100786/

2

Following the Soviet withdrawal, the CIA lost interest in the country, leaving the weapons and money behind11. The Mujahedeen, which had started out as rural fighters, were now well-organized and well-armed, and with a fragile government left to fend for itself, Afghanistan was quickly crushed under the Taliban. Various groups of foreign and local fighters stayed in Afghanistan through the nineties and continued to train and fight until the US-led invasion in 2001, where they still operate today with the weapons provided by both sides. Following the victory of the Taliban, Afghanistan has become the world’s leading producer of opium, cultivating the opium needed for roughly 90% of the world’s heroin. In 2016, the opium trade was worth an estimated 1.5 billion US dollars, equivalent to 7% of Afghanistan’s GDP12. While the NATO-led coalition in Afghanistan has made moves against the production of opium, the illicit growth of the plant is fueled by the Taliban which in turn sells it on to those who use it to produce heroin which then flows into the West accounting for one in every four drug-related deaths in Europe in 200813.

b. Libyan Civil War (2011-Present) Libya had been ruled by the dictator Muamar Qaddafi for almost four decades by the time that Arab spring, a series of revolutions and civil wars, started on the Arab Peninsula and in North Africa. He quickly responded to protests with force, and the demonstrations and on the 15th of February, the protests formally turned into an armed revolt with the main opposition groups taking up positions in the East of the country while government forces and tribes loyal to Qaddafi occupied the West of the country14. Seeing this as an opportunity to enact regime change in the previously-hostile nation, the West wasted no time installing a no-fly zone above Libya with the implementation of United Nations Security Council resolution 197315, and began supplying the various rebel groups with money, arms and air support from bases and ships in the Mediterranean. The United States government alone is reported to have provided half a million dollars’ worth of military aid to various militant groups, some of which reportedly fell into the hands of jihadist fighters16.

With this overwhelming support, the rebels quickly advanced across the country and Qaddafi was killed on the 11th of October, 2011. With the position of the dictator empty, the power vacuum was quickly filled with opposing groups who had lost their common goal and turned to infighting, each attempting to carve a future out of the rubble. The arms provided to them once again remained behind, giving every militia de facto control over the area they occupied17.

A common thread in both of these conflicts is the process of outside powers funding and arming of non-state actors, followed by their immediate disengagement from the conflict. The power vacuum left by the toppling of these regimes and the abundance of arms led to continued conflict in both scenarios. To make matters worse, the weapons which had been

11 Source: https://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2009/12/did-the-us-abandon-afghanistan-in-1989/192860/ 12 Source: http://www.ecnmy.org/engage/opium-afghanistan/ 13 Source: http://www.drugfreeworld.org/drugfacts/heroin/international-statistics.html 14 Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/20/world/libya-civil-war-fast-facts/ 15 Source: http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1973(2011) 16 Source: http://www.theblaze.com/news/2014/04/29/the-massive-amount-of-weapons-meant-for-libyan-rebels-that-actually-ended-up-in-terrorists-hands/ 17 Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8860684/Libya-revolutionaries-turn-on-each-other-as-fears-grow-for-law-and-order.html

3

provided to fighters in Libya have since proliferated, one notable example being a Belgian-made assault rifle making its way into the Gaza strip in the hands of a Hezbollah fighter18. In this case, the aid which was meant for pro-western militant groups taking part in a civil war ended up in the hands of a listed terrorist network.

c. The Islamic State The so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, ISIL which is also commonly referred to as the Islamic State or Daesh, draws its roots to the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the disbanding of the Iraqi army following the coalition victory. With the entire army now out of a job, many turned to underground illicit organizations –many of which were jihadi in nature- which fought the coalition and the newly installed government19. One splinter group, an affiliate of Al Qaida, Al Qaida in Iraq (AQI) had formed and began actively carrying out attacks on the US-led coalition in Iraq. By 2006 the leader of AQI had been killed by US forces and the group was rebranded to the Islamic State in Iraq (ISI) though it slowly lost influence as the United States surged the number of troops in Iraq around 2010. By 2011 however, with trouble brewing in Syria as a result of the Arab Spring, ISI saw an opportunity to expand, and joined the conflict20.

With the group gaining notoriety by brutally fighting the Syrian government in the civil war, fighters from abroad began joining the newly branded Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), many of whom brought expertise from other armed conflicts and insurgencies at the time ranging from the Caucasus region and Chechnya to the Arab Peninsula and North Africa21. With them, they sent support in the form of money, fighters and weapons via a complex logistical network which has proven difficult to combat22.

d. Former Yugoslavia and the Balkan Wars With the breakup of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1992 into its constituent states (Albania, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Slovenia) the vast arsenals fell into the hands of either the constituent governments, or into the hands of criminal organizations.

In the early 1990’s despite a weapons embargo and fearing further territorial losses, what was left of the Serbian-dominated Yugoslav army began arming Bosnian-Serb civilians while the already-independent Croatian army was arming ethnic Herzegovinian-Croats following rising tensions as Yugoslavia fragmented23. Caught in the middle of these factions were the Bosnian Muslims, who also began arming themselves in order to defend themselves from both sides. With the increased tensions and an increasingly armed populace, conflict was all but inevitable.

