Press Corps ArticlesAll articles have been written by delegates of the Press Corps based on their personal observations. Any opinions expressed are written in tandem with the policy of the newspaper the delegates have been assigned to, and do not reflect the delegate's own biases. If you have any queries, concerns or complaints, please email email@example.com.
From Hacking To Sabotaging- Has Humanity Doomed Itself?
By China Daily 1
If you are currently reading this, that means that China Daily has not fallen- at least, not yet. It won’t be long before another asteroid strikes again, and where will it land is the biggest concern we can have.
It was reported that there has been discord throughout the committee known as Accelerando, where nations gather to discuss the topic of space exploration and innovation. It started off simply with creating colonies and infrastructure on planets but ended in the brutal destruction and collapse of many nations that have been struck by asteroids.
The concern was that certain nations were sabotaging others with constant talks of hacking and dirty bombing (covertly planting bombs within other countries), this United Nations Committee was far from anything considered peaceful.
Unknown to them at the time, a new spaceship designed by Luxembourg to mine resources from asteroids and sending it back to earth had ended up sending asteroids off-path, hurling towards Earth.
With signs of the incoming asteroids, it threw the committee into a panic, they had to get out of the way of danger to be able to figure out a solution. The delegates found themselves traveling onto a space station away from Earth, but lost communications with Earth.
During this time, China had argued that there are billions of people that are counting on them for help. China had proposed a solution to the impending doom, to use lasers developed by China to destroy incoming asteroids. Along with this, they wanted to use South African mining lasers equipped on BEEBOS, which are basically drones.
Despite their best efforts, this idea was turned down, leaving no current solutions to the predicament that Earth faces. China is currently in the highest state of emergency it has ever been. All of the workers are focused on repairing damage lasers to counter the asteroids. The question we are left with is this: is there enough time to protect ourselves? How will we repair Earth?
Despite the questions, we might have to face reality as it is. There has been talk from nations about starting anew, and even leaving people to suffer. Is the world really going to be destroyed by the hands of humanity, by one innovation from a nation? At least, there were talks of creating a “LightSaber”... Thanks, Japan, for being innovative.
Everything I (And Everyone Else) Don’t Understand About Ad-Hoc
By China Daily 2
15TH CENTURY, CRIMEA—Tensions are rising as intense disputes over how to handle the Ottoman-Crimean conflict; Ottoman troops have occupied religious centers in Crimea after repeated attacks on Muslims.
Just kidding—No one knows what’s going on, and I don’t either.
Here’s the thing about ad-hoc committees: delegates know next to nothing about the topic up until the moment they step in the room. As a result of this need-to-know basis, ad-hoc committees are usually taken up by more competitive, experienced delegates. This means a lot of them are eager to speak.
Still, in the two hours that I was in the room, only about a third of delegates spoke regularly. Did the other delegates have nothing to say? Were they confused? I wouldn’t blame them.
The committee takes place in 1478, in Crimea, commonly known as a valuable territory due to its strategic location at the forefront of the Black Sea. Formerly a protectorate of the Ottoman Empire, tensions are high as Crimeans scramble to form alliances with the likes of Poland and Lithuania.
But let me ask you a question: have you heard of this conflict, ever? Think back to your world history classes when you were a puny freshman in high school. Was there ever any mention of this event that could’ve potentially sparked a war?
No. You didn’t. But don’t feel embarrassed—neither has my history teacher, who possesses a masters’ degree in Medieval Studies. And, as you can probably guess, I didn’t either.
So that’s why I sat in the committee room for two straight hours, absolutely clueless.
I even went as far as to enlist the help of the chairs for some context and still found myself pretty clueless.
Sadly, in the end, the committee didn’t pass the majority of proposed resolutions. What was to be done of these Crimeans and the potential bloodshed they faced? Truth to be told, I never found out.
So, while the Ottoman-Crimean conflict may have been put to rest centuries ago, rest assured that it will live on in my mind as the most confusing committee in the history of ad-hoc committees. Kudos to all the delegates and Chair members brave enough to tackle it!
By Le Monde 2
Today, during the European Union session, the delegates replied with regard to Brexit. Upon my arrival, the delegates were in unmoderated caucus and exposing their positions in this regard. The delegates were divided into two groups and had started writing about the resolutions.
The first resolution was sponsored by Romania, Ireland, Sweden, Luxembourg and Finland, and signed by Croatia, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, Austria, recognizing the threat of Brexit and its implications for the European Union. It expressed awareness of the economic, social and political ramifications of a soft or hard Brexit, its appreciation of Britain's national sovereignty and its ability to make the right decision for people, the accountability of immigrants to UK as well or British citizens living in other nations within the EU, and that trade has a major impact on a nation's economy since economic stability is crucial for nations. The second, instead, was in favor of Brexit, but with compromises: open market, freedom to negotiate with other nations, 5 years option to return, EU laws until 2020, visa-free migration.
Of great success was the request to create a soft Brexit, which was supported by the Czech Republic. The Republic wanted a free market to trade with Germany and the United Kingdom; Spain disagreed with Brexit, because it would have a negative impact on their economy and Italy, Malta, Cyprus, Romania, Ireland, Greece, all agreed to maintain a free market, since a possible Brexit would lead to negative economic impacts that could cause crisis. The most impressive statement was that of Turkey, stating that if Brexit were implemented, it would lose $ 3.7 billion in trade surpluses.
Therefore, France wished to limit the amount of Brexit extensions. Smaller nations could not keep existing in a state of limbo, tentatively planning for a hard or a soft Brexit they didn’t know about for sure.
The Arab League's Latest Resolution Sentences Thousands of Yemini to Death by Air Strike
By Al Jazeera 1
On Saturday November 11, the Arab League passed a resolution that will result in the deaths of thousands of Yemeni by Saudi Arabian airstrikes. The resolution sought to provide a path to peace between the government of Yemen and the rebel group Houthi- however, this piece of legislation is anything but peaceful.
