What is the eligibility level for participants at Model United Nations Rotterdam?

The conference is designed for high-school level participants.

Where is Model United Nations Rotterdam located?

The conference takes place in Rotterdam, NLD.

What is the expected number of delegates for this conference?

The conference anticipates accommodating a significant number of delegates.

MUNROT 2026

May 27–29, 2026Rotterdam, NetherlandsIn-person

ConcludedRegistration closed

Model United Nations Rotterdam offers high school students an opportunity to engage in diplomatic simulations in the city of Rotterdam, NLD. This conference is designed for individual delegates and aims to foster a deeper understanding of international relations and the functions of the United Nations. Participants will convene for several days, immersing themselves in committee work and debate. The event is structured to accommodate a substantial number of delegates, providing a platform for extensive interaction and collaboration among young leaders. The focus is on developing skills in negotiation, public speaking, and critical thinking within a simulated international environment.

Country perspectives

Where the most-relevant 1 countries stand on the dominant committee topic. Click through for the full country profile.

Netherlands

As the host nation, NLD provides the logistical and cultural backdrop for the conference, embodying a commitment to international cooperation and diplomacy.

Role in topic

NLD's role is primarily as the host, facilitating an environment conducive to international dialogue and learning for high school students. Its history as a center for international law and peace initiatives adds a layer of significance to the conference location.

Topics & background

The history behind each committee topic and the states that shape it.

Democracy at the Crossroads: Governing in an Era of Fragmentation

Since the post-Cold War wave of democratization peaked in the 1990s, successive measurements by Freedom House, V-Dem, and the Economist Intelligence Unit have recorded nearly two decades of democratic backsliding. Established democracies face polarization, declining trust in institutions, and the fragmentation of party systems, while hybrid regimes have consolidated executive power through legal and constitutional channels. The 2008 financial crisis, the migration pressures of the mid-2010s, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the information revolution have all accelerated fragmentation by eroding shared narratives and exposing the inability of traditional governing coalitions to deliver stable majorities. The core dispute concerns how democracies should adapt without abandoning pluralism. Some governments argue that 'illiberal democracy' or 'sovereign democracy' is a legitimate response to globalization and foreign interference; others insist that liberal constitutionalism, judicial independence, and minority protections are non-negotiable elements of democratic governance. International forums such as the Summit for Democracy, the Community of Democracies, and the EU's rule-of-law mechanisms have tried to coordinate responses, but enforcement remains weak and contested. Today the question is no longer whether democracy is in retreat but how fragmented societies can be governed coherently. Coalition instability in Europe, contested elections in the Americas, and the rise of populist movements that question electoral legitimacy itself have placed the durability of democratic norms at the center of international debate.

Key players

Can Democracy Defend Itself? Militant Democracy and the Limits of Tolerance

The concept of 'militant democracy', coined by Karl Loewenstein in 1937 in response to fascist movements exploiting Weimar Germany's openness, posits that democracies may legitimately restrict anti-democratic actors to preserve the system itself. Post-war Germany institutionalized this through party bans, constitutional protections of the 'free democratic basic order', and the Federal Constitutional Court's authority to outlaw extremist parties. Similar tools exist in Spain, Turkey, Israel, and elsewhere, while the European Court of Human Rights has developed jurisprudence permitting limits on speech and association that threaten democratic order. The central dispute is where the line falls between self-defense and self-betrayal. Critics warn that party bans, disqualifications of candidates, emergency powers, and restrictions on protest or speech can be weaponized by incumbents against legitimate opposition, as seen in cases ranging from Venezuela to Tunisia. Defenders point to the storming of the U.S. Capitol on 6 January 2021, the 8 January 2023 attacks in Brasília, and coup attempts in several states as evidence that complacent democracies risk collapse. The debate has intensified as courts in multiple countries weigh disqualifying candidates for anti-constitutional conduct, as Germany debates banning the AfD, and as Romania annulled and rescheduled its 2024 presidential election over alleged foreign interference. The committee must consider how to balance pluralism, due process, and democratic survival.