Meanwhile to the South, Albania was also experiencing the strains of the Yugoslavian breakup as it proclaimed independence on the 19th of April 1991. By 1994 however, following poor management and government policy the country had slipped into civil war. It is estimated that during the Albanian civil war (January-August of 1997), 600,000 small

18 Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34810155 19 Source: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/06/mapping-out-iraq-fighting-groups-201462494731548175.html 20 Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29052144 21 Source: http://www.theweek.co.uk/islamic-state/64120/how-many-foreign-fighters-have-joined-islamic-state 22 Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/logistics-101-where-does-isis-get-its-guns/5454726 23 Source: http://www.nytimes.com/1994/11/05/world/arms-trafficking-to-bosnia-goes-on-despite-embargo.html

4

arms were looted from government depots by rebel groups and civilians24. Similar cases occurred elsewhere throughout the former Yugoslavia. Later, these weapons would find their way across the border to the brewing conflicts elsewhere in the Balkans. By the time the conflicts had truly erupted, the Yugoslavian arms depots had been looted by all sides.

Unfortunately, weapons still occasionally go missing in Serbia25 highlighting the fact that the former Yugoslavia’s arms depots still pose a security challenge. Securing arms depots like these would go a long way to limiting the supply of weapons to non-state actors, limiting the use of force to those with a legitimate mandate to use it, namely nation-states.

4. Organized Crime Another scenario is the violent and heavily armed criminal organizations. The example of the drug cartels operating in South, Central and North America is well documented26, though similar organizations operate further abroad in areas such as but not limited to South East Asia and the African continent. In these cases, the non-state actors fund themselves through the illicit drug trade or through the sale of other contraband on the grey and black markets, and use the funds to arm themselves with military grade weapons, materials, and buy out local officials. In these cases, although it is clearly documented and well known, these groups operate outside the capabilities of local law government. In Mexico alone, up to 80,000 people have been murdered by the cartels since 2006 according to the Congressional Research Service27. The cartels’ main source of income is the drug trade which feeds the demand of drug users in the United States of America and Canada.

While national governments are fighting the cartels within their national jurisdictions, and the United States is leading several multinational initiatives to combat the influence of the cartels throughout Latin America, these programs have only seen limited success. Arguably, the greatest step forward in this fight has been made by the Colombian government in their efforts to make peace with the FARC rebel group which officially signed a peace agreement in November of 2016, and came into effect in February of 2017. FARC, or the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia) was an armed guerrilla group operating in the Columbian Armed Conflict (1964-present). The group was founded as the military wing of the Columbian Communist Party and took part in the insurrection following the victory of the US-backed anti-communist government in the country28. While solutions like this offer hope that successful solutions can be found, the issue of FARC was relatively unique as it was the last major leftist revolutionary organizations operating in South America.

Hopefully, the peaceful settlement and the agreement for FARC to lay down its arms is a great victory for the war against the cartels, as one of FARC’s main sources of income was the drug industry29. By removing the source of drugs, the cartels main income will suffer and as a result they will lose some of their ability to wage their bloody gang-wars. To

24 Source: https://books.google.de/books/about/New_Security_Challenges_in_Postcommunist.html?id=SG6Uxihqxf4C&redir_esc=y (p.157) 25 Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-serbia-arms-idUSKBN13C204 26 Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2013/jul/16/drug-cartels-world-zetas-miguel-angel 27 Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/02/world/americas/mexico-drug-war-fast-facts/ 28 For more information, see: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36605769 29 Source: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Otis_FARCDrugTrade2014.pdf

5

capitalize on this victory however, states must continue to move forward to secure the coca plantations, the main ingredient of cocaine which was the main drug supplied to the cartels in order to fund FARC, do not fall into the hands of the cartels directly30. If this can be achieved, then not only will Columbia’s bloody FARC chapter be over, but the end of the cartels could be a faint but glimmering light at the end of the tunnel.

5. The Problem & Its Causes The main problem when discussing the flow of arms to non-state actors and attempting the address it is the multifaceted and complex nature of the arms trade in itself, plus the addition of the complex nature of revolutionary organizations and terrorist groups and their goals. The arms trade is remarkably complex due to the political strings attached to the selling of arms to groups who may not align with a nation’s ideals, or those of their allies, as well as issues with transparency which may not always be up to the high standards set by supranational organizations like the European Union which make it easier to track weapons sales31. Additionally, the goals and aspirations of outside actors play a role in the issue as they often provide non-state actors with the means to acquire or hold onto arms –in the form of funds or political support. All of these things are linked to each other, creating a virtual hydra of an issue to tackle. Another layer of the issue is the geopolitical goals of other state actors which influences their will to solve the issue, as prolonging the issue may allow groups to achieve goals which overlap with their own.

While it may seem that it would be in everyone’s interest to solve the issue of arms falling into the hands of non-state actors, unfortunately differing goals and the lack of political will to truly go ahead and solve the issue remains the largest roadblock towards halting the flow of arms to non-state actors. The tolerance shown by Turkey’s government towards IS smugglers, or the lack of enforcement on portions of its Southern border, is a prime example of this. Turkey sees an enemy in the Kurds, and as long as IS continues to fight them, the principle of “an enemy of my enemy is my friend” seems to be the phrase of the day32. Likewise, Turkey’s objections to the West arming the Kurdish fighters making progress against IS out of fear for its own interests only reinforces this notion33.

6. Past UN Actions The topic of halting the flow of arms to non-state actors has been handled both by the United Nations and by regional organizations for decades. When referring specifically to the efforts made by the United Nations, the UN has passed several binding resolutions aimed at preventing arms from falling into the hands of non-state actors (UNSC 154034), regulating the global arms trade (Arms Trade Treaty35) or disarming specific groups in conflict and post-conflict regions through bodies like the United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs36. While DISEC does not have the authority to pass binding resolutions

30 Source: https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2016/07/farc-cocaine-colombia/489551/ 31 Source and further reading: https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/427/disarmament-non-proliferation-and-arms-export-control_en 32 Source: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/18/turkey-cut-islamic-state-supply-lines-erdogan-isis 33 Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/09/us/politics/trump-kurds-syria-army.html?_r=0 34 Source: http://www.un.org/en/sc/1540/1540-fact-sheet.shtml 35 Source: https://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/att/ 36 Source: https://www.un.org/disarmament/about/

6

like the Security Council does, it does have make valuable contributions in the form of recommendations to the Security Council on matters of disarmament37.