The Air Strike Resolution (ASR) was sponsored by delegates of Lebanon, Sudan, and Saudi Arabia. After hours or rigorous debate within the league, the ASR was passed. From the beginning of the session, the delegation hailing from Saudi Arabia as well as a countless number of other delegates continued to credit Iran with the supposed funding of the Houthi rebellion. This was the single largest piece of reasoning backing the Resolution.
The largest part of this omnibus package is the move to continue Saudi airstrikes backed by the United States on innocent Yemeni citizens. The largest beneficiary of the resolution was the government of Yemen. By continuing to receive Saudi aid, the government was able to increase the power it has over its citizens, despite putting them in harm’s way by allowing for aerial strikes.
Before the resolution was passed, the delegate from Saudi Arabia was heard saying; “diplomacy is impossible so long as Iran continues to support the rebels”. The delegate later remarked; “peace will be on the table when Iran resolves to stop supporting the Houthi in all forms”.
As of 6:00 EST, Iran has given no official response to the resolution.
Young Algeria Decides on International Involvement, Though Indecisively
By Al Jazeera 2
ALGIERS, 1962—Algeria has faced a long and bloody struggle for independence. The path forward has been marked by violence, terrorism, and genocide on the part of the French government.
Today, discussion began among Algerian leaders to decide on their relationship with the world, resulting in two major decisions.
The discussion was prompted by the French government’s announcement that pied-noirs (Algerian-born French) would not be permitted to return to France if they were in Algeria at the time of the announcement. This set off a series of riots during which pied-noir neighborhoods and churches were burned by indigenous Algerians.
Committee members Zohra Drif, Jean Sénac, and Hélèn Cixous, presented a resolution that was passed. It advocated for the integration of pied-noirs into Algerian society through education programs between pied-noirs and native Algerians, enacted by forces of the United Nations and African Union officials. It also enacted programs to disarm all Algerians, pied-noirs and natives. According to sponsor Drift: “[this] is the start we need for Algeria.”
After the passage of this resolution, members Albert Camus, Messali Hadj, Jaques Derrida, and Jean Pélégri presented a plan for Algeria’s long term relationship with the United Nations. It outlined a plan in which they would temporarily join the UN on a 6-month basis before reviewing their grounds for permanent membership at the end of this period. During these 6 months, soldiers would be stationed on, according to sponsor Hadj, “every street corner in Algiers.” This resolution was not passed; the decision was made soon after member Cixous questioned the sponsors: “how do we prevent empty [United Nations] platitudes?”
Algeria has now enacted the framework of a short-term plan for their stability as a nation, but the debate about their long-term position in the international community continues. Many committee members are currently unsure of what the FLN’s status should be after the revolution, nor is there any degree of certainty about respiration for the war, though both topics are to be discussed.
One piece of happy news was found, though. Close to the end of the committee session, FLN leader Hocine Ait Ahmed received a carnation from a secret admirer, bringing a smile to the committee member’s face despite the crisis.
The Accomplishments of the Members of the Seneca Falls Convention
By Guardian 1
Seneca Falls, New York 1848
The members of the Seneca Falls Convention have undertaken the daunting task of discussing the matter of women’s rights from a political, social, and moral perspective in a society dominated by the patriarch.
A large portion of the members in attendance are women; however, the voices of men are also well represented. Some husbands, such as James Mott, have traveled to New York to discuss the rights of their wives and daughters. There is even an African-American man named Frederick Douglass in attendance here today.
Beyond discussion, the goals of this convention are to pass individual resolutions on the topics of education, suffrage, marriage equality, and abolition and to advocate for these resolutions beyond the conference.
On the topic of education, the members of this committee agreed that men and women are equal and deserve the same educational opportunities in all levels of education. These resolutions would require institutions to be coeducational from primary school to higher education. Beyond being allowed to attend these institutions, women would be encouraged to pursue higher education through public acts and demonstrations. Moreover, a woman’s educational opportunity would not be dependent on her marital or social status.
On the topic of marital equality, the members focused on ensuring that a woman has security and rights in all stages of life, specifically after marriage. The members reaffirmed that women should be able to initiate the divorce process with consensus that divorce is not promoted or encouraged through this resolution. The members also spent a significant amount of time debating the distribution of land among the family after a husband dies. This debate sparked questions regarding if it is in their jurisdiction to decide how families deal with their individual economic matters. The final resolution was to follow the will of the spouse unless there is not one in place.
The topics of abolition and suffrage are still in debate.
While the work being accomplished in the duration of this convention is incredibly important to the members in attendance, there is cause for question regarding how the people not in attendance will react to the created resolutions. Regardless of how the public will react, the admirable passion of the women and men in pursuit of gender equality is an accomplishment in itself.
The Elephant in the Room
By Guardian 2
Through the process of Brexit, a problem has arisen. The Irish border is at odds about commerce, but the British Parliament is in agreeance of a “soft border”- this is an open border with limited restrictions. Despite this, some nuances were still being considered,
The directive named “The Elephant in the Room” was debated during a parliament session, the fundamental ideas entailed recognizing Northern Ireland and the creation of a soft border. The committee wholeheartedly agrees on the clauses about the control of UK border for themselves and the free movement between Irish people. This is a great triumph yet one point of contention is argued: “the movement of goods and the enforcement behind this.”
Within this paper, a proposed solution is mentioned. A licensing system will be in place for cross border commerce, the Irish border will remain open to the free movement of people AND small businesses. Larger business (greater than 125 employees and a yield of 1 million material/year) will need licensing to pass the border. James Brokenshire, the secretary of foriegn commerce says: “We would not want to trouble the mom and pop shops, we want accountability for these large businesses! Not the hard-working people of Ireland.”
This statement sparks controversy as the question of enforcement comes into play. James Brokenshire proposes a friendly amendment to “The Elephant in the Room”, regarding a database that needs a log of the date of border cross, time and specific goods that are transported.
This customs agreement is under the notion that taxing smaller cross border business is beneficial to the UK itself but detrimental to small businesses. It is agreed that small businesses do not have to care for personal consumptions such as crossing the border for leisure. In order to regulate peace, smaller businesses will not be taxed.
