Polska Agencja Prasowa |DISEC | Building Infrastructure vs. Quick Solutions: Finding a Way to Combat Chemical Warfare in Water Supply

October 14th, 2019 | In the Disarmament and International Security Committee, there has been debate over whether short term solutions to disinfecting chemicals in water are more beneficial, or whether long-term infrastructure-building plans would be better. At the start of debate, countries like Spain, Chad, and Pakistan opposed plans that proposed building infrastructure, claiming that it would take too long and fail to aid countries in immediate need. The other side of the argument claimed that building infrastructure would help in the long run, making it so that countries would not have to worry about contaminated water supply again. 

When it came to creating working papers, most groups tried to create a mix of the two, the best of both worlds. A plan by Austria, France, and South Africa proposes to use preventative chemicals in water supplies to combat current water contamination. As for the long term, the plan hopes to use a developed to developing aid system that would help countries in need to build a system protecting water sources. Another plan, proposed by Belgium, Spain and the USA, looks more towards preventative measures to ensure water safety. This would entail more education for countries considered uninformed on proper water maintenance. 

This, of course, is a long term solution, and is dependent on developed countries  to provide the aforementioned education. Could the dependency proposed by these plans see the rise of neo-colonialism? The Austria, France, South Africa plan hopes to prevent this by having a 6 month rotation on the developed countries giving aid, as to not create dependency.  However, is this enough?  

Another plan proposed by Iran, Pakistan, and Nigeria asks for immediate relief for Middle Eastern countries and other territories in desperate need for solutions to their individual water crises. Their proposal then plans to create committees that would evaluate countries in need. This plan relieves countries in immediate danger, but does not propose many solutions to help said countries for future threats.