​

 

TOPIC A - AI Weaponry Regulation

As the world's technological capabilities rapidly develop, an important consideration is the degree of meaningful human usage and intervention in the quickly modernizing global military industrial sector. Increasing AI capabilities have been considered and tested for use in national military and weapons arsenals. This includes everything from aiming and firing rockets and drones to planning the very attacks themselves with satellite and top secret intel. Along with these advances comes warnings from experts and global leaders that, without appropriate human oversight, technology like Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (aka "Killer Robots"), is unable to appropriately and "humanely" assess human and civilian loss of attacks. On the other hand, many researchers and developers have claimed the advancement of AI weaponry dramatically increases the potential productivity and power of military campaigns. To what degree should we encourage innovation and invention including AI? Is there a fear that research regulation in international law will stunt the growth of international law-abiding nations, subjecting them to the powers of non-compliant nations? The legal implications of this are wide-spread. Machines cannot be held responsible for breaches of international law meaning there must be a jurisprudential framework tracing the actions of AI weaponry back to individuals or nation-states. What legal standards should this body work to produce to protect citizens and global security?

 

​

TOPIC B - Climate Refugee Status in International Law

Citizenship is a cornerstone of legal protections and provisions under international and domestic law. What happens when the country you are a citizen of is swept with tsunamis or hurricanes or floods or droughts? Traditionally, when many think of refugee status, warfare and political term oil come to mind. However, in the past several decades, thousands of people worldwide have been forcibly displaced from their homes. In many cases, this consists of intra-national immigration but, increasingly, this has also included international refugee displacement that transcends nation-state borders. These individuals are stuck in an unregulated and frequently under discussed limbo - not afforded the citizenship international law protections but also not formally considered political or war-fleeing refugees. Many experts have called for a formal recognition of climate refugee legal status. This would include a formal international mandate for due process protections from deportation. Several countries have already rejected refugee status for individuals fleeing climate-based rather than political-based displacement and persecution. To what degree should climate refugees be protected under international law? What rights should be afforded for intra-displaced refugees? Climate disasters can displace people in different ways. Some situations might seem clear cut like loss of housing or physical danger. But there are other manifestations of the climate crisis that may or may not be worthy of refugee status. In countries wrecked by hurricanes, for example, loss of electricity, food, and medical infrastructure could be deemed unlivable - should those individuals be guaranteed refugee protections if they flee to neighboring countries? What would be the burden on those nations? What formal legal systems and provisions should be implemented to decide whether an individual should be considered a climate refugee?

​

CHAIR: Noah Barkan

​

​Noah Barkan is a member of the class of 2028, planning to major in Princeton's School of Public and International Affairs. He is involved in organizations on campus such as Vote 100, The American Whig-Cliosophic Society, Mock Trial, Princeton Legal Journal, and Princeton's program in Law and Public Policy. Noah was a delegate at PMUNC when he was in high school and is excited to chair this year.