After passing with a simple majority vote, the committee is alerted via crisis that Ireland and Northern Island are extremely happy with this deal and the Irish border deal is fully resolved.
The Race Against Climate Change
By Yomiuri Shimbun 1
The United Nations Climate Change Conference has diverse delegates from all parts of the globe. They all created different blocks and resolutions to help come up with ways to battle climate change.
These delegates had already created blocks and resolutions that helped combat climate change. All of the delegates had very similar resolutions that related to deforestation, transportation, rising sea levels and education programs even if they were not in the same block.
All of the delegates emphasized and discussed deforestation and how to combat it. The delegates were talking about how deforestation is affecting their countries, and the environment. The delegate from Costa Rica had stated, “Deforestation is a result of agriculture.” Billions of trees are cut down for agriculture. That deforestation impacts climate change significantly as trees are vital for our environment and wellbeing.
The delegates from Brazil and the United States of America stated that they were working on resolutions to fight deforestation, promote sustainability, boost the economy, and raise awareness about the situation of climate change and the consequences of it. These resolutions would significantly help our environment and slowly reverse the speedy process of climate change.
The delegates from Iran, Afghanistan, and Colombia had similar ideas and said that they were working on resolutions also about reducing deforestation, improving transportation to make it more eco-friendly and introducing an education program.
Other delegates were trying to focus on other important topics that relate to climate change such as rising sea levels. The rising sea levels can be incredibly dangerous to countries that are coastal or are below sea level. The delegate from the United Kingdom had stated that for “coastal nations below sea levels, it’s not easy for them, they are at a disadvantage.” Rising sea levels cause glaciers to melt, this would essentially sink many coastal countries like the Maldives would be in danger in the sea levels rise high enough.
Helping to reverse the process of climate change is incredibly important. If not we could end up killing the only planet that we have.
Those who Fight for Fairness in the World Should Practice What They Preach.
Yomiuri Shimbun 2
JAPAN 1946-48--Those who fight for fairness should themselves stand for what they preach. Today reconvened the committee to form the so-called “Tokyo Trials”. In a rather absurd manner, many fought for the so-called Japanese “criminals” to be tried under laws that were created after the alleged crimes. This is an obvious and gross circumvention of the basic ideas of decency.
While certainly some such as defense council Miyake Shotaro, understood and respected the need to understand and respect these boundaries; many such as Ju-ao Mei set out with the intention of expressly trying the accused under this morally corrupt pretense.
Two main working papers were presented, the first being the morally faulty paper sponsored by Ju-ao Mei, Ivan Michyevich Zaryanov and Joseph Keenan (a man whose primary job is to secure a guilty conviction). This resolution would allow for those who have allegedly committed crimes, serious or not, to be executed based on laws defined after they are accused of having committed the crimes.
It does not take much to expose the absurdities in such an idea. Apply this to anything else and you would begin to understand how wrong this is. For example, it would be unreasonable and unfair to change the expectations required to graduate from a university and then retroactively revoke the diplomas from everyone who has previously graduated from said university. Next, everyone who had previously held a diploma from this university was executed for presenting false educational credentials.
Thankfully the honorable Miyake Shotaro along with others presented a reasonable resolution--which ultimately began to be merged with the other due to its superior nature. This resolution made clear that “victors could not establish new crimes and new definitions and punish prisoners according to them” This assertion is in a clear moral league of its own when placed in contrast with the inhumane, unfair ideas presented by the rest of this committee.
At long last, toward the end of the day’s committee, the room came around to the only sensible and ethical move of merging their highly unethical and morally corrupt resolution with that of the honorable Miyake Shotaro and his block, leaving this paper with a sense of hope for some fairness in the world after all.
China and Japan Keep Behaving Based on Their Own Interests
By Sydney Morning Herald
SPECPOL (Special Political and Decolonization Committee) is one of main committees of the UN General Assembly, dealing with a diverse set of political issues, including UN peacekeeping, the peaceful uses of outer space and decolonization.
My visit this afternoon consisted of attending a debate session on the Senkaku-Diaoyu Island Dispute, a group of five islands and three rocks, whose geographical position interposes China and Japan. A dispute between China and Japan, on which country should own such territory, has been going on since late 1960s, when the ECAFE, after having surveyed the South China Sea, found oil and gas deposits beneath such islands’ surface. Historically, Chinese peoples inhabited those territories; however, the first Sino-Japanese war resulted in a Japanese conquest, legitimated by the Treaty of Shimonoseki. After World War II and the occupation perpetrated by the US on Japan, the Okinawa Reversion Agreement allowed Japan to be in control of such islands once again. As soon as oil and gas were found in the South China Sea, however, Chinese dissent started growing more and more.
While China claims its right to control such geographical zones in the name of a historical heritage of dominance, Japan is empowered by a document which asserts its actual dominance.
During the moderated caucus, countries’ policies and sympathies for China or Japan were outlined. Present African countries such as, but not limited to- Ethiopia and Mali- showed a clear sympathy for China, due to the financial help China gave them. Russia also oriented its leaning towards China. On the other hand, Japan had the possibility to earn more consensuses than China. So, the countries who were leaning towards Japan instead were USA, Germany, France and Turkey.
During the unmoderated caucus, working papers were being shaped. Three different blocs were created. The first one, encouraged by Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Cambodia and India, was slightly Japan-oriented, having proposed a division of such territories by 70 percent for Japan and 30 percent for China, affirming the fact that official documents overcome past dominance, and a buffer zone of 80-square-meters. The second one, proposed by Japan, USA, Germany and Turkey, was definitely Japan-oriented, wanting to give Japan absolute dominance on those islands. The last one, proposed by China and Russia was China oriented instead, wanting to give China absolute dominance over such islands.
Women in Politics: The Path to Participation for Latin American and Southeast Asian Women
By Times of India 1
The life of a woman in Latin America or Southeast Asia is often plagued with discrimination, opposition, and a feeling of invisibility. Because they have never been taught to speak their minds, women truly believe that they are not able to contribute to society. Because of this miseducation, there is an extreme shortage of Latin American and Southeast Asian women in politics.
