TURNING POINT COMMUNITY’S RAJKOT

LEADERSHIP SUMMIT, MARWADI UNIVERSITY 2025

STUDY GUIDE
UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
 AGENDA:
“Deliberation on
Strengthening Global Security
and Cooperation in the Face of
Rising Armed Conflicts and
Cyber Threats”
 TABLE OF CONTENTS:

1 INTRODUCTION TO THE
COMMITTEE
2 RULES OF PROCEDURES

3 NTRODUCTION TO THE AGENDA

4 CASE STUDIES ON POTENTIAL

CRISIS
5 KEY FRAMEWORKS AND
DOCUMENTS
6 PREVIOUS STEPS TAKEN

7 KEY PLAYERS

8 SUGGESTED SUBTOPICS

9 SUGGEST RESOURCES
 INTRODUCTION TO THE COMMITTEE:

The UN General Assembly (UNGA) is the main policy-making

organ of the Organization. Comprising all Member States, it
provides a unique forum for multilateral discussion of the full
spectrum of international issues covered by the Charter of the
United Nations. Each of the 193 Member States of the United
Nations has an equal vote.
It has shaped the global agenda on disarmament, sustainable
development, human rights, and peace building. Its resolutions
may not be legally binding, but they carry significant political
weight and often form the foundation for international norms
and treaties. Beyond that, the Assembly provides legitimacy to
collective action by ensuring that global policies reflect the
diversity of voices across the international community.
It works on issues like:
* International peace & security
* Human rights
* Global cooperation on new threats (like cyber security)
* Unlike the Security Council, UNGA cannot impose binding
military action. Its resolutions are recommendations but carry
strong moral and political weight.
 RULES OF PROCEDURES:

MUN simulates UNGA using simplified Rules of Procedure

(ROP). Here’s how it flows:
1. Roll Call → Say “Present” or “Present and Voting”.
2. General Speakers’ List (GSL) → each country delivers
opening statements (60–120 secs).
Example: “Honorable Chair, the Delegate of India believes…”
3. Motions → Requests by delegates to change debate flow:
• Moderated Caucus (focused discussion, timed speeches).
• Unmoderated Caucus (informal lobbying, drafting).
• Extension of GSL, setting speaking time, etc.
4. Drafting Documents:
• Working Papers (raw ideas, informal).
• Draft Resolutions (formal, structured).
• Amendments (changes to draft resolutions).
5. Voting → Countries vote to adopt resolutions.

Procedural Points for the Conference:

1. Point of Order - Used when a delegate believes the chair or
another delegate has made a mistake in procedure.
2. Point of Information - Used to ask a question of another
delegate who has the floor.
3. Point of Personal Privilege - Used to address personal needs
or comfort, such as requesting a pause due to discomfort or
needing to leave the room.
4. Point of Parliamentary Inquiry - Used to ask a question about
the rules of procedure or the topic being discussed.

INTRODUCTION TO THE AGENDA:

The agenda “Deliberation on Strengthening Global Security &

Cooperation in the face of Rising Armed Conflicts & Cyber
Threats” is a carefully chosen theme because it reflects two of
the most urgent realities shaping our world today.

• On one hand, armed conflicts are increasing in both

number and intensity. From the war in Ukraine, to
renewed violence in Gaza, to civil conflicts in Sudan,
Myanmar, and beyond, the past decade has shown us that
large-scale violence remains a reality. These wars not only
devastate local populations but also disrupt global supply
chains, increase refugee flows, and strain international
peace mechanisms.
• On the other hand, cyber threats have emerged as a new
frontier of insecurity. Cyber-attacks have targeted
hospitals, banks, government systems, and even
democratic elections. State-sponsored hackers and non-
state actors alike have demonstrated the ability to cause
chaos without firing a single bullet. In some cases, cyber-
attacks have been directly linked to armed conflicts,
blurring the line between traditional warfare and digital
aggression.
This agenda is important because the nature of conflict has
changed. Wars today are not fought only on the ground; they
also take place online. In Ukraine, for example, missile strikes
were combined with cyber-attacks that shut down electricity
networks, leaving people more vulnerable. In Sudan, internet
shutdowns made it harder for humanitarian groups to deliver
aid and for civilians to communicate in times of crisis. These
cases show how closely the digital and physical worlds are now
linked. Global security can no longer be discussed by focusing
only on armies and borders; cyber security must be treated as
an essential part of international peace and cooperation.

