The Security Council: A Global Debate on Al Weapons 

MUN is about tackling real-world challenges and making tough decisions. The Model United Nations’s Security Council meetings in Ikast, Denmark, were anything but dull, as countries debated the role of Artificial Intelligence (Al) in warfare. Should Al be allowed to make decisions in battle? Can humans trust machines to take over such huge responsibilities? These were the kinds of questions that had to be taken into consideration.

Each delegate had to convincingly represent the political views of the country they were acting as a representative for, regardless of whether their own beliefs aligned with the official political doctrines. Here is a glimpse on how the students worked in the MUN Security Council:

Russia: “The World is More Complicated than ever”

Russia kicked off the MUN debate by stating that due to the introduction of AI systems, modern conflicts are more complicated now than ever. The Russian delegate argued that while Al could be useful in defence systems, humans need to remain in control. Russia emphasized that they were strongly in favour of using Al to protect their country but made it clear that human supervision should be essential. Decisions about life and death should not be left to a machine!

North Korea: “The Future is Al, and We Need to Invest in its Growth”

North Korea’s view was even more radical: They demanded to invest globally in Al-powered autonomous weapons. The delegate argued that Al is faster, better, and more efficient than humans. For them, the future of warfare is Al, and countries that don’t develop AI weapons will be left behind. North Korea even called for weapons that can make decisions on their own —no need for a human to be there constantly monitoring.

But could Al really be trusted to handle offensive operations? Is it safe and ethical?

Germany: “Can AI Really Be Trusted?”

Not every delegation was ready to give that much control to machines. Germany proposed an amendment that would require all Al military systems to have a human operator who could step in at any time and stop an attack if necessary. And what – Germany asked – if an AI system got hacked or malfunctioned?

The United States agreed that humans need to stay in control, especially when lives are at stake. They argued that while Al can be extremely efficient, it lacks the ability to make ethical decisions in conflicts.

However, North Korea strongly opposed human AI supervision as it would slow down progress. To North Korea it is crucial to foster Al development until the algorithms are even better than humans at handling threats.

Tensions Rise: a Russian Veto & a North Korean Proposal

Just when it looked like Germany’s proposal might be accepted as an amendment, Russia stepped in with a veto, which can only be done in the Security Council. They now argued that requiring constant human control would weaken the potential that Al defence systems promise. For Russia, the focus needs to be on using Al to enhance security, not hold it back. This Russian veto caused a lot of dissatisfaction among the delegates.

Next, North Korea proposed another amendment, a suggestion to reject any centralized control over Al research and funding. They argued that no single country or person should have the power to control Al development!

If you think MUN is simply young people talking in circles, think again. This Security Council meeting was a battle of ideas, and the stakes were high. Who knows what decisions might be made tomorrow? But one thing is for sure: MUN is way more exciting and thought-provoking than it might seem from the outside.

Sophie & Mieke, Year 12, Members of the Press Team