NTUMUN Bastion 2014 by Nishant Chemburkar

THE BASTION

2014

THEBASTION NTU MODEL UNITED NATIONS

www.ntumun.com

NTU MODEL UNITED NATIONS 2014

CRISES DRAMA

9th FEBRUARY 2014

INSIDE

IMPACT

riddled by crisis on both

days of conference

ECOSOC

was troubled by a

meltdown of

A rgentinian E conomy GA: Runner becomes

DISEC passes resolution,

LoN declares assassination of Hitler

UNHRC: Split consensus about gender equality debate

SC Chairs shocked as war is declared on USA

UNEP passes resolution:

IMPACT pushes on

ECOSOC solves

the chair

GA C hairs

in deep thought as the

committee erupts in drama

E ven in a serious debate on women ’ s (HRC), bloopers kept us all smiling

rights

n an interesting turn of events, this year’s edition of NTU MUN was full of crises and drama. With every committee declaring emergency situations during days 1 and 2 of the conference, there was not a dull moment to be found. The event ended with a bang too, with the GA providing lots to talk about after the council sessions ended. Following two failed resolutions, allegations were made against the Chair. This was followed by a Vote of No Confidence being unanimously passed by the committee against the Executive Board, the first ever time in NTU MUN! As the Chairs vacated the room, the committee runner was made Chair, leading to some hilarious results. In other news, IMPACT faced 2 crises, one on each day of the event, solving a few issues while leaving aside the rest. ECOSOC had a Chair who also decided to represent the country of Algeria during the sessions; UNHRC spent most of it’s time in unmoderated caucus; LoN made unsuccessful secret plans to assassinate Hitler; SC delegates were overheard asking the SC’s permission to declare war on the United States of America; DISEC did manage to pass a resolution, though not on the agenda set by the committee; and UNEP managed to solve iits pending issues. Read on to find out more about each of the above stated!

but not on main issue

despite two crises

marriage of policies is a go

Argentian default crisis

Please also visit the NTUMUN 2014 blog at munplugged2014.wordpress.com for more informal news, gossip and bloopers.

2014

THEBASTION

GENERAL ASSEMBLY

2014

THEBASTION

EDITORIAL

NTU MODEL UNITED NATIONS

Press Director’s Note

The Press Team

BY: A arushi M agan , K austav C haudhuri , S oham G hosh

PHOTOJOURNALISTS Hana Theresia | Dian Yu | Justina Lee | Melody Madhavan | Michael Anthony

PRESS DIRECTORS Aarushi Magan | Kaustv Chaudhuri | Soham Ghosh

ords can’t express how fulfilling this year’s production has been for us. With twice as many Press Delegates as last year, our team wrote a total of 30 articles in just a span of two days. We’re especially proud of the caliber that each of our Press Delegates has shown. The level of efficiency and creativity was extraordinaire. All Press Corps across the 8 different Councils put together high quality, individualistic reports that we hope will give you a glimpse of how the conference transitioned over the two days. Our Press Delegates were divided in groups of 3 to keenly observe the proceedings of each council. While the photojournalists scurried from one council to the next to capture beguiling photos of the proceedings, our core team

P hoto

joined the puzzle pieces to gain a clear picture of what went on. Our team comprised the most fluent writers, brilliant photographers and a talented artist, all of whom effectively depicted NTUMUN 2014. We hope that this year’s NTUMUN provided as much of a learning experience for you as it did for us. This understanding and camaraderie among participants fostered one of the most fruitful events that we have served. As we sit here writing this, we hope that this edition of The Bastion will walk you through our journey over the past 3 days. We loved and will cherish every moment of it, and we wish the same for you. Wishing you all the best in all your future endeavors. Until next year! credits

| Sanchar Saran

“We’ve been talking about the problem for hours” Chairs unimpressed with standard of debate in GA BY: J oel T an Discussions in the General Assembly got off to a slow start, as delegates repeatedly parroted their desire for limits to be placed on international intervention in civil disputes; with scant consideration of what these limits should be. The debate kicked off with an examination of the concept of a “Responsibility to Protect (R2P)” (explain) Delegates largely conceded that R2P, while relevant, had its shortcomings; and a moderated caucus was soon called to examine the R2P doctrine. Pertinent issues began to surface; the delegate of Zimbabwe expressed concern over possible abuse of R2P by global powers to exploit weaker nations, while the delegate of Turkey highlighted the need for a “clearer framework”.