This agenda needs to be approached from several angles.

• First, there is the challenge of dealing with ongoing armed
conflicts and the humanitarian crises they create.
• Second, countries must work together to build stronger
defenses and cooperation against cyber-attacks.
• Third, the international community has to agree on
common rules, trust-building measures, and systems of
accountability to keep cyberspace stable and secure.
Finally, recovery after conflicts should not only focus on
rebuilding cities and infrastructure, but also on restoring
and protecting digital networks that societies depend on.
 CASE STUDIES ON POTENTIAL CRISIS:

Armed Conflicts-

1. Ukraine–Russia War (2022–2025)

The war in Ukraine is the biggest conflict in Europe since World
War II. Alongside missile strikes and ground battles, Ukraine has
also faced cyberattacks on its power grid, hospitals, and banks.
This shows how modern wars now extend into cyberspace. It is
a clear reminder that no nation’s security can be measured only
in terms of territory anymore.
2. Israel–Palestine (Gaza War, 2023–2025)
The Gaza conflict has created one of the worst humanitarian
crises in recent years, with thousands of civilian deaths. The UN
General Assembly passed resolutions calling for ceasefires and
humanitarian access, but stronger action was blocked in the
Security Council. This reinforced the role of the UNGA as a
moral voice when binding action is not possible. The war also
revealed the limits of global diplomacy when major powers
remain divided.

3. Sudan Civil War (2023–present)

Sudan’s civil war has displaced millions and pushed parts of the
country toward famine. Internet shutdowns during the fighting
have slowed aid coordination, showing how digital restrictions
can worsen humanitarian crises. The situation illustrates how
fragile states can quickly become humanitarian emergencies
without sustained international support.

4. Myanmar (2021 Coup – present)

Since the 2021 coup, Myanmar’s military has used both
violence on the ground and internet censorship online. This
highlights how today conflicts combine physical repression with
digital control. The people’s struggle for democracy has
therefore unfolded across both streets and social media
platforms.

Cyber security & Hybrid Threats-

5. AIIMS Delhi Cyberattack (2022)

In 2022, a ransom ware attack crippled India’s largest hospital,
AIIMS Delhi, for weeks. It revealed how fragile critical health
systems can be when targeted by cybercrime, directly affecting
patient care. The attack raised urgent questions about the
preparedness of developing nations against sophisticated cyber
threats.
6. Colonial Pipeline Attack (United States, 2021)
The ransom ware attack on the Colonial Pipeline in 2021 cut
fuel supplies to millions in the eastern United States. It showed
how a single cyber incident can quickly trigger wider economic
and security challenges. The event also pushed governments to
recognize cybercrime as a national security threat, not just a
technical issue.

7. Estonia Cyberattacks (2007, 2022)

Estonia, one of the world’s most digital societies, faced large-
scale cyberattacks in 2007 and again in 2022. These were
closely tied to political tensions and led NATO to establish its
Cyber Defense Centre, showing the link between cyber
operations and geopolitical conflict. Estonia’s experience has
since become a global case study in resilience and cyber
defense cooperation.
 KEY FRAMEWORKS AND DOCUMENTS:

• On Armed Conflicts:
When the Security Council gets stuck because of vetoes, the
General Assembly often becomes the place where the world
speaks out.
• This first happened in 1950 with the Uniting for Peace
Resolution, which allowed the Assembly effectively.
• In recent years, we’ve seen this again: during the Russia-
Ukraine war, Resolution ES-11/1 (2022) brought together
141 countries to condemn the invasion, despite Russia
blocking action in the Council.
• In 2023, during the Gaza conflict, the Assembly called for a
humanitarian truce after the Council failed to agree. These
examples show that while the General Assembly cannot
enforce decisions, it can bring the world together and act
as a strong voice of global opinion.