7. Solutions In order to cut off the flow of arms to non-state actors, the leading causes must be tackled and sorted before any headway can be made on solving the issue of the actual flow of arms. As mentioned in the previous section, there have been attempts to sort the issue before, both by the United Nations and by regional and national organizations and governments however the issue remains at large to this day.

Distancing outside players of the geopolitical game from non-state actors would be a good first step toward solving the issue. Cutting off the largest source of weapons and funding would go a long way towards improving the situation. The most likely way to go about this would be to utilize existing bodies, or establish new ones to carry out this task should existing organizations not be sufficient to do so.

Securing arms caches left behind by toppled regimes would also help further the cause of disrupting the flow of arms to non-state actors by cutting off another one of the sources of weaponry to various groups. This source has contributed to the challenges faced in post-conflict areas ranging across the world, and remains one of the largest dangers in modern conflicts, notably the civil wars in Libya and Syria, where rebel groups have gotten their hands on chemical weapons caches of the Qaddafi and Assad governments respectively.

8. Questions a Resolution Must Answer (QARMA)

• What kind of NSA’s will the resolution tackle?

• What poses the greatest challenge to stopping arms from falling into the hands of NSA’s?

• How will the resolution address or solve the problem(s)?

• How can the UN help enforce the decisions made?

• Should the UN opt for a short-term framework, or a long-term framework? What about both?

• Can lessons be learned from previous experiences?

• Should a framework be created to deal with all instances? Is this even possible?

9. Conclusion This is a difficult and broad issue that will require a lot of thought and creative solutions before any truly effective framework can be put in place to halt the flow of arms to non-state actors. The issues faced in this topic are far broader than the actual spread of arms, so to find a solution and create an effective and lasting framework with which to move forward, you must go deeper into their sources; those providing groups with arms and their motivations for doing so. Again, DISEC cannot pass binding resolutions, but it can offer technical and specialized recommendations to the Security Council which in turn can then pass them. In order to come up with a long lasting and effective solution, all of these issues should be addressed.

I wish you the best of luck in your preparation, and I look forward to seeing you in Göttingen! – Steven Franckowiak

37 Source: http://www.un.org/en/ga/first/

7

II. ASYMMETRIC WARFARE

Today’s armed conflicts hardly resemble to the wars described in history books, where two or more states’ armies engage on a traditional battlefield, and where only the soldiers’ abilities and the military leadership stands between victory and defeat. The contemporary warfare has changed into a treacherous game in civilian environments where adversaries are trying to defeat each other by exploiting each other’s weaknesses. Warfare today is rarely taking place between states along a front line, but instead between parties with different legal status and considerably different military resources, organizations, and command structures38. Conflicts where the parties differ in terms of qualitative and/or quantitative strength can be described as asymmetric. To assimilate further, following definitions will help bring clarity on asymmetric warfare and how it differs from conventional warfare.

1. Asymmetric warfare The definition of asymmetric warfare used in this guide is “when the weaker party to an asymmetric conflict, as a way to compensate for lacking resources, uses means and methods that are prohibited under IHL” (International

Humanitarian Law)39. The strategy behind asymmetric warfare is to strike against the adversary’s weak points and to avoid him where he is strong. The weaker party seeks to avoid an open confrontation, and therefore the civilian society is often used as cover for the operations.

2. Symmetric/conventional warfare Symmetric, or conventional, warfare means that the parties to an armed conflict are equally qualified in military operations in terms of equipment, size of units, technology, weaponry, etc. In these cases it is therefore the factors such as the military leadership of operations and the individual soldiers’ skills that will determine the outcome of the conflict.

3. Unconventional warfare Unconventional warfare is a term used to describe all types of methods a weaker party to an armed conflict may use in order to compensate for a qualitative or quantitative inferior position. The weaker party is normally using a strategy that is focused on exploiting the adversary’s weaknesses. Asymmetric warfare is an unconventional warfare.

4. Theory behind Asymmetric Warfare Although today’s international community is facing different threats than a century ago, asymmetry in conflicts in itself is not new. Parties to armed conflicts have through all times sought to defeat their opponents by striking against the opponent’s weakest points. However, the means and methods in those conflicts have changed to involve the civilian society to a much larger extent than before. Contemporary asymmetric warfare catches situations where a weaker party to an armed conflict choses methods that are not in conformity with IHL to weaken its stronger opponent. This is very effective for non-state actors (The term non-state actor will here be used to describe an organization, which in an armed conflict uses force that is not authorized by a state), because opponent states normally do not consider themselves able to deviate from the rules in the same manner

38 Jeppsson, Asymmetrisk krigföring – en aktuell krigföringsform, 2005, p. 37 39 Heintschel-Aym WF:How to respond 2011 p 465

8

without facing the risk of serious consequences both in terms of responsibility and reputation. As Barnett puts it, “true asymmetry [involves] those actions that an adversary can exercise that you either cannot or will not”.40

The constant race toward new military innovations and world leading technology means that the disparity between weak and strong is ever increasing. Paradoxically, the more equipped and trained strong states get, the bigger the risk becomes for being defeated by weak non-state actors using asymmetric warfare. But with technology comes also opportunities; a military superior party to an armed conflict is today able to defeat a weaker opponent without even physically entering foreign soil.41

The non-state actor can benefit from the state’s fear of casualties; the casualty aversion policy means that the opponent state will be easily coerced if threats are directed towards its citizens. The state will normally do everything possible to avoid the deaths of innocent people. This puts the non-state actor in a more powerful position than it would otherwise have. The non-state actor does of course take the risk of losing support for its own cause when targeting civilians, but generally asymmetric warfare is closely surrounded by propaganda campaigns and strong local support for the non-state actors.