The UN Women committee is currently working to remedy this issue. Through discussion and debate, the delegates in the committee have begun to reach a consensus about what actions should be taken to create a better environment for women in these areas.
The first action that the UN Women committee would like to take would create educational platforms that teach women how to vote. This is a vital step that allows these women to dip their toes into the idea of participating in politics without putting themselves out publicly. These platforms would help to create a more politically conscious female population in nations where education is scarcely found.
The second movement that the delegates have elected to make would educate women on how to further get involved in politics and empower them to do so. These campaigns could include bringing powerful women to speak around the world and creating social media platforms that inspire women to get involved.
The final action of the UN Women committee would educate boys and men on the subject of women in government and create safer work environments in politics. This is a completely understandable addition—women shouldn’t be condemned for speaking their minds in government when their male counterparts are making the environment unsafe.
These ideas and actions are all excellent and would likely create a safer and generally better environment for women in political positions, and they could absolutely make a difference in creating more gender diversity within Latin American and Southeast Asian governments.
We are, however, neglecting to consider one point: we have no idea how to implement these ideas on an international level. Each nation has its own, unique cultural identity within our world, and it will be extremely difficult to push education and safety laws on countries that do not want to change.
The idea of encouraging women in politics is an excellent one; however, before we can reach the level of inclusivity that we strive for, we have to look further into the courses of action that we can and must take to achieve our goals.
Preaching Peace: DISEC’s Drive to Change the World of IEDs
By Dawn 1
Down to eart, DISEC swiftly agreed upon what the fate of Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) and how to deal with them across the board.
Split into three blocs, being lead by mainly the delegations of USA, China, Egypt, and South Africa, all decided to vote and pass in conjunction, each bloc focussed on one of their specific concerns: bloc one tackled the issues of counter-terrorism, bloc two tackled the need of advancements in technology and the creation of a tracking committee, and bloc three focussed on country-specific solutions.
Bloc one focussed majority of their paper on creating a database as a way to combat IEDs. Their database would mainly track what region, companies, and person/group buys the most parts and chemicals that could be used to create a bomb. Some of the key chemicals they tracked were TATO and mercury fulminate. Additionally, they created a committee that would continue to be in charge of following up on the regions and areas deemed unsafe due to how much was bought and sold there, and would be in charge of filing a case if something was to happen.
Bloc two focused mainly on getting funds by donation so that they could invent a plethora of new devices to prevent and protect against IEDs. Their first device was based on bomb clearing; their goal was to create a robot that could be used to first detect the common substances in a bomb and then when the bomb was identified, it would go and disarm the bomb with guidance from an offsite bomb squad. Moreover, they wanted to create secure vehicles that could go around and collect any leftover bombs, residue, and/or chemicals where they could then dispose of them in a newly established location safely to stop further access to them.
Bloc three focussed on country-specific plans. Most prominently they wanted to educate create specific plans for the countries that need it most (third world, then second, then first). These education plans would be told and created for the general public, police, and border patrol/securities. Their other main focus was on how to classify countries on rather they are developed or undeveloped and if they are third world, second world, and first world, just because this was an integral part of their plan.
All three papers passed unanimously. Overall, DISEC as a whole worked collaboratively and addressed the pressing issue of IEDs in an efficient effective way.
Border Dispute Outbreaks at Indo-Pakistani Border
By Dawn 2
11/9/19 Punjab, Pakistan
Today at the Kartarpur Corridor, which connects the Sikh shrines of Dera Baba Nanak Sahib in India and Gurdwara Darbar Sahib in Pakistan, a bomb was detonated moments after its opening ceremony, killing 250 civilians four kilometers inside of the Pakistani border.
Following the reporting of his terrible tragedy at the Security Council by esteemed BBC anchor Aditya Kapur, chaos immediately broke out. The primary cause of this was the accusations being hurled in both directions by the delegations of Pakistan and India, blaming each other for the atrocity. This was compounded as more information poured in, informing the council that: the bombs used were made in France, the French president Emmanuel Macron and Belgian Prime Minister Sophie Wilmès were seen exiting an unpublicized meeting in Brussels, and that the French delegate to the UN earlier that day made a statement claiming that only the P5 members of the UN (France, Britain, America, China, Russia) should have access to nuclear weapons.
Three blocs quickly formed among the delegates in the Security Council. The delegations of Pakistan, Kuwait, and Indonesia joined together as they believed that the attacks were religious in nature and wanted to ensure Islamic ideals were represented in the Council. Belgium and France joined together to further their goals of disarmament. Following the lead of the delegation of China, the delegations of the US, Russia, Great Britain, Peru, Equatorial Guinea, and India all pledged humanitarian support for the civilians in need.
Although this story is breaking at this very moment, as it develops, DAWN is hoping to be at the forefront of its reporting, in order to provide its readers with the best, most up-to-date information as the story unfolds. Who was responsible for this atrocity? What is France’s role? How will they be punished? Find the latest updates at our website.
What Measures are our Nations Taking to Prevent Sex-Based Infanticide?
By China Daily 1
Sex-based infanticide, or infanticide in general, is a large issue that is prevalent across the world and practiced in many different levels of severities, whether it be sexist thoughts or the pressure that women face that may cause them to feel that they need to go through with this act. Whatever the conditions may be, the committee of the United Nations International Children's Emergency Funds, or UNICEF, was tasked to debate the issue and come up with plausible solutions that could help lower the rates of infanticide around the world.
During the debate, there were supposedly three groups with different opinions but share many similar ideas with each other. The groups came up with many acronyms for their groups that aligned with their views. One of these was known as ICED, standing for Integration, Criminalization, Education, and Data. The group emphasizes the tracking of repeated cases of sex-based infanticide and federal punishments for those who repeatedly commit these crimes.
Another group was RED, standing for Rights, Education, and Data collection. This group consisted of countries such as China, Lithuania, USA, and more. They are putting great emphasis on the methods of collecting data in order to find and label areas as either low, medium, or high-risk and provide education in those areas to inform women about the equality of males and females. The last group did not have a name but provided similar solutions.
