On November 13th, the European political scene was changed forever. The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) conducted a terrorist attack in the heart of Paris. NATO is hoping to solve such issues and with the recent Westminster attacker being a homegrown terrorist. it seemed logical for the committee to solve that issue first. Norway suggested programs to make potential homegrown terrorists feel more welcome and less likely to join the ranks of a terrorist.
Belgium quickly disagreed with the statement due to the need for a short term solution. Because a large pocket of their Muslim population is currently living in one concentrated area in Brussels, which have been linked to the Paris and Brussels attacks, as explained by the Belgian delegate.
Shortly after the US brought up the power of social media as a weapon that terrorists happily abuse, the US put forward the solution to control social media that spread such as propaganda and monitor communication between the victim(s) and the terrorist(s).
The Netherlands then suggested that we should strike down websites that spread propaganda; he then finished his speech with the idea of the formation of a "teachers in youth." The teachers who are selected would go to young people at risk, educate them and attempt to de-radicalize them. There was very little disagreement on this solution as it was brought up many times in the future.
Luxembourg proposed integration for refugees, so that they do not conduct any illegal action that risks innocent lives and included therapists in the program. This once again received little disagreement among delegates.
The United Kingdom brought up the idea of monitoring where terrorists buy their materials to build chemical weapons. Sadly, this seemingly went unnoticed by the committee.
Spain strangely suggested creating a "tech coalition so they can monitor their activities." France then stated it would be nearly impossible to achieve a feat of that size. He also said that the U.K knew about the potential risk of the person responsible for the Westminster attacks.
In response to France's points, Norway then asked the question "if the U.K government knew about the risk, why did they allow it to happen?" This issue was well received by the committee; however, no further action was taken to solve this issue.
Canada suggested a solution which focuses on mental health for communities at risk to be recruited, so they feel apart of the society.
Greece questioned the idea of monitoring technology as he stated: "Feasible? The delegation of Greece thinks no!" He then suggested creating a shared intelligent network between nation states in NATO.
After several delegates including the U.S brought up monitoring the web, it became apparent that this was a solution that the entire committee was for; it even it went a step further when Hungary proposed other countries to pass laws to monitor cell phones. Hungary stated that it had worked in the past in Hungary. The dais then said enacting such laws would potentially violate freedom of speech.
Belgium quickly disagreed with the statement due to the need for a short term solution. Because a large pocket of their Muslim population is currently living in one concentrated area in Brussels, which have been linked to the Paris and Brussels attacks, as explained by the Belgian delegate.
Shortly after the US brought up the power of social media as a weapon that terrorists happily abuse, the US put forward the solution to control social media that spread such as propaganda and monitor communication between the victim(s) and the terrorist(s).
The Netherlands then suggested that we should strike down websites that spread propaganda; he then finished his speech with the idea of the formation of a "teachers in youth." The teachers who are selected would go to young people at risk, educate them and attempt to de-radicalize them. There was very little disagreement on this solution as it was brought up many times in the future.
Luxembourg proposed integration for refugees, so that they do not conduct any illegal action that risks innocent lives and included therapists in the program. This once again received little disagreement among delegates.
The United Kingdom brought up the idea of monitoring where terrorists buy their materials to build chemical weapons. Sadly, this seemingly went unnoticed by the committee.
Spain strangely suggested creating a "tech coalition so they can monitor their activities." France then stated it would be nearly impossible to achieve a feat of that size. He also said that the U.K knew about the potential risk of the person responsible for the Westminster attacks.
In response to France's points, Norway then asked the question "if the U.K government knew about the risk, why did they allow it to happen?" This issue was well received by the committee; however, no further action was taken to solve this issue.
Canada suggested a solution which focuses on mental health for communities at risk to be recruited, so they feel apart of the society.
Greece questioned the idea of monitoring technology as he stated: "Feasible? The delegation of Greece thinks no!" He then suggested creating a shared intelligent network between nation states in NATO.
After several delegates including the U.S brought up monitoring the web, it became apparent that this was a solution that the entire committee was for; it even it went a step further when Hungary proposed other countries to pass laws to monitor cell phones. Hungary stated that it had worked in the past in Hungary. The dais then said enacting such laws would potentially violate freedom of speech.