5. Fourth Generation Warfare A term that sometimes is used as a synonym to asymmetric warfare is fourth generation warfare (4GW). The modern military history can be divided into three different eras, or “generations” of warfare:

The first generation of warfare (1GW) started by the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 and went on until around 1860. At this time in history, the political, economic, and social development in Europe permitted states to set up large armies who clashed on traditional battlefields, using the tactics of line and column. During 1GW, the foundation was laid for many traditions that distinguish military from civilian, such as the use of uniforms, saluting, and gradation of rank. The weapons used were muskets and canons, however, states were not industrialized enough to maintain a steady supply of arms for their armies.

The second generation of warfare (2GW) took place during the Industrial Age. At this time in history, states had become even more economically developed and thus had the possibility to mass produce more advanced weapons. Tactics were based on fire and movement, and the state that produced the largest quantity of arms was likely to win the war. Not only were new weapons developed during this time; communication systems and logistics did also contribute to a new and more effective way of fighting.

The third-generation warfare (3GW) was first seen during World War I (WW I). Here, non-linear fighting and use of intelligence to overcome the adversary came to play the crucial parts of warfare. During WW II, the Germans introduced the concept of Blitzkrieg – to quickly overcome the opponent by “shock operations”. The mental part of warfare came to be at least as important as the military equipment.

This development led on to what has now come to be called the fourth generation of warfare, or 4GW. The 4G adversaries will almost exclusively use non-linear tactics that are directed against both military and civilian targets. The goal is to obtain a collapse from

40 Barnett, Asymmetric warfare: Today’s Challenges to US Military Power, 2002, p. 15.

41 ICRC, IHL and the Challenges of Contemporary Armed Conflicts, 2003, p. 7.

9

within and to create as much harm as possible with the smallest possible use of military means.42 This harm is easiest to attain in civilian environments.

Given the historical background, it could be concluded that traditional armies have a military structure and organization that is well prepared to meet the threats of 2G or 3G adversaries, but when it comes to 4GW they are insufficiently trained both from a physical and psychological point of view. In order to meet the new threats coming from 4G adversaries, it has been suggested that conventional armies must adopt the same way of fighting. The 4G adversaries are skilled at turning their shortcomings to advantages, for instance by operating in small and flexible units as a corollary to lacking in manpower. In fact, as Lind et al. puts it, “mass may become a disadvantage as it will be easy to target.”43

Accordingly, the big challenge that lies ahead for conventional armies is thus to adapt to 4GW. It is important to underscore that this is not about using the same means and methods as the 4G adversaries, which today are likely to be terrorist groups, guerilla units, or insurgents. Rather, it is about being more flexible and being able to adjust the operation to the specific environment. Armies are trained to carry out large operations in large units, and if doing this in urban environments, there is always a risk that the civilian population will be disproportionally affected. Excessive use of force against small units will undeniably lead to collateral damage if carried out in densely populated areas.

6. Types of Asymmetric Warfare

The term is also frequently used to describe what is also called irregular warfare, guerrilla warfare, insurgency, counterinsurgency, terrorism, and counterterrorism, essentially violent conflict between a formal military and an informal, less equipped and supported, undermanned but resilient opponent.

a. Terrorism The word “terrorism” can be found in most newspapers every day of the year, all around the world. But despite the widespread use, no consensus of the term has been reached. In UN Security Council resolution 1566, terrorism is defined as criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act.

The definition of terrorism that will be used in this guide is the use of violence or the threat thereof by a non-state actor directed towards civilians or civilian objects in order to defeat a military superior adversary. Most definitions of terrorisms include that the actions should be politically motivated. However, the motives behind the terrorist actions are of subordinate interest here. Rather, focus is on the terrorist action as a warfare method in an asymmetric armed conflict.

No single definition of terrorism has thus been agreed upon among states. Many governments and various organizations have tried to define the term in a simple, yet comprehensive way, but differences between them remain. The difficulty to define

42 Thornton, Asymmetric Warfare: Threat and Response in the Twenty-First Century, 2007, pp. 155-156 43 Lind et al., The Changing Face of Warfare: Into the Fourth Generation, 1989, p. 23.

10

terrorism lies in that it is a political label on an undesirable and unlawful behavior, which may lead to measures being taken against the terrorist organization,44 and states have different views on the interests of organizations that should fall within this scope. “One person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter” is an often quoted saying which describes the different views two parties can have on the same matter.

b. Means used by Terrorists An increased possibility to access weapons that are highly injurious, such as weapons of mass destruction (WMD), is often claimed to constitute a risk of terrorists causing mass casualties. WMDs could be chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear.45 However, the threat of WMDs should not be over exaggerated, since the access to and successful use of them is dependent on a number of combined factors.46 Instead, much simpler – but nevertheless dangerous – improvised explosive devices (IEDs) are commonly used to cause damage to the adversary. The use of IEDs has emerged as one of the primary warfare methods by terrorists and insurgents in asymmetric conflicts.