Key players

Economic Coercion and Sanctions as Instruments of Democratic Protection and Geopolitical Pressure

Economic sanctions have evolved from the comprehensive embargoes of the 20th century into highly targeted instruments: asset freezes, sectoral restrictions, secondary sanctions, export controls, and human-rights-based 'Magnitsky' regimes. The United States, European Union, United Kingdom, and Canada have built overlapping architectures justified on grounds of democracy promotion, counter-proliferation, and human rights. Since Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea and especially its 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, sanctions have become a central front of geopolitical confrontation, accompanied by the freezing of roughly USD 300 billion in Russian central bank reserves. The core dispute is twofold. First, do sanctions actually advance democratic outcomes, or do they entrench authoritarian regimes, harm civilian populations, and accelerate the fragmentation of the global financial system? Second, where does legitimate sanctioning end and coercion begin? China's pressure on Lithuania over Taiwan, U.S. secondary sanctions on third-country firms, and the EU's new Anti-Coercion Instrument adopted in 2023 illustrate competing definitions. The G7 Russian oil price cap and discussions over confiscating frozen sovereign assets have raised further questions about the rules-based order. The committee must weigh the effectiveness, humanitarian impact, and legal basis of coercive economic tools, as well as the growing use of de-dollarization, alternative payment systems, and BRICS expansion as responses by sanctioned and non-aligned states.

Key players

Preventing the Use of Armed Groups to Suppress Civil Liberties and Democratic Participation

States and political actors have increasingly outsourced repression to irregular armed actors: pro-government militias, private military companies, paramilitaries, and 'titushky'-style street forces. The Russian Wagner Group and its successor Africa Corps, Sudan's Rapid Support Forces, Iran's Basij, Venezuelan colectivos, and various pro-regime militias in Myanmar and Nicaragua have all been deployed to intimidate voters, attack protesters, suppress journalists, or capture electoral processes. The Montreux Document (2008) and the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers offered early frameworks, but enforcement is fragmented and largely voluntary. The core dispute concerns accountability and definition. International humanitarian and human rights law assign responsibility to states for armed actors operating under their direction or control, yet plausible deniability, transnational deployment, and hybrid corporate structures complicate attribution. The UN Working Group on the Use of Mercenaries has documented expanded operations across Africa and Latin America, while the RSF's role in Sudan's 2023 war and atrocities in Darfur illustrate how state-empowered militias can collapse into independent threats to civilians and democratic order. The committee must consider how to strengthen norms against the use of irregular armed groups for political repression, including sanctions, prosecutions, regulation of PMCs, and protections for protesters, observers, and opposition figures.

Key players

Cyber Warfare and the Militarization of Information: Establishing International Norms in an Unregulated Digital Battlespace

Since the Estonia cyberattacks of 2007, Stuxnet in 2010, and the NotPetya campaign of 2017, cyber operations have moved from espionage to a recognized domain of inter-state competition. The UN Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) and the Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) have produced consensus reports affirming that international law, including the UN Charter, applies in cyberspace, alongside eleven voluntary norms of responsible state behavior. Yet thresholds for the use of force, attribution standards, and the protection of civilian infrastructure remain contested. Russia's invasion of Ukraine, attacks on Viasat, and sustained operations against Ukrainian energy and government systems have provided the first large-scale demonstration of integrated cyber-kinetic warfare. Alongside cyberattacks, the weaponization of information through coordinated inauthentic behavior, generative AI, and platform manipulation has become a parallel battlespace. Russian, Chinese, and Iranian influence operations, the Cambridge Analytica scandal, and electoral interference incidents from the United States to Romania have shown how information operations can degrade democratic processes without crossing armed-conflict thresholds. Competing frameworks divide the field: Western states emphasize a free, open, and secure internet, while Russia and China promote 'information security' doctrines emphasizing state sovereignty over content. The committee must address attribution, norms for protecting critical infrastructure and electoral systems, regulation of offensive cyber tools and spyware, and the boundary between legitimate strategic communication and hostile information warfare.