It became evident, however, that this was as far as discussion would progress for a while. The delegate of France astutely raised the question of how, if ever, the R2P doctrine should be improved; but the thread of the discussion was soon lost as Mexico unprecedentedly lambasted R2P, prompting other delegates to come to its defence.

the international community involvement in a civil conflict. Regional organisations, they claimed, would be more aptly equipped to deal with the intricacies of a conflict, by virtue of geographical proximity. The chairs were forced to themselves intervene, on many occasions, in order to refocus the debate.

Indeed, it took yet another moderated caucus before South Africa proposed a “regulatory framework” for R2P to correct abuses – again without any specifics.

After lunch, things had seemingly not improved. A moderated caucus surrounding case studies of individual countries experiencing civil strife – called for by France – led to delegates of several of these countries coming forth to bemoan the plights of their citizens.

An unmoderated caucus following this seemed to yield new developments. The delegates of Ethiopia and China advocated the involvement of regional organisations in deciding

Once again, the co-chair had to step in. “Nobody in this room does not realise

that the world is in conflict, people are dying. It does not get you brownie points to keep repeating this.” He then explicitly called for “hard debate” and real solutions - prompting delegates to launch into a discussion of economic sanctions, seemingly neglecting other forms of intervention. Again, the chair took matters into his own hands, momentarily converting the General Assembly into a de facto classroom and laying out four forms of intervention – military, economic, diplomatic and humanitarian aid - on the whiteboard. Thankfully, a breakthrough came during another unmoderated caucus, where the council was split into two distinct blocs, each with their own working paper. One,

led by Turkey and the UK, was focused on defining a “hierarchy” of intervention measures, as well as what conditions would justify which measures. The second, spearheaded by China and Belarus, was once more centred on the role of regional organisations; and productive discussion ensued surrounding the second working paper till the adjournment of the session. Things ended off on a high note, with the Nigerian delegate motioning cryptically for “entertainment”. The chair humoured him – by allowing him 12 minutes for a dance performance, bring a rapturous conclusion to a slow – but hopeful – first day of debates.

Happenings during the GA Crisis BY: A nkita K rishnamoorthy Out of nowhere, a crisis in South Sudan by the terrorist group Boko Haram was reported to the Secretary-General, who brought it to the delegates’ notice. There was an almost alarming tension brought into the atmosphere of the council as the delegates used their two minutes to internalize the situation, with Nigeria quaking in his pants to respond to the situation.

NTUMUN 2014 ORGANIZING COMMITTEE 2

Boko Haram is a nongovernment terrorist group whose actions are based in Nigeria. Hence, Sudan’s question, on whether Nigeria was in cahoots with Boko Haram was very relevant. Nigeria almost immediately replied that he condemned the actions of the terrorist group and pointed out the government of Nigeria has

P hoto also been attacked by the militant group in the past. The delegate of Belarus backed this statement of Nigeria. The reactions of the neighboring countries that surround South Sudan also expressed their regret with the situation and condemned the actions of the militant group.

Several motions were suggested immediately, with South Sudan’s motion for a moderated caucus on the evacuation of refugees from South Sudan for ten minutes. France’s motion for a moderated caucus on the issue of child soldiers was sent back because it had more to do with child rights, which is an issue

credits

| Srishti Sarkar

for UNHRC, and not a priority for the General Assembly. Most of the reactions from other countries were standard, with countries coming up with solutions that suggested sending international aid or Red Cross, but none of them could suggest a proper solution.