• On Cyber security:
Cyber threats are new, but the General Assembly has been
working on them for almost twenty years.
• Its Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) confirmed that
international law applies in cyberspace, and the Open-
Ended Working Group (OEWG) has worked on building
trust, sharing knowledge, and creating guidelines for
responsible state behavior online.
• Resolutions like 75/240 (2020) stress the need for
countries to cooperate against cybercrime.
 • Looking ahead, the Global Digital Compact is likely to
shape how the world manages digital governance and
online security.

PREVIOUS STEPS TAKEN:

Disarmament Resolutions:
The General Assembly has been central in advancing
disarmament. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT),
signed in 1968, now has 191 States Parties, making it one of the
most widely adopted treaties. Similarly, the Arms Trade Treaty
(ATT), which came into force in 2014, regulates the global arms
trade valued at over $100 billion annually. Despite these
frameworks, enforcement gaps remain, especially in regions
facing active wars.
Cyber security Mechanisms:
Recognizing the rise of cyber threats, the UN established the
Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) and the Open-Ended
Working Group (OEWG). In 2021, the OEWG adopted a
consensus report outlining 11 norms of responsible state
behavior in cyberspace, including protecting critical
infrastructure. However, cyberattacks such as the AIIMS Delhi
attack (2022) and the Colonial Pipeline ransom ware attack
(2021) show how fragile digital systems still are.
Regional Efforts:
Regional organizations have strengthened security alongside
UN action. NATO created its Cooperative Cyber Defense Centre
of Excellence in Estonia after the 2007 cyberattacks and
continues joint military-cyber drills. The African Union adopted
the Malabo Convention (2014) on cybersecurity and personal
data protection. The European Union launched the EU
Cybersecurity Strategy (2020), linking digital safety to economic
resilience. Together, these efforts show how regions
complement global UN initiatives.

KEY PLAYERS:

Major Powers: United States, Russia, China, and the European

Union, all with big roles in conflicts and cyber operations.
Regional Powers: India, Turkey, Iran, and Brazil, shaping
stability in their own regions.
Developing Countries: Usually the hardest hit by wars and least
ready for cyber threats.
Non-State Actors: Terrorist groups, cybercriminals, and tech
companies that influence the digital space.
International Organizations: UN agencies, NATO, AU, OSCE,
and others working to manage conflicts and promote
cooperation.
 SUGGESTED SUBTOPICS:

Subtopics for Debate (Moderated Caucus Ideas)

Humanitarian Access in War Zones –

How can we make sure civilians trapped in conflicts actually
get food, medicine, and aid, even when politics or blockades
stand in the way?
Cybersecurity of Critical Services –
What practical measures can protect hospitals, power grids,
and banks from cyberattacks that can paralyze entire nations?
Global Cooperation to Stop Hybrid Wars –
How can countries come together to deal with wars that are
fought both on the ground and online, often at the same time?
Rebuilding After Conflicts in a Digital World –
When a war ends, it’s not just about rebuilding roads and
schools—how can nations also secure their digital systems to
avoid future chaos?
Holding States and Groups Accountable Online –
Should there be global rules to hold governments, hacker
groups, or even corporations responsible when cyberattacks
cause real harm to people?

SUGGESTED SOURCES:

https://peacekeeping.un.org/en
https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/data
https://meetings.unoda.org/open-ended-working-group-on-
information-and-communication-technologies-2021
https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/npt/
https://www.unhcr.org/data.html

BY: JEET CHANGELA, ASHNA ACHHNANI