An IED is exactly what it sounds like: an improvised bomb that is made of either military components or commercially sourced explosives, or a combination of both. Common for all IEDs is that they contain explosive material, detonators, and trigger mechanisms. However, as a corollary to being improvised, IEDs almost never look the same and could be hard to detect even for trained military personnel. This illustrates the risk that innocent people will accidentally come in contact with the explosive without knowing what it is or without even noting it in the first place. IEDs could also be attached to vehicles, so called vehicle-borne IEDs, to cause even greater damage. A vehicle can carry a substantial amount of explosive material and be placed in urban environments without raising suspicion. If detonated, the bomb could thus cause devastating and indiscriminate damage to civilians and civilian objects.

One of the more controversial methods used by terrorists is suicide bombing; a committed member of the group takes his own life in a strategic location and is thereby aiming at killing members of the oppositional force. This type of attack is highly indiscriminate since the suicide bomber kills number of people in the attack other than himself.

7. 20th century Asymmetric Warfare a. Second Boer War

The British captured Johannesburg and expected the Boers to accept peace as dictated by the victors in the traditional European way. However instead of capitulating, the Boers fought a protracted guerrilla war. The Boer commando would raid deep into the Cape Colony, which were organized and commanded by Jan Smuts, resonated throughout the century as the British adopted and adapted the tactics, first used against them by the Boers. Boer guerrillas were only defeated after the British brought to bear 450,000 troops,

b. World War I

44 Measures could be both violent and non-violent, an example of the latter is the freezing of assets.

45 For a thorough description of the concept, see Thornton, Asymmetric Warfare: Threat and Response in the Twenty-First Century, 2007, p.32-33 46 Ibid., p. 40.

11

• Lawrence of Arabia and British supported the Arab uprising against the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were the stronger power and the Arabs, the weaker.

• Austria-Hungary vs. Serbia, August 1914. Austria-Hungary was the stronger power, Serbia the weaker.

• Germany vs. Belgium, August 1914. Germany was the stronger power, Belgium the weaker.

c. Between the World Wars

• Abd el-Krim led resistance in Morocco from 1920 to 1924 against French and Spanish colonial armies ten times as strong as the guerilla force, led by General Philippe Pétain.

• TIGR, the first anti-fascist national-defensive organization in Europe, fought against Benito Mussolini's regime in northeast Italy.

• Anglo-Irish War (Irish War of Independence) fought between the Irish Republican Army and the Black and Tans/Auxiliaries. Lloyd George (British Prime Minister at the time) attempted to persuade other nations that it was not a war by refusing to use the army and using the Black and Tans instead but the conflict was conducted as an asymmetric guerrilla war and was registered as a war with the League of Nations by the Irish Free State.

d. World War II

• Philippine resistance against Japan - Philippines - During the Japanese occupation in World War II, there was an extensive Philippine resistance movement, which opposed the Japanese with active underground and guerrilla activity that increased over the years.

• Winter War – Finland was invaded by the much larger mechanized military units of the Soviet Union. Although the Soviets captured 8% of Finland, they suffered enormous casualties versus much lower losses for the Finns. Soviet vehicles were confined to narrow forest roads by terrain and snow, while the Finns skied around them unseen through the trees. They cut the advancing Soviet column into what they called motti (a bundle of sticks), and then destroyed the cut off sections one by one. Many of the Soviets were shot by snipers, had their throats cut from behind, or froze to death due to inadequate clothing and lack of camouflage and shelter. The Finns also devised a petrol bomb they called the Molotov cocktail to destroy Soviet tanks.

• Soviet partisans – resistance movement which fought in the German occupied parts of the Soviet Union.

e. Cold War examples of proxy wars

• In Southeast Asia, specifically Vietnam, the Viet Minh, NLF and other insurgencies engaged in asymmetrical guerrilla warfare with France, at first, then, later, the United States during the period of the Vietnam War.

• Likewise, the war between the mujahideen and the Red Army during the Soviet war in Afghanistan has been claimed as the source of the term "asymmetric warfare" although this war occurred years after Mack wrote of "asymmetric conflict," it is notable that the term became well known in the West only in the 1990s. The aid47, given by the U.S. to the mujahadeen during the war was only covert at the tactical level,

47 $40 million USA and $20 million Saudi Arabia per year (Global seq.org)

12

the Reagan Administration told the world that it was helping the "freedom-loving people of Afghanistan". This proxy war was aided by many countries including the USA against the USSR during the Cold War. It was considered cost effective and politically successful, as it was a drain on the resources and manpower of the USSR and turned out to be a contributing factor to its collapse in 1991 8. 21st century Asymmetric Warfare (Case Studies)

a. Iraq

The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) Islamic State (IS), and by its Arabic language acronym Daesh is a militant group. ISIL gained global notoriety in early 2014 when it drove Iraqi government forces out of key cities in its Western Iraq offensive, followed by its capture of Mosul and the Sinjar massacre. This group has been designated a terrorist organization by the United Nations and many individual countries. ISIL is widely known for its videos of beheadings of both soldiers and civilians, including journalists and aid workers, and its destruction of cultural heritage sites. The United Nations holds ISIL responsible for human rights abuses and war crimes, and Amnesty International has charged the group with ethnic cleansing48 [2] on a "historic scale" in northern Iraq49 . In Syria, the group has conducted ground attacks on both government forces and opposition factions. By December 2015, the Islamic State covered a vast landlocked territory in western Iraq and eastern Syria, with a population estimate of 2.8–8 million people where it enforces its interpretation of sharia law. ISIL is now believed to be operational in 18 countries across the world

Leadership and governance

ISIL is headed and run by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. According to Iraqis, Syrians and analysts who study the group, almost all of ISIL's leaders including the members of its military and security committees and the majority of its emirs and princes are former Iraqi military and intelligence officers, specifically former members of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath government who lost their jobs and pensions in the de-Ba'athification process after that regime was overthrown. The former Chief Strategist in the Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism of the US State Department, David Kilcullen, has said that "There undeniably would be no Isis if we had not invaded Iraq.