China and the other nations actively discussed educating parents/women about the importance of both genders, and how one is not more important than another. China has a policy in place delimiting one child per family, because of the concerns of overpopulation and the effects it could have on the country as a whole.
In recent years due to sex-based infanticide, China’s population has a surplus of males, while females are lacking. China has been concerned with this issue and has reformed its policy to allow for parents that have one child to have two children.
Along with these efforts, China will be working alongside other countries in RED to provide further solutions to not only China, but countries all over the world.
Climate Change: A Ticking Time Bomb
By China Daily 2
SANTIAGO, CHILE—This past weekend, the United Nations Climate Change Conference gathered in Santiago de Chile for a heated discussion on cracking the code to the ticking time bomb that is global warming.
Six blocs, consisting of EU member states, the United States, India, China, developing nations, and other developed nations were created to propose solutions to lowering the global temperature increase by 2100—which has, by a general scientific consensus, been projected to be 4.2 °C. It has long been established that we should prevent the global temperature from rising any more than 2.1°C.
Delegates were informed that “if no action (was) taken and Greenhouse Gas emissions (carried) on, Business as Usual (BAU), the global temperature (would) rise by 4.5°C—islands (would) disappear. Manhattan (would) flood.”
Armed with this knowledge, delegates of all blocs began crafting proposals that were made up of six statistics: the year in which peak emissions were projected, the year reductions would begin, the preventing of deforestation, promotion of aforestation, and contribution to the Green Climate Fund (GCF).
Delegates scrambled to calculate the most plausible and efficient numbers they could.
Developed nations—the EU, United States, China, and others—presented ambitious goals. $25 billion, by far the largest contribution to GCF, was promised by the member states of the EU. India, promising the prevention of 100% of feasible deforestation, presented lofty goals to the committee.
Nations with goals to develop their economy acknowledged their reliance on fossil fuels, as well as the double-pronged issue they face with reducing emissions and fighting the effects of climate change—which often affects these nations most. These nations were given the option to allocate funds from GCF in place of contributing to the $100 billion goal.
Even with ambitious proposals, however, the global temperature was still set to rise by 3.1°C. More needed to be done to mitigate the issue.
A second round of proposals was made after a 20-minute period of discussion with delegates’ respective blocs. Even while the percentage of reduction of Greenhouse Gas emissions has increased, reduction years set back years earlier, the lowest global temperature rise delegates could come to was 2.6°C still 0.5°C higher than the projected temperature that could send our planet into catastrophe.
As global temperature continues to rise, efforts like the UN Climate Change Conference continue to be made to combat the consequences of global warming.
Climate change is a race—and we have to win.
UNODC’s Unanimous Passage of the TEA Papers
By Al Jazeera 1
On Nov.11, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime gathered to propose papers to address issues concerning the trade of counterfeit products and how they affect the global pharmaceutical industry.
The session began with each delegate sharing the struggles of their nation and its general problems on the topic of counterfeits. Delegates from Egypt and Mexico expressed how they currently have a large security presence on international ports of entry.
Other nations, including Latvia, Madagascar, Morocco, and Ireland expressed that they struggle on the domestic scale and seek to expand local measures in order to fix the problem.
Delegates shared their proposed papers after that moderated caucus. The first coalition, including Cuba, Egypt, Ireland, Panama, and Mexico, proposed their “TEA (Transparency, Education, Accountability) Papers.” The Papers’ main objective was to provide general solutions that would be easily applicable to both large, industrious countries, and smaller, developing nations. The notable features of the papers were their plans on education and a unique RFID program.
The “TEA Papers” increase awareness of counterfeit goods by ensuring that information about the issue is available in public areas and pharmacies. Another feature was the proposed legislation that mandated that all drugs have an RFID scannable code to ensure the legitimacy of the product and allow governments to track the goods.
After the proposal was finished and the opinions of delegates were expressed, the papers were put up for a vote. By unanimous consent, the papers were passed by the UNODC.
As The Crisis in Yemen Grows, Arab League Must Make the Correct Decision on International Involvement
By Al Jazeera 2
Since Yemen first began to experience conflict in the early 2010s, the humanitarian and military crisis has grown in scope and scale. Borne out of a clash between Iranian-backed Houthi rebels and democratic protesters, civil war has split the country, and created almost 15 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) scattered throughout Yemen. Today as the Arab League met in Cairo to discuss this crisis, the question of international intervention quickly arose.
Two main factions emerged during the debate. While both were arguing for aid to be implemented, the bloc headed by Palestine loudly denounced United States involvement in the region, while the Saudi Arabia-led bloc was more in favor of it. While these two blocks tabled their debate for the day in favor of discussing methods of dealing with the humanitarian crisis, the questions they tackled must still be considered.
The USA's latest involvement in the Middle East has been in Syria, where we have seen that nation’s democratic structures torn apart by conflict, mostly led by the US. Based on this alone, it’s clear that the United States should not over-engage in the Middle East’s issues. As Palestine so eloquently put it during the debate: “The US is not a friend.”
The proposition put forth by the Palestinian-led bloc was that instead, the EU would provide the best form of aid for the people of Yemen in restoring stability. The EU has long opposed the US-Saudi airstrike in the region. As their spokesperson for the Bureau of Special Action regarding airstrikes: “The EU reiterates the need to fully respect international humanitarian and human rights law, in particular concerning the protection of civilians.”
During an interview with Palestine, they expressed the hope that “[Since the EU] is a much broader range of opinions and goals, they will not be able to put as much pressure on the Arab League states compared to the US. They’re going to have a less partisan goal in the region.” As Palestine stated, the broad and nonpartisan goals of the EU will make it a much better partner, and compared to the US they have a much stronger track record of providing effective humanitarian aid.
As the debate continues later today, one can hope that a solution respecting the sovereignty of the Arab League, its ability to serve its own needs, and that assistance to the people of Yemen will be reached.