Key players

Cross-Strait Tensions and the Future of Taiwan: Democratic Self-Determination, Security, and International Response Options

The Taiwan question originates in the Chinese Civil War (1945-1949), when the defeated Republic of China government retreated to Taiwan while the People's Republic of China was established on the mainland. UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 (1971) transferred China's UN seat to Beijing without explicitly resolving Taiwan's status. The PRC claims Taiwan as an inalienable part of China and reserves the right to use force; Taiwan has since democratized, holding regular elections since 1996 and developing a distinct civic identity. The United States maintains a 'One China policy' under the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, providing defensive arms while preserving strategic ambiguity. Tensions have escalated sharply since 2016. PLA incursions across the Taiwan Strait median line have become routine, large-scale exercises followed U.S. Speaker Nancy Pelosi's 2022 visit and Taiwan's 2024 presidential election, and Chinese leadership has explicitly tied 'national rejuvenation' to unification. Taiwan produces over 90% of the world's most advanced semiconductors, giving the dispute global economic stakes. Japan, the Philippines, and Australia have increasingly aligned with U.S. deterrence postures, while ASEAN states remain wary of confrontation. The committee must weigh principles of self-determination and democratic governance against the One China framework, examine deterrence and crisis-management mechanisms, and consider economic and humanitarian implications of conflict or coercion in the Strait.

Key players

Protecting Democratic Rights of Displaced Populations Amid Rising Populism

The number of forcibly displaced people worldwide has surpassed 117 million, according to UNHCR, driven by conflicts in Syria, Ukraine, Sudan, Myanmar, Venezuela, and the Sahel, alongside climate-related displacement. The 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, together with the 2018 Global Compact on Refugees and Global Compact for Migration, set out core protections but say little about political participation, civic rights, or long-term integration. As displacement has become protracted - with average refugee situations now lasting over a decade - the gap between humanitarian protection and democratic inclusion has widened. Simultaneously, populist and nativist movements have reshaped politics in major host states, framing migration as a security and identity threat. Policies such as the UK-Rwanda scheme, externalization deals with Libya and Tunisia, pushbacks at EU borders, and restrictions on asylum in the United States have tested the limits of the non-refoulement principle. Diaspora voting, consular protection, statelessness, and transnational repression of exiled dissidents have become live issues, with regimes from Belarus to Eritrea reaching across borders to surveil or coerce their citizens abroad. The committee must consider how to protect the civil and political rights of refugees, asylum seekers, internally displaced persons, and diaspora voters in an era when host-state politics is increasingly hostile and origin-state repression increasingly extraterritorial.

Key players

Humanitarian Law, Security, and the Protection of Democratic Institutions in War-Torn States

International humanitarian law - codified in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, their Additional Protocols, and customary IHL - governs the conduct of armed conflict and the protection of civilians, but says relatively little about the survival of democratic institutions during war. Yet sustaining parliaments, courts, electoral commissions, local government, and independent media is often decisive for legitimate post-conflict order, as experience in Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Mali has shown. UN Security Council Resolutions 1325 on women, peace and security and 2532 on conflict ceasefires during COVID-19 have expanded the normative architecture but enforcement remains uneven. Ukraine's continued parliamentary functioning under martial law, Sudan's collapse into open war between rival armed forces, the erosion of state institutions in Haiti under gang control, and the Taliban's dismantling of representative structures in Afghanistan illustrate the range of contemporary challenges. Attacks on election workers, judges, journalists, and humanitarian personnel have increased, and disinformation and cyber operations now target institutions as much as armies. The ICC, hybrid tribunals, and universal jurisdiction cases test whether accountability can keep pace. The committee must address how the international community can protect democratic institutions, civil society, and the rule of law in active conflicts and fragile post-conflict settings without undermining sovereignty or fueling further escalation.

Key players

Key terms & resources

The concepts worth knowing before MUNROT 2026, plus lessons and profiles to go deeper.