Conventional weapons ISIL relies mostly on captured weapons with major sources including Saddam Hussein's Iraqi stockpiles and from government and opposition forces fighting in the Syrian Civil War and during the post-US withdrawal Iraqi insurgency.

Non-conventional weapons The group uses truck and car bombs, suicide bombers and IEDs, and has used chemical weapons in Iraq and Syria. In September 2015 a US official stated that ISIL was manufacturing and using mustard agent in Syria and Iraq, and had an active chemical weapons research team.

Attacks outside Iraq and Syria

48 2002-2015: 33 000 killed, 41 000 injured, 11 000 kidnapped + 1000 women abductions (The Independent)

49 830 000 people displaced from N. IRAQ, 5380 people missing (Amnesty international)

13

In 2015 and 2016, ISIL claimed responsibility for a number of high-profile terrorist attacks outside Iraq and Syria, including a mass shooting at a Tunisian tourist resort (38 European tourists killed), the Suruç bombing in Turkey (33 leftist and pro-Kurdish activists killed), the Tunisian National Museum attack (24 foreign tourists and Tunisians killed), the Sana'a mosque bombings (142 Shia civilians killed), the crash of Metrojet Flight 9268 (224 killed, mostly Russian tourists), the bombings in Ankara (102 pro-Kurdish and leftist activists killed), the bombings in Beirut (43 Shia civilians killed), the November 2015 Paris attacks (130 civilians killed), the killing of Jaafar Mohammed Saad, the governor of Aden, the January 2016 Istanbul bombing (11 foreign tourists killed), the 2016 Brussels bombings (over 30 civilians killed), the 2016 Nice attack (84 civilians killed), the July 2016 Kabul bombing (at least 80 civilians killed, mostly Shiite Hazaras), the 2016 Berlin attack (12 civilians killed) and the 2017 Istanbul nightclub shooting (39 foreigners and Turks killed). In March 2016, it was reported that ISIL had trained at least 400 fighters specifically to launch attacks against Europe.

b. Afghanistan The war in Afghanistan dates back to 1978. It has been a country plagued by asymmetric warfare for a long time, the most blatant example being the ‘War on Terror’ which commenced after 9/11. 2001 saw the end of the Taliban regime as a result of a US-led operation ‘Enduring Freedom’. The United States justified their operations on Afghanistan on the premise that the Taliban regime was providing shelter to Osama bin laden, the leader of Al-Qaeda. In 2002 however, the Taliban began an insurgency to regain control of Afghan politics, and by

2006 NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) took control of operations. Hence, an asymmetry existed between the two warring parties, one relying on guerilla warfare and attacking ‘from the shadows’, the other technologically advanced and skilled. A series of controversial debates ensued regarding the drone attacks and the collateral damage associated with them.

On 28th December 2015, the NATO withdrew the ISAF troops and the transition of operations from the ISAF to the Afghan security forces happened between 2011 and 2012. The Afghan security forces consist of the Afghan National Army, and the Afghan National police. ISAF was mainly focused on the capacity building of these two forces in order to tackle the ongoing insurgency, and the security forces took the lead as January 2015 saw the arrest of five men who were involved in the Peshawar attacks on a school in Pakistan. However, the attacks on the parliament followed by territorial gains of the Taliban in the southwest of the Kunduz region, showed that Afghanistan still has the task of coping with asymmetric warfare. The U.N. envoy to Kabul, at a meeting in the United Nations Security Council, said that Afghanistan's security forces were "undeniably stretched" but resilient amid a push by insurgents for more territory and concerns that Islamic State militants were also seeking a foothold in the country (Reuters). Other interest groups include the two anti-Taliban militias, Jamiat-e-Islami and Junbish-i-Milli, both part of the Northern Alliance. Another cause for concern is the surge in poppy production as interest groups continue to fight authorities. A major source of funding for the Taliban is the illicit drug trade network, giving rise to narco-terrorism as well. Due to the porous border with Pakistan (Durand line), a spillover effect of the ongoing war in Afghanistan was inevitable. The ongoing war has led to thousands fleeing the country or becoming IDPs.

14

The United Nations has issued a number of reports, statements and resolutions on Afghanistan. One resolution was focused on renewing the 1988 Taliban sanctions regime(S/RES/2160) whereas December 2014 saw the passing of a resolution which welcomed the agreement between Afghanistan and NATO to create a Resolute Support mission(S/RES/2189). In 2006, a United Nations Assistance mission in Afghanistan was established, and a resolution calling for the renewal of its mandate was passed in March 2015(S/RES/2210). Other countries have stepped in to tackle the situation at hand. Pakistan held peace talks between the Afghan Taliban and Afghan government as a measure to end the ongoing conflict. The NATO, in its Wales Summit, highlighted important developments which took place in Afghanistan. Another step was the Tokyo Declaration, which included clauses regarding the maintenance of law and order in Afghanistan. However, effective policy, capacity building and resilient will of the people and government is needed for a favorable end state to be reached.

c. Nigeria Since 2009, Nigeria has been a target of insurgency by the militant group Boko Haram. Boko Haram has been accused of thousands of deaths since 2009 with attacks on churches, government buildings, markets and more recently, schools. In 2012, conflicts within Boko Haram resulted in the eventual split of the group between Salafist conservative faction led by Abu Usmatul al-Ansari and the more dominant takfiri faction led by Abu-Bakr Shakau.