Amazon Board of Directors 2019 is an Accurate Portrait of Our Society
By Sydney Morning Herald 1
Throughout centuries, employer-employee relationships have shaped themselves into diverse and progressively better forms. From slaves to vassals, from subjects to employees, everyone has been disappointed, or hopeful for change, in terms of their own rights as both human beings and workers.
Amazon Board of Directors 2019 is a specialized reunion, composed of 14 members, whose aim is to solve current problems and propose new projects regarding the internal and external policy of a really important firm worldwide. The main concern of the committee was to write a working paper on how to improve employees’ working conditions. Many aspects were faced and discussed, such as, but not limited to: a worker’s wellbeing inside the environment of the warehouse, holidays, breaks, raising awareness on cases of mistreated associates and improving communication between boss and employee.
The first subtopic directors discussed was how complaints should be managed: a subclause of the working paper the board had already written last night affirmed the importance of an online server where workers could write feedback anonymously, while another one stated that a better supervisor-employee communicative relationship would be the solution.
Director Wilke, however, proposed an amendment in order to employ a new person to communicate workers’ stances and needs to the supervisor. An object of bustling debate was the question of holidays and breaks. There’s still not a unanimous clause since the board hadn’t voted at the time.
Still, their highly active debate gave the opportunity for interesting ideas to spring up; ideas such as the Reynolds-proposed 30-minute daily break that workers could split into parts, Nooy proposed a 10-minute break every 4 hours and, again, the nullification of universal daily break regulation since every worker has different needs due to personal situations, such as health.
On the question of holidays, religious matters were widely taken into account, especially by Director Stesifer. On the other hand, Weeks’ stance was based on not giving more holidays to people who needed spare time due to religious constraints but on giving everyone the same time one could manage however they wanted. Stesifer also proposed to inform supervisors about periods of constraints due to religious matters and discontinue punishing employees for their conditions.
Long-Term and Short-Term Solutions: How Should We Handle NTDs?
By Times of India 1
Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) have recently become a serious issue facing the UN’s World Health Organization (WHO); the committee has neglected to come to an agreement when it comes to where the UN’s funding should go regarding this issue.
Many fully-developed countries in the committee have stated that funds should go to the research of new potential NTDs that could harm affected populations in the long term. However, many underdeveloped nations claim that the UN should be working toward aiding distribution of education and aid to countries in the short term. These nations argue that, because their populations are dying off due to current issues, funding should be put toward eliminating these problems before being put toward the future.
These two positions, long-term action and short-term action, boil down into three main points: research, distribution, and education. Fully-developed nations are pushing for international research on potential future NTDs; underdeveloped countries refute this idea, stating that they simply cannot afford to be putting so much money into long-term research when their citizens are dying due to current issues.
These underdeveloped nations suggest that the UN’s main goal should be finding a cost- and time-efficient method for distributing vaccines and cures that have already been found to people in need. This action would require researchers to investigate various nations and areas and determine where the most aid should be distributed in order to better adapt to different circumstances and cultures.
The one point that both sides seem to agree on is action to educate the population about potential causes, symptoms, and methods of prevention for the NTDs affecting them. These educational provisions would ensure that in-school and online courses outlining these points would be available for these populations. The delegates have also agreed that current organizations based in underdeveloped countries should be enlisted to provide citizens with community-specific aid.
The research and elimination of NTDs is an extremely important topic in today’s world; many people die each day because they do not have access to the resources they need to survive. The two polarized sides of the WHO have both posed important and valid points. However, they refuse to come to a consensus, which can and will be damaging to this cause should their stalemate continue.
If the committee cannot come to a compromise, no action will be taken, and those affected by NTDs across the world will continue to suffer.
Inside the Tokyo Trial
By Yomiuri Shimbun 1
The Tokyo Trial was created to decide who to punish for Japan’s war crimes in World War 2. There are twenty-eight people who are officially on trial for their crimes. The committee is diverse with different influential world leaders, Japanese generals, and the Japanese emperor.
So far, the committee has two blocs, and in these two blocs, there are many different ideas that were discussed. Delegates were discussing resources, funding, putting lower criminals on trial, putting generals or people who were in power on trial, not prosecuting anyone, or prosecuting everyone.
Ideas like those had divided the delegates in the committee. Throughout the discussions between delegates, many expressed their opinions on ways to prosecute the people on trial. Yoshida stated that, “We cannot try all our soldiers.” He was one of the delegates who wanted the people in power in power, such as generals, put on trial instead of having every soldier who did wrong to be prosecuted. Other people who agreed with him had other reasons to only put people of power on trial. Those who agreed had the reasoning of having those soldiers as their workforce to help rebuild Japan.
There were also delegates who thought that they should prosecute both soldiers and the people in power. One delegate stated that he would want to show amnesty, and not be too lenient or harsh on the convicted. The delegate had shared their thoughts on a system where, when they would grant amnesty, make sure that the convicted weren’t lying. The in-depth system they shared had some other delegates agreeing with him.
After World War 2, Japan had very little funding. Many delegates had shared that having these soldiers act as a workforce would help Japan with their rebuilding again. The Japanese Emperor Hirohito stated, “Japan has little funding to put the criminals on trial.” Instead, Emperor Hirohito wants to use resources to help the Japanese people instead of just executing them. Many other delegates also agreed with this.
While listening to the delegates discuss these topics, I had to agree with the delegate who said that they should prosecute the people in power and the regular soldiers. Compared to the other delegates’ opinions, this made the most sense as both are to blame. The people in power had ordered the soldiers to commit these horrible crimes yet the soldiers had done horrible acts on their own. Having only one group of people prosecuted would not make sense, as that is only a small part of the whole group which caused the problem.
Gene Editing Raises Ethical Questions Over Valid Medical Uses Versus Enhancement
By Yomiuri Shimbun 2
Thousands of expecting parents a year get the same bad news: your child has a life-threatening disease that will greatly decrease their quality of life, that is if they live at all. With the latest advancements in gene-editing technology, this prognosis no longer has to remain a static unchanging cloud over the child's existence before they are even born.