Even now, as the article is being written, with the moderated caucus has been extended; none of the delegates have come up with any actual solutions to the problem. The delegate of Turkey, however, did add that as a representative of NATO, the Turkey would be wiling to provide the manpower, and expertise of NATO in evacuating the refugees out of South Sudan. The Delegate of Gabon, frustrated with the ignorance of the council delegates, explained the difference between the UN Peacekeeping troops and the African Union Military troops. As the delegates were given a twenty minute unmoderated caucus, they dispersed for lunch, discussing their opinions together. They keep going around in circles, not even able to decide the motion for a moderated caucus. Who knows what will happen next.

2014

DISEC

THEBASTION

SECURITY COUNCIL | UNEP

2014

THEBASTION

NTU MODEL UNITED NATIONS

DISEC In Action: From cooperation to confusion

BY: L im S hu Q i , C lara

P hoto

credits

| Lim Shu Qi, Clara

DISEC in a moderated caucus

“N

ational sovereignty”, “transparency” and “falling into the wrong hands” - these were some of the prominent phrases mentioned time and time again by delegates in the first committee session of the Disarmament and International Security Committee (DISEC). With a little more than 40 delegates, the morning at DISEC started off well. Delegates passionately waved their placards, expressed

their stances with zest and continuously cooperated with one another in brainstorming for solutions. It was clear that the initial direction of the council was to discuss whether countries should be allowed to continue to produce Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). Living up to its name of being a world power, Russia suggested a plethora of solutions, including education against radicalism as well as the implementation of selective proliferation of

WMDs to ensure that it does not fall into the hands of terrorists. Russia’s stance that the committee should get rid of the chemical stockpile in Syria immediately sparked off discussion on the situation in Syria. Interestingly, the Syrian delegate defended its country’s stance and actions, stating that “Syria’s embarkation of its chemical weapons program was a result of reports of similar developments in Israel and Turkey”. However,

the committee seemed to be rather disinterested in further discussion of Syria’s situation as several delegates pointed out the efforts of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to clamp down on Syria. The delegate of France concurred by indicating that “a merger of the two resolutions would be more effective” since the working papers submitted by the People’s Republic of China was rather strict in order to maintain the status quo whereas the one submitted by the United Arab Emirates was “too naïve”. Only a merger of these two working papers will an appropriate and effective resolution be achieved. There was great contention when it came to the issue of national sovereignty. In a moderated caucus raised by the delegate of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the technicalities of checks-andbalances to monitor WMDs were discussed. Austria also took the first step in proposing control measures of WMDs, including sending subsidiary bodies of the United Nations to check on stockpiles to ensure transparency in handling these weapons. Gabon repeatedly emphasized on three key facets: cooperation between international

groups, supervision by the United Nations and collaboration with existing treaties. Although the committee almost unanimously agreed that such checks-andbalances were necessary for transparency, it was met with much disagreement by the delegate of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) as she very firmly believed that the very basis of a country is its national sovereignty. To put it in her words, “It is not up to other imperialist nations to interfere in the workings of the other nations,”. The debate took a drastic turn when the chairpersons of DISEC stepped in. By urging the delegates to be more focused in their discussion, it was evident that the committee turned weary as arguments fell down slippery slopes and went on in circles. More importantly, noting that several delegates had started to go against their stances, the delegates were strongly reminded to keep to their foreign policy. With the committee’s disinterest in discussing issues such as the dual nature of WMDs, the role of the international community in this matter as well as the resolving the existence of actors supporting the terrorist groups possessing WMDs, it is still unclear, and confused, as to which direction the committee is headed towards.

Yesterday's debate was quite fruitful as we had created two different blocs. One bloc was mainly led by China, and the other by United Arab. We are still discussing the possibility of merging, since we are in the United Nations and we definitely want to uphold the spirit of collaborating and working together.

Delegate of UAE

IN THE DELEGATE’S WORDS

What did you think of yesterday's debate?

Yesterday, I noticed that there were two working papers proposed by the two blocs and there seemed to be disagreements over them. In your opinion, what are the differences between the two working papers?

Yes, there are currently two working papers in progress. The working paper submitted by China encourages a relatively hard approach at dealing with the current problem at hand. It focuses primarily on disarming and making countries sign several treaties and pacts. They want several countries to do specifically this, and others to do specifically that. However, for the bloc I’m co-leading, we are trying to approach the problem from an alternative angle. We have noticed that previous meetings in the Disarmament and International Security Committee had proven to be quite unsuccessful in the past. That’s why we propose a softer approach - instead of telling to what to do, we are trying to restore the trust and political relations between countries so that we can fight the common enemy (which is global terrorism).