Violence resulting from the Boko Haram insurgency has killed an estimated 11,000 people in Nigeria between 2003 and 2014, according to research from Johns Hopkins University and in 2015 the insurgents continued their offenses, with high-profile attacks on several cities and villages along the shores of Lake Chad, such as Baga and Doron Baga. To make things worse, Boko Haram has stepped up its activities in the Far North region of Cameroon. The latest expansion in aggression is undoubtedly representative of the growing nature of the Boko Haram threat. Since mid-2014, the Islamist extremist sect has established that it possesses both the objective and the operational capacity to pursue the formation of a separatist state in northeastern Nigeria governed under Shariah Law.50

However most of the conventional conflict taking place in Northeastern Nigeria accounts for only a small percentage of violence. A large portion of the attacks and violence, have continued to occur outside of the northeast of Nigeria. Moreover, these acts of violence remain characteristic of typical asymmetric warfare with suicide and car bombings, targeted assassinations, kidnappings, armed ambushes, and coordinated raids continuing to serve as favored methods of attack. It can be assumed that these forms of attacks are serving Boko Haram’s operational necessities. Majority of the attacks have targeted facilities such as banks, police barracks, market places and construction sites. Thus, through these attacks they not only fulfill the purpose of spreading violence but also

gain access to money, weaponry, and explosives, all of which are essential tools for their operations. Furthermore, they have carried out armed insurgencies on several detention facilities, as witnessed in major cities such as Maiduguri, Bauchi, Lakoja, Abuja and, most recently in Tunga, which has resulted in the release of several confined rebels, some of whom were expert strategists, bomb-makers, and professionals in kidnapping and other financing activities. Boko Haram uses this kidnapping tactic as both a ‘finance and a 50 http://www.cfr.org/global/global-conflict-tracker/p32137#!/?marker=17

15

concession generating mechanism’. They demand high amounts of ransom from both local and foreign hostages thus gathering finances for buying weapons and supplies. Further these hostages are used as a bargain for the release of several Boko Haram’s insurgents detained by the military forces.51

This use of asymmetrical forms of violence has allowed Boko Haram to build the perception that its threat is ubiquitous and has further undermined the role and legitimacy of the Nigerian state as the guarantor of domestic security.

d. Chechnya The southern Russian republic of Chechnya has for centuries been a point of contention with Moscow in the restive North Caucasus. The conflict primarily exists between the Russian government and the several Chechen nationalist and Islamist forces. Even though the origin of the conflict dates back to 1785, the more recent clash resulted due to a nationalist movement wanting to separate from the Soviet Union’s obstinate communist rule, though it later became more defined by Islam.52

In 1994, the First Chechen War broke out. Russian President Boris Yeltsin sent an army into Chechnya to fight the separatist leader, Dzhokhar Dudayev. A bloody war ensued and after two years he was killed after being targeted by two laser-guided missiles. Many Chechen citizens as well as Russian troops lost their lives after which a peace agreement was signed to bring an end to these killings, the Russian forces withdrew and Chechnya became autonomous. In 1999, the fighting started again and eventually resulted in Russia gaining control over Chechnya.

The attack on Dagestan in 1999 by the Islamic International Brigade (IIB) based in Chechnya was led by Shamil Basayev and Ibn al-Khattab. The IIB have been said to be aligned with Islam State terrorists and Al-Qaeda. Their troops attacked Dagestan in favor of the nationalist faction forming there. The success of Russians in faltering the advancement of the combative Islamists brought about the Second Chechnya War in

1999. As a result of these terror attacks Russia led several bombing raids in Chechnya and it is estimated that as a consequence more than 1.3 million people fled Chechnya. The war lasted for over nine years, overseen by President Vladimir Putin. Casualties of Chechen civilians have been estimated to be up to 50,000 with Russian numbers over 5,000, and since then low-level insurgency has continued particularly in Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan. The civilian population was caught in the middle of the crisis and there was an international outcry against the Russian brutality and bombing of innocent civilians. These human rights violations were brought up in the international community and the “UN Commission on Human Rights adopted a resolution on Chechnya that condemned serious human rights violations by Russia’s forces, and raised concern about forced disappearances, torture, and summary execution.”

Russian forces have further carried out various operations against these insurgents and have captured many of their leaders. A prominent one Shamil Basayev was killed in July, 2006 by the Russian forces. However, these extremist groups have also carried out several terrorist attacks throughout Russia including the bombings in 1999 of the Russian

51 http://www.insightonconflict.org/conflicts/nigeria/ 52 https://www.gwu.edu/~ieresgwu/assets/docs/ demokratizatsiya%20archive/GWASHU_DEMO_

16

apartment, the hostage of Moscow theatre in 2002 and the bombing of Domodedovo International Airport in 2011.

e. Yemen Yemen existed as two separate countries through a greater part of the 20th Century. By 1990, the Yemen Arab Republic in the north and the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen in the south formed a unified Republic of Yemen. Political conflict between the two disparate nationalities seemed inevitable, and soon the southerners fought a civil war in 1994, as a response to political marginalization. High levels of unemployment, widespread corruption, exorbitant food prices and lack of social services form the backdrop which eventually transpired into the crisis.53

