D.I.S II 2025

Topic

Combating the Global Rise of Synthetic Drugs (Fentanyl, Captagon, Meth). Addressing production, trafficking, and transnational regulation of synthetic narcotics and their precursors.

About the committee

The international drug landscape has shifted dramatically in recent decades. While traditional narcotics like heroin and cocaine remain global threats, synthetic drugs—particularly fentanyl, captagon, and methamphetamine—have surged in both production and consumption. Unlike plant-based drugs, synthetics can be manufactured anywhere with relatively low costs, requiring only precursor chemicals and clandestine laboratories. This makes their supply chain harder to detect and regulate, while their potency has led to catastrophic consequences. Fentanyl (a synthetic opioid) is up to 50 times stronger than heroin and has fueled the overdose crisis in North America, with ripple effects worldwide. Captagon, a powerful amphetamine-type stimulant, has become a destabilizing factor in the Middle East, with allegations of its mass production in conflict zones like Syria and widespread trafficking across the Gulf. Methamphetamine remains a dominant synthetic stimulant, with production concentrated in Southeast Asia (Golden Triangle) and Mexico, driving both regional addiction crises and global trafficking routes. The problem is compounded by the ease of precursor smuggling—chemicals used in legitimate industries are diverted to illicit use. Organized crime networks, insurgent groups, and even state-linked actors exploit these markets for financing, destabilizing fragile states and fueling violence. Existing international instruments like the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs and the 1988 UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances were not designed to tackle the scale, speed, and chemical innovation of synthetic narcotics today. Thus, the international community faces urgent challenges: How to regulate and monitor precursor chemicals without disrupting legitimate industries. How to enhance cross-border intelligence-sharing to tackle trafficking routes. How to balance law enforcement with public health approaches, ensuring access to treatment and harm reduction for users. Whether new international frameworks are needed to specifically address synthetic drugs. This agenda calls upon member states to adopt a multifaceted approach—combining regulation, law enforcement, public health, and international cooperation—to confront what is rapidly becoming the defining narcotics crisis of the 21st century.

Countries

Topic

The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan (1979–1989) and Its Implications for International Peace and Security

About the committee

On 24 December 1979, Soviet forces entered Afghanistan to support the embattled communist government of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan against growing insurgencies. What began as a limited intervention quickly escalated into a full-scale occupation, with over 100,000 Soviet troops deployed to the region. This invasion has transformed Afghanistan into a central battleground of the Cold War, sparking international condemnation, massive refugee flows, and the rise of armed resistance movements — many supported covertly by external powers. The United Nations Security Council is now faced with the urgent task of addressing the implications of the Soviet presence in Afghanistan: the violation of Afghan sovereignty, the destabilization of South and Central Asia, the humanitarian crisis that has displaced millions, and the risk of wider superpower confrontation through proxy involvement. Delegates must debate whether the Council can formulate an effective response, consider possible sanctions, aid mechanisms, and peacekeeping measures, and explore pathways toward a political settlement that safeguards Afghanistan’s independence and regional stability.

Chairs

• Naman Lenka
• Vivaan Dam

Countries

Topics

1. i)Debating on and providing solutions to a relevant agenda, discussing pertinent phenomena and issues that pose obstructions to journalism.
2. Reporting on and covering proceedings in all committees of Disputatio MUN 2025, and presenting the gathered information through formal paperwork and engaging, creative presentation.

About the committee

The International Press Corps is the watchdog of Disputatio MUN 2025. Tasked with reporting, analyzing, and critiquing the developments across every committee, the IPC brings transparency, accountability, and dynamism to debate. Delegates step into the shoes of global journalists and media outlets, balancing impartial reporting with sharp editorial perspectives. In this council, members are challenged to cover proceedings in real time, craft formal reports, and present creative press releases that shape the narrative of the conference. Beyond reporting, the IPC will also debate and propose solutions to the pressing challenges facing journalism today—ranging from censorship and propaganda to the dangers posed by misinformation and the digital age. At its heart, the IPC ensures that every voice is heard, every action is scrutinized, and every decision is remembered—not just as records, but as headlines.

Countries

Topic

“The Anglo-Irish Troubles (1981–1985): Responding to Growing IRA Violence, Hunger Strikes, and the 1984 Brighton Hotel Bombing.”

About the committee

The United Kingdom in October 1984 finds itself at a crossroads of domestic security, political legitimacy, and counter-terrorism policy. The Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) has escalated its campaign of violence, moving from attacks in Northern Ireland to direct strikes at the British government itself. The most shocking of these came on 12 October 1984, when a bomb planted by the IRA exploded at the Grand Brighton Hotel, targeting Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and her Cabinet during the Conservative Party Conference. Though Thatcher narrowly survived, five people were killed and dozens injured. This attack is not an isolated incident—it follows years of worsening conflict known as The Troubles (1969–1998). In the early 1980s, the hunger strikes by imprisoned IRA members, most notably Bobby Sands in 1981, intensified political tensions and international attention. The IRA, emboldened by grassroots support in parts of Northern Ireland and alleged external aid, has increasingly sought to bring the fight to the British mainland. The British government, meanwhile, is under mounting pressure. On one hand, hardline security advocates push for expanded powers for MI5, MI6, and Special Branch to suppress terrorism at any cost. On the other, moderates and diplomats argue that a purely militarized response risks further alienating the Catholic community in Northern Ireland and inflaming global opinion. At the same time, Thatcher’s Cabinet faces political scrutiny at home, with questions over civil liberties, the role of intelligence services, and the government’s ability to prevent such devastating attacks. With the freeze date immediately following the Brighton Bombing, the Cabinet must now decide: Should the UK double down on security crackdowns and surveillance to prevent future attacks? Is there scope for negotiation or limited concessions to reduce bloodshed? How should the government balance public safety, democratic values, and political authority in the face of terrorism? The fate of Thatcher’s government, the stability of Northern Ireland, and Britain’s international standing now hang in the balance.

Chair

• Iqra Sarfraz

Countries

Topic

Deliberation of the National Security Council of India on the coordinated response to the terrorist attack in Pahalgam on 22nd April 2025, with particular emphasis on the immediate security, intelligence, diplomatic, and military measures to be undertaken.

About the committee

Welcome to the National Security Council of India. You are gathered here at one of the most critical junctures in the nation's recent history. Just two hours ago, the serene valley of Pehelgam was shattered by a coordinated and ruthless terror attack—targeting civilians, disrupting security infrastructure, and threatening the stability of the region. The gravity of this moment cannot be overstated. As members of the National Security Council, you carry the immense responsibility of safeguarding the sovereignty, security, and resilience of the Republic of India. The decisions you take in the next few hours will not only define immediate rescue efforts but will also shape national policy, diplomatic relations, and internal security for years to come. This is not a meeting of routine deliberation—it is a test of leadership under fire, judgment under uncertainty, and compassion amidst crisis. You must navigate conflicting information, external pressures, and the weight of public expectation with clarity and resolve. Every action you propose, every directive you enforce, and every word you communicate could mean the difference between chaos and control. We urge you to approach this task with seriousness, discipline, and unwavering commitment to the nation's welfare. Bring your expertise, courage, and empathy to the table. This Council represents not only the defense of borders but the protection of citizens, the integrity of institutions, and the strength of India’s democratic fabric. The eyes of the nation are upon you. Act decisively. Act responsibly. Act for India.

Chairs

• Samrat Pratap Singh
• Atharv Baluja

Countries