P hoto

credits

| Hana Theresia Lamtarida

Waiting For Consensus: Security Council BY: P hyllis H o

he United Nations Security Council convened today to discuss the daunting issue of “Narco-terrorism in Afghanistan”. Opium cultivation in Afghanistan amounts to US $2.7 billion worth of revenue and sustains the livelihoods of farmers who would otherwise remain in poverty. The delegate of Afghanistan expressed hope that despite its complex and long-standing nature, the issue can be resolved with international cooperation. He recognizes the possibly destabilizing effect of a sudden pullout of US and NATO forces. However, Afghanistan continues to emphasise the overriding importance of ensuring that Afghan sovereignty is not infringed upon in the fight

against narcoterrorism. In response to this, the council pledged to assist the Afghan government. Notably, the USA also reaffirmed its commitment to playing a supporting role. The council soon moved away from the inevitable discussion of US role in empowering the Taliban. Instead, they brought up long-term and short-term solutions that were revisited time and again. Members were unanimously against military solutions, with France and Afghanistan pushing for the socioeconomic empowerment of the opium cultivators. Chile proposed the legalization of opium cultivation however it wasn’t supported by the majority of members.

Disagreements entered into a hilarious phase when Argentina, Afghanistan, United Kingdom and Russia brought to the table the possibility of waging a war against the USA as a Delegate of Argentina

We’re here for peace and security, we’re not here to declare war on each other.

coalition force. The Chair did not support their cause, reminding the aggressors of the implications should they break protocol and disrupt world peace.

As the sessions progressed, two working papers were introduced. The first, sponsored by Afghanistan and Nigeria, included financial compensation for Afghan farmers, working committees between nations and the demilitarization of druglords. Reaffirming the UN Charter, the paper has taken the safeguarding of Afghan sovereignty into account. Furthermore, forgoing the cash crop while providing financial compensation could strain the nation’s finances. Sponsors of the second working paper comprised the United Kingdom, USA, France, Australia and Rwanda. The paper proposed anti-opium campaigns, a UN peacekeeping force, increased

weapon funding from allies and the development of a financial sector to cater for the provision of viable livelihoods. However, the delegate of Afghanistan skeptically asserts that the nation’s sovereignty and can be threatened with the introduction of a peacekeeping force. Moreover, the delegate is also against the development of a financial sector so as not to interfere with existing organizations’ efforts in this aspect. Argentina, on the other hand, will support this paper on the condition that it retracts its call for increased weapon funding. At the end of the day, debates still ensued, and a conclusion couldn’t be reached.

Carbon Emissions Reduction: Light at the End of the Tunnel? Potential resolution in pipeline as delegates appears to have reached a compromise overnight.

BY: A lan L o

ingapore - As the council members of the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) continue to work towards resolving the global carbon emissions issue, its progress is obstructed by a few loud voices that obstinately refuse to accept the voice of the majority of the committee. As delegates around the world work to solve perhaps the greatest international issue of this century, there has been surprisingly little disagreement in the committee on what a successful resolution of the problem would look like, once more offering hope that a resolution might be achieved. In total, three draft resolutions were submitted. Unfortunately, diplomatic efforts to develop a meaningful resolution remains unlikely as certain proponents of the carbon tax refuse to yield ground towards the emissions trading scheme which appears to have gained popularity overnight. The latest draft resolution comes after unidentified

P hoto

delegates convened yesterday in hopes of arriving at some form of agreement. This resolution outlines a plan in which a hybrid taxationtrading scheme would be put forth towards member states for implementation. The proposed scheme is similar to a successful protocol that Norway passed years ago.