The aspect of asymmetric warfare has been most apparent in recent months, which saw conflict between several different groups, pushing the country into a civil war. At the forefront are forces loyal to President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi, against the forces aligned to the Zaidi Shia rebels, also known as the Houthis. The political facet of this conflict is shown by the expansion of Houthi territory when a power vacuum was created in 2011 after President Saleh, Mr Hadi’s predecessor. Initially the Houthis took part in the political process, as seen by their participation in the National Dialogue Conference. Later, however, they opposed President Hadi’s plan to divide Yemen into a federation of 6 provinces, on the premise that they would be left weakened. It is especially alarming to note that Yemen’s own security forces have split loyalties, some towards the President while others towards former President Saleh and the Houthis. To add to all this is the Al-Qaeda of the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), which is opposed by both parties but has strongholds in the south and southeast, and has staged numerous deadly attacks. A rather sinister development came about in late 2014 when a Yemen affiliate of the Islamic State (ISIS) came about with the mission to counter the influence of the AQAP.

In the ensuing conflict, President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi fled the capital Sanaa in February and stayed in Aden, which was declared the de facto capital. The conflict acquired international attention when Mr. Hadi requested Saudi Arabia to lead a coalition of five Gulf Arab states and Jordan, Egypt, Morocco and Sudan. This coalition intervened and launched airstrikes on Houthi targets, adding further asymmetry between the forces involved in the conflict.

The United Nations has passed a total of 6 resolutions on the crisis. The topics of the resolutions range from arms embargos(S/RES/2216) to ‘sanctions against those threatening the peace, security and stability of Yemen’(S/RES/2140). Iran has submitted a four-point peace plan for Yemen, however, it is looked upon suspiciously by Western and Arab diplomats in New York, saying that they do not consider Iran to be a neutral party. One statement by the President to the Security Council highlighted other efforts: “[T]he Security Council strongly calls upon all parties, in particular the Houthis, to abide by the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative and its Implementation Mechanism, the outcomes of the comprehensive National Dialogue conference, and the Peace and National Partnership Agreement and its security annex…” All past actions have not, however, yielded concrete results.

53 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-14704951

17

Needless to say, the asymmetric warfare being carried out in Yemen has regional implications. According to Reuters, “The conflict, though rooted in local rivalries, has become a proxy battlefield for Sunni Saudi Arabia and Shi'ite Iran.” Gulf States, in full support of President Hadi, have accused Iran of backing the Houthis financially and militarily. The United States, vary of the AQAP, has carried out numerous drone strikes and military operations. From a strategic viewpoint, Yemen sits on a narrow waterway through which most of world’s shipments pass. Saudi Arabia and Egypt fear that a Houthi takeover would threaten free passage through the strait.

9. Questions A Resolution Must Answer (QARMA)

• What are the Types of asymmetric threats?

• What is the changing dynamic of asymmetric warfare as a result of international terrorists?

• What steps should be taken to build capacity in states unequipped to deal with these asymmetric threats?

• How can the UN help states to enforce law and deal with emergency crisis management?

• How does the UN move to address the humanitarian crises that have arisen in the regions that are threatened by terrorists?

• Link between cross border terrorism and asymmetric warfare?

• How to deal with problems relating to intelligence failure?

• A strategic approach towards the various case studies should be presented.

• Is the unilateral course of action that has been ongoing to addressing the issue best or should the UN adopt a multilateral approach in dealing with this issue?

• How should the committee tackle the question of hybrid foes that claim the trappings of statehood and political legitimacy while relying on terrorist attacks?

• Should the international community adopt diplomatic means to appease non-state actors? If not, why?

• Is there a road map which can be established to ensure a smooth political transition in countries which have been victims of asymmetric warfare?

• How has technology altered the battlefield and how can it be used against the belligerents?

• In what ways has asymmetric warfare tarnished the political reputation of countries conducting the military operation? Is there a way to reverse the effects? (may not be addressed in the resolution but will be a part of the broader discussion)

• Is there a need to shift from larger, costlier interventions to more unconventional ways of warfare? Should counterinsurgency operations be more civilian-led?

• How can civilian policy-makers and the military be brought on board to adopt the same views of strategy?

• Is there a need for military campaigns to acquire a political character?

• What are the different sources of funding, political and ideological support of these groups? How can the UN freeze such support?

• What lessons can be learnt from previous counterinsurgencies? How can these lessons be applied in a more favorable way for future policy?

18

10. Word of Welcome I sincerely welcome you to GöMUN 2017. I am Maaz Zafar Saddiqui and I come from

Pakistan. I did my Cambridge from Pakistan and decided to further my professional carrier

in Germany. Currently, I am studying German language under Foundation Year program at

University of Wildau. I intend to pursue my degree program in Mechanical Engineering in

Germany in years to come.

I will be your Director for the Disarmament and International Security Committee (DISEC).

Having been an active participant in Model UN since high school, I have experienced

conferences both on domestic and international levels. Diplomacy is a prerequisite in

Model UN that often goes neglected in the local circuit and that's something I personally

want to change within this simulation. There's going to be a lot of engaging debate in the

committee due to the timely nature of the topic, and inventive solutions will be required

to tackle the issue that will be under discussion. I have chosen Asymmetric Warfare as the

agenda for debate because of its relevance in the current day, with the issues of terrorism

raising concern in places such as the Middle East.

Please do not hesitate to contact me prior to the conference if you have any queries. I look

forward to seeing you all in June.

Best Regards,

Maaz Zafar Saddiqui