Heritable Gene Editing (HGE) allows for parents to effectively edit out mutations that cause life-threatening diseases in a child’s genes before they are even born. Prominent Bioethicists have promoted this use case of HGE but many are becoming concerned with the possibilities for parents with means to enhance their children by bending the definitions of “medically necessary”. For example, removing a gene shown to cause bad eyesight, or inserting a gene shown to cause rapid muscle development.
At the Second International Summit for Human Genome Editing, prominent bioethicists discussed the delineation between what is constitutes a valid life-threatening illness, versus so-called enhancements, and the best rules by which to regulate that.
Xiaomei Zhai, a prominent Chinese bioethicist, proposed one such system that gained support with many members, penned as “the Ten-Ten Rule”. Like its name, it indicates the system is based around two factors: any negative condition that more than 10% percent of the population of any given country has, would not be classified as a “medical necessity” that HGE could be applied to. The other 10 refers to a ban on editing for “enhancements” for 10 years.
While the Ten-Ten Rule garnered support from many in the room, many also raised concerns that the vague nature of the terms used in the paper, such as “negative condition” would lead to confusion down the road as the classification of different diseases would have to be proven to be negative conditions.
Mohammed Ghaly, an Islamic bioethicist, and a vocal opponent of the Ten-Ten Plan, presented his paper which he claims allows greater flexibility for individual governments to operate when “different ethics come into play”. His system would create an Ethics Board to oversee, approve, edit and deny proposals from different countries based on a set of overarching ethical guidelines. Plans to enforcement were to come, he said, probably in a second paper. Opponents of Ghaly’s plan argue that strict guidelines are not a bad thing.
The debate continues as the global medical community watches, and waits for guidance on this cutting edge of medical technology.
Distrust, Discrepancy, and A Dire Need for Solutions
By Dawn 1
The disassembly of the Ottoman Empire has given birth to a plethora of issues regarding foreign affairs and the future of Asia and the Middle East.
This Committee is made up of leaders, former peasants, explorers, etc… all with conflicting views on how to deal with the issues facing them, the Crimean Khanate; however, one objective is clear—they want to strengthen the Khanate through all of its troubles. From stolen firearms to a mass massacre, to church invasions, to peasants riots- there is a never-ending list of topics up for debate.
The majority of the committee seems to be in consensus on the fact that they need to avoid angering any bordering countries such as Poland and Lithuania, and that they need to avoid further conflicts with the Ottomans. Despite their common goal, there have been many ways discussed to approach this. For example, Simon, a Lithuanian nobleman along with Latyf, the son of the Khan, and many others within the committee have expressed wanting Crimea to become a “trading hub,” versus a military power.
Contrarily, Sambecca, a supporter of the Golden Horde, expressed an interest in making Crimea its own country. Additionally, he proposed delegating a budget to creating a weapon stronghold along with a strong united military that would be trained under Chambul, a cavalryman, versus the current individual-militia-type military. Moreover, people like Kosoy, a Russian prince, were worried about the peasant revolts causing turmoil and stated they wanted to stop and prevent future outbreaks. In the following directive, they proposed that by solving the robberies, church invasions, and peasant murderings, they would solve the peasant revolts, through the creation of an investigative body. This directive was passed unanimously.
In spite of their differences, the committee collectively passed 5 directives. Including one that provided 1501 horses to the Ottomans. Additionally, to further ensure a strong relationship with the Ottomans, they passed a directive creating a “Peace Committee” to go speak with the Ottoman ruler. Furthermore, they decided to set aside 1500 Akce for weapon research and stronghold building. Lastly, because of distrust, they passed a unanimous directive which created a board that would investigate all members of the committee.
All in all, Ad-Hoc was able to put aside their differences and attempt to solve some of the issues facing them; however, they still have a long way to go until a consensus is reached and everyone is content with the future of the Crimea Khanate.
DISEC: Noble Goal, Dangerous Precedents
By Dawn 2
The goal of ending the illicit arms trade is a noble one, but the steps taken by DISEC to combat it appear over the line to DAWN, as they interfere in nations’ abilities to defend themselves, and with their population’s right to privacy.
DISEC passed two resolutions which set dangerous precedents, according to DAWN, as to how the UN should handle international crises. First, in a bill sponsored by Indonesia, Norway, and Canada, they proposed a UN task force for the “protection” of arms caches in countries. While these arms caches can be stolen and sold on the black market, it is far too dangerous of a precedent for the UN, no matter how benevolent, to be allowed jurisdiction over a country’s means to protect itself from foreign attacks. Whether or not one believes the UN to be untrustworthy, this is a gross violation of every nation’s sovereignty and rights to self-defense.
Second, DISEC proposed a resolution that establishes a task force of “white-hat” hackers to track potentially dangerous digital transactions. While this may seem beneficial at first, these hackers would have unprecedented power, with the full might of the UN behind them, and can investigate anyone on their own whim.
When asked about the recruiting process for these hackers, the representative from Equatorial Guinea said: “I’m not sure, probably online through online applications, and, yeah, online applications.” This would allow anyone from anywhere to acquire this unprecedented amount of power as long as they displayed the hacking prowess and ideals required by the UN. This same resolution would track all purchases made with cryptocurrency online. DAWN sees these two clauses as an extreme threat to personal freedoms and internet privacy, because anyone can have this supreme power and everyone will be tracked.
Although they do not outweigh these two negatives, there were also some positive resolutions passed by DISEC. They promoted the education of police and customs officers on the ins and outs of the illicit weapons trades, an important step to better dismantling the trade as a whole. As well, they will attempt to better control the distribution of more powerful firearms, through consequence-free buybacks and scrubbing the internet of 3D printed firearms.
Despite these positives, the passing of the DISEC resolutions marks a dark day for the future of national and individual sovereignty everywhere, enabling more surveillance and control from the UN than ever before.