Critics of the draft resolution argue that having a “cap” would not sufficiently motivate member states to actively seek a decrease in emissions. Ms. Jeanne Sanjaya (Zimbabwe) curtly stated that “with a cap, there is not enough incentive to reduce carbon emissions”. She had previously submitted a draft resolution that was in all aspects similar to the latest draft resolution, but lacked a “cap” that would have allowed member states to freely pollute to that limit. That draft resolution had been strongly supported by

credits

| Melody Madhavan

In order to bring the committee to an agreement, it was best to promote a marriage of the two policies: carbon tax, and cap and trade

Delegates discussing a potential draft resolution during the un-moderated caucus. the delegates of Iraq, Uganda, and Austria, all of whom still refuse to budge from their tough stance. This uncompromising stance is reminiscent of the previous day’s situation in

the council where the council was cleaved in two between the proponents of the carbon tax system and the emissions trading scheme. As council opened today, many such delegates appeared to have

reached a compromise during that unofficial meeting. Mr Chris Davies (Pakistan), one such individual, rationalised “that in order to bring the committee to an agreement, it was best to promote a marriage of the two policies: carbon tax,

2014

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

THEBASTION

UNHRC

2014

THEBASTION

NTU MODEL UNITED NATIONS

The Big Picture: The Human Rights Council

The Hitler Conundrum ‘Hitler-phobia’ – Justified? BY: L im Z he Y i

itler’s ascension to Chancellor of Germany on 30th of January set off a political storm. The constant rhetoric of extreme German nationalism, the transformation of German public life into despotism and Hitler’s aim of ‘abolishing’ the non-Aryan race caused many stakeholders, including this newspaper, to be nervous. The seemingly background noise of threat was beginning to metastasize itself into a force to be reckoned with.

Can we trust this man?

In exclusive coverage of the proceedings of session regarding Hitler, countries began to take notice of the

rising leader. As the delegate of France aptly put, “we are not scared of Hitler, but to say we are merely concerned with regards to the intentions of Hitler’s actions is a major understatement”. This prompted the world to ratchet up already high security measures to ensure the security of their own nations. Such ideas included a proposal to create a tacit alliance to combat Hitler, should there be the slightest hint of hostility, while others followed more hard-lined stances, where economic and military sanctions, along with diplomatic isolation would be imposed upon Germany

to ‘peacefully’ pressure Hitler away from power. In coming up with a solution, the world was in a dilemmatoo little action may be viewed as the appeasement of the west to Hitler while too much would simply force Hitler into a hostile corner. Furthermore, while the countries rushed to hasty conclusions, the threat of Hitler was one of rhetoric and not concrete action.

The world has gotten a lot more careful and it’s a good thing- but only if it doesn’t go too far.

Crisis in the League of Nations BY: L im Z heyi

ith each resolution proposed in the league, new and innovative ideas were brought to fore. This includes the amendment to article 231 (War Guilt Clause) by Bolivia and a temporary occupation of Germany proposed by the USSR. Yet, after hours of intensive debate and five failed resolutions, there still lacks a solution to the Hitler quandary. Regrettably, the League of Nations is as of now, supremely divided when the world needs cohesiveness most.

DELEGATES SPEAK

This

newspaper

would

like to propose a new angle to resolving the issue based on economic pragmatically in assisting the German Republic struggles caused by the great depression is being discussed. Research done by the Bastion shows there exist a strong correlation between the popularity of Nazism and unemployment, where they both rise accordingly. As unemployment soars to 7,000,000 above a nationwide wind drift of bankruptcies and failures, Hitler gains popularity from the disconcerted masses who perceive other countries to be watching the suffering

of the Germans in silent apathy, while still demanding reparations for World War 1. Should the nations in world adopt a more accommodating stance to assist Germany in its economic struggles, perhaps, Germany might be lifted from the economicc turmoil and limit the rise of a dictatorship.

Delegates in deep thought BY: R ohit D ass

progress so far?

How do you feel about the divergence in opinions among in delegates?

Hao Jun The people here are quite irrational. The debate has been lively and amusing and there have been inappropriate innuendos all over the place. Ingmar The delegates here are objecting simply because of the fact that their own drafted resolution aren’t going to be passed. Many in fact have similar stances across different issues.