Non-State Armed Groups Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural Committee (SOCHUM)Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)Responsibility to Protect (R2P)Proxy War Statelessness

Lessons

Bite-sized lessons to build the basics

Topic-Specific Deep Dives

Lesson

How Committees Work

Lesson

Understanding the UN System

Lesson

Economic Data for Country Research

Lesson

Courses

Guided courses that go deeper on the topic

Security Council Simulation

Course

MUN Delegate Fundamentals

Course

Research & Country Analysis

Course

Public Speaking for MUN

Course

In the news

Recent reporting to ground your prep

Justice Denied: 2.7 Million Voters Deleted in West Bengal

Story

DNC Autopsy Backlash Exposes Ken Martin’s Weak Hand

Story

DNC’s Harris Autopsy Exposes Democrats’ Real Fault Line

Story

DNC Autopsy Puts Biden on the Hook for Harris’s Loss

Story

Frequently asked questions

MUNROT 2026

May 27–29, 2026Rotterdam, NetherlandsIn-person

ConcludedRegistration closed

Country perspectives

Where the most-relevant 1 countries stand on the dominant committee topic. Click through for the full country profile.

Netherlands

As the host nation, NLD provides the logistical and cultural backdrop for the conference, embodying a commitment to international cooperation and diplomacy.

Role in topic

Topics & background

The history behind each committee topic and the states that shape it.

Democracy at the Crossroads: Governing in an Era of Fragmentation

Key players

Can Democracy Defend Itself? Militant Democracy and the Limits of Tolerance

Key players

Economic Coercion and Sanctions as Instruments of Democratic Protection and Geopolitical Pressure

Key players

Preventing the Use of Armed Groups to Suppress Civil Liberties and Democratic Participation

Key players

Cyber Warfare and the Militarization of Information: Establishing International Norms in an Unregulated Digital Battlespace

Key players

Cross-Strait Tensions and the Future of Taiwan: Democratic Self-Determination, Security, and International Response Options

Key players

Protecting Democratic Rights of Displaced Populations Amid Rising Populism

Key players

Humanitarian Law, Security, and the Protection of Democratic Institutions in War-Torn States

Key players

Key terms & resources

The concepts worth knowing before MUNROT 2026, plus lessons and profiles to go deeper.

Non-State Armed Groups Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural Committee (SOCHUM)Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)Responsibility to Protect (R2P)Proxy War Statelessness

Lessons

Bite-sized lessons to build the basics

Topic-Specific Deep Dives

Lesson

How Committees Work

Lesson

Understanding the UN System

Lesson

Economic Data for Country Research

Lesson

Courses

Guided courses that go deeper on the topic

Security Council Simulation

Course

MUN Delegate Fundamentals

Course

Research & Country Analysis

Course

Public Speaking for MUN

Course

In the news

Recent reporting to ground your prep

Justice Denied: 2.7 Million Voters Deleted in West Bengal

Story

DNC Autopsy Backlash Exposes Ken Martin’s Weak Hand

Story

DNC’s Harris Autopsy Exposes Democrats’ Real Fault Line

Story

DNC Autopsy Puts Biden on the Hook for Harris’s Loss

Story

Country perspectives

Topics & background

Key terms & resources

Frequently asked questions

Related conferences

THIMUN The Hague 2026 Conference

58th Annual THIMUN The Hague Conference 2026

THIMUN The Hague 2026 Opening Ceremony

The Hague International Model United Nations 2026

THIMUN The Hague 2026

The Hague International Model United Nations – 58th Edition (2026)

Related conferences

THIMUN The Hague 2026 Conference

58th Annual THIMUN The Hague Conference 2026

THIMUN The Hague 2026 Opening Ceremony

The Hague International Model United Nations 2026

THIMUN The Hague 2026

The Hague International Model United Nations – 58th Edition (2026)

Country perspectives

Topics & background

Key terms & resources

Frequently asked questions

Related conferences

THIMUN The Hague 2026 Conference

58th Annual THIMUN The Hague Conference 2026

THIMUN The Hague 2026 Opening Ceremony

The Hague International Model United Nations 2026

THIMUN The Hague 2026

The Hague International Model United Nations – 58th Edition (2026)

Related conferences

THIMUN The Hague 2026 Conference

58th Annual THIMUN The Hague Conference 2026

THIMUN The Hague 2026 Opening Ceremony

The Hague International Model United Nations 2026

THIMUN The Hague 2026

The Hague International Model United Nations – 58th Edition (2026)