The Frankfurt Diet
Le Monde 2
Today the Frankfurt Parliament reunited to discuss two important topics: the constitution of the Germanic Confederation, and a unitary German state. It was immediately possible to see that there were two political camps: the liberal left and the moderate right. One was in favor of admitting Austria, the other one, Prussia. Despite being faced with such an important matter, the delegates were able to remain calm and speak and discuss to find a solution. The delegates split into two groups to try to unify their ideas so that it was possible to create Germany as efficiently as possible. Important was the resolution written by Otto Von Bismarck and supported by Carl Joseph Anton Mittermaier, Karl Vogt, Rudolf Haym, Baron Karl Ludwig von der Pfordten, Frederick William IV of Prussia. With this resolution, Bismarck was trying to agree with both the liberal left and the moderate right.
But regardless of the rest, I believe it is important that you know the position of each person present in the committee so that you can form your own idea about this topic. Therefore, the same question was asked to all those present in the parliament: "What is your idea for the structure of new Germany?
CARL TEODOR WELCKER: “I think it should be a constitutional monarchy with two equal Houses, one of Nobles, the other of Elected Commons. But the voices of the present must be heard.”
CARL JOSEP ANTON MITTERMAIER: “I support a constitutional monarchy with a Parliament that could represent the people.”
CARL VOGT: “Germany must be a democratic republic, completely led by capitalism, but at the same time, it must be focused on the problems of workers.”
WILHELM WOLFF: “I’m with the Reisser and the rest of our bloc, where there will be a bicameral Parliament and a monarch.”
FREDERICH WILHELM IV: “I think it should be made so that the monarch (likely me), will have the most power and the Parliament should only have minimal power.”
RUDOLPH HAYM: “Germany must be unified without Austria under a constitutional monarchy.”
JOHANN DROYSEN: Germany must be a centralized and unified state with a compromise between liberalism and absolutism.”
GABRIEL RIESSER: “We have a constitutional monarchy with a hierarchy of Kings, Dukes, and Counts under the Emperor.”
OTTO VON BISMARCK: “ It should be a constitutional monarchy with policy split on state and national level. The government is a compromise for liberals and conservatives”
PRINCE FELIX OF SCHWARZENBERG: “ I believe that it should be structured by a constitutional monarchy, altrought I personally feel it should have only i ruler that ha on absolute power”
FRIEDRICH DANIEL BASSERMANN: “It should be an unified state: three ties system similar to that of Otto Von Bismarck”
The Failures of the Parliament on the Topic of Immigration in Brexit
By The Guardian 1
Since the British people voted to remove themselves from the EU, the members of Parliament have attempted to create solutions to this issue now known as Brexit, which both satisfy the British government and occur before the given deadline set by the EU. However, the constant changes of the members of Parliament regarding their political parties and loyalties have made the issue entirely more difficult as the topic of border policy and immigration of people from other European nations continue to spark fierce opinions and directives among these various members.
After the party changes that had occurred during the last debate were disclosed at the beginnings of this proceedings, the members began to present and discuss many different directives that had been proposed. The major topics behind the directives were immigration and economic policies.
David Davis, a leader of the DUP, sponsored numerous directives with Gavin Robinson that followed their parties’ beliefs that a soft border needs to be in place between Ireland and England in order to ensure good relations between the countries and encourage economic prosperity of both nations.
While many of these directives did pass, they all faced a great amount of opposition from the Liberal Party, under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, who in conjunction with the Conservative Party, passed other directives in line with their beliefs that there needs to be more immigration policies put in place to regulate the immigrants entering the UK.
Additionally, the current Prime Minister, Yvette Cooper, has continued to assert herself and her Labor Party in the policies of both opposing parties. The party issues and switches have become so complicated that the Queen herself needed to interject the proceeding to remind the members to focus on the facts, solving Brexit, and the people of the UK rather than the interests of their own parties.
As these members continue to work hard to create a solution of Britain, we can only hope that the Parliament listens to the echoes of the Queen and act in the best interests of the British people rather than themselves. Regarding the issue of immigration, the Parliament needs to create a clear consensus that is aligned with the wants of the people.
Turkey’s Long Path to Ascension
By The Guardian 2
Today strikes the long path to Turkey’s ascension into the European Union, a country at odds between two continents. Through the efforts of Westernization, Turkey has sought membership within the EU; there is long-term negotiation on eligibility, as Turkey’s track record regarding Human rights and stability comes into question.
Two draft resolutions were proposed during this committee session, one spearheaded by Czechia, Hungary, Estonia and Turkey that targets the stability of the nation prior to membership. This entails a bilateral trade relationship between Turkey and the EU, with the guideline that Turkey is actively engaged in gaining capital and demonstrates apparent strides toward ascension. This effort manifests the absence of deadlines and punishments due to the potential for hindrance to a strong bilateral relationship with the EU.
As Turkey's current economic condition is experiencing turmoil, a precedent of financial stability is bestowed upon the nation. This, of course, is a guided effort to propel the country of Turkey to that place. This is through a central fund through the EU, which will not be compatible with Erdogan's current administration due to his calamitous nature. Yet, this paper holds an optimistic attitude on mitigating Turkey’s ill-considered human rights violations.
A huge point of contention regarding the Kurdistan ethnic demographic was brought up opposing this effort; this is the minority voice against this effort.
Denmark expressed their concern to a member of The Guardian,“The Kurdish minority has been repressed for decades. Because of that, a rebel group named the Kurdish Workers’ Party has sprung up and caused violence, which resulted in Turkey labeling the Kurds as a terrorist group [...] In addition to that, the Kurds have helped the EU, and the U.S in the fight [against] ISIS. If this paper does not acknowledge this, it will be detrimental to the fight in Syria.”
In response to this concern, the Turkish resolution has pushed the clause “The Kurdistan Working Party must be stopped in order for membership within the EU”. Within a series of unmoderated caucuses, Turkey and Denmark were at odds about this conflict, as the issue of representation of a demographic group came into the scope of eligibility. Turkey lashed out with an argument of suppression, stating “This resolution clearly suppresses military aggression and is addressed with a tone of compromise!”
This conflict was not exhausted as the reporter left the committee.