Hao Jun On the one hand, some are very comfortable with resolution treating Germany as a puppet state. And on the other hand, people are very uncomfortable with recognizing Hitler and Germany. There will be no appeasement and no recognition. Ingmar Iraq is newly independent and we are pushing for an end to colonialism. To be honest we are a bit sympathetic to Hitler because you know...the enemy of the enemy.

How much confidence do you have in the League of Nations’ ability to converge on a single, unified solution ultimately? Hao Jun Yeah, maybe next week…maybe never. Unless some countries seriously compromise on their stand I do not see that happening. Ingmar Quite confident but it will only narrowly pass.

P hoto

credits

| Hana Theresia Lamtarida

credits

| Hana Theresia Lamtarida

N afie A.A l R ubaish

n the 8th of February 2014, the Human Rights Council (HRC) resonated strongly with fervent debate. From the very opening of the General Speaker’s List in Session 1 to the end of Session 2, the council possessed a unique dynamism.

As bleak as the situation is, there is still much room to hope in the ability of all nations to reach a consensus to resolve this pressing issue. As long as there is a will, there will be a way to resolve this crisis amicably.

BY: A melia C hew and L iu Z han

and

We got hold of Tan Hao Jun, delegate of Bolivia and Ingmar Salim, delegate of Iraq to talk about the ongoing debate How do you feel about

P hoto

The issue at stake: the alleviation of gender inequality and violence against women in Africa. The delegates of the HRC understood too well the implications of their actions. Africa is by far the second largest continent – one with over 900 million people and 54 countries. It goes without saying that their every decision has wide-ranging ramifications.

The main cause of rift among delegates has been on how exactly to alleviate gender inequality and violence against women. Indeed, solutions proposed have ranged from feasible to bizarre. The delegate of China once brazenly proposed foreign intervention in Africa by more developed countries to ensure socio-economic restructuring. The Ugandan delegate dismissed this immediately. Furthermore, in a quick vote, no African country was in favour of foreign intervention. More feasible solutions proposed included the extension of micro-credit schemes and close working of African governments with Nongovernmental Organisations (NGOs).

While there is no one in the HRC who obliquely opposes the ideal of gender equality, the rifts in this council have occurred due to split consensus on how exactly to resolve the aforementioned issue. Whereas some like Sudan call for the strengthening of laws to protect women, others have argued that such laws already exist in many African countries, and that significant gender inequality yet persists. Another divisive issue is that of whether healthcare should be made accessible to all women, something deemed logistically impossible in the African continent in the shortterm by some. However, delegates seemed to extend an olive branch on the issue of employability. France,

for instance, has suggested the creation of “women-centric” jobs to specifically employ women. This call too was echoed by Afghanistan. Such an initiative could help elevate the socio-economic prospects of women if implemented. Brazil has mooted vocational training to improve the skill level of women, and thus their employment prospects. As of now, the issue of increasing the employability of women is by far the least divisive. What is less reassuring for the HRC is the distance of the working paper and resolution from completion, as observed by the Chair. In an effort to bolster the pace of efforts he called for a Moderated Caucus specifically discussing the feasibility of certain proposed solutions to gender inequality

and violence against women. These hoped-for solutions were “women-centric” employment, healthcare for women, political representation of women as well as punitive legislation against violence inflicted on women. Much of whether or not the HRC will be successful hinges on whether they can get their act together for the constructive drafting of a resolution. Work on the working paper has finally commenced among the various countries but with Session 2 ending fast, Day 2 will effectively be a make-orbreak day for the HRC.

2014

THEBASTION

ECOSOC

2014

THEBASTION

IMPACT

NTU MODEL UNITED NATIONS

ECOSOC: Day 1 diaries

A day of merry-go-rounding

BY: C elestine L ian , S hruti N aik

BY: T an P ei E n

he first of two Council sessions in day 1 got off to a shaky start. The delegate of USA – a key stakeholder in the agenda set for the IMPACT Council was absent. This meant that one of two thrusts of the Council’s agenda, in particular, to discuss the citizenship, political and legal implications, as well as regulations in relation to governmental surveillance, received scant and unfocused attention among the delegates of the Council. Accordingly then, discussions veered towards the second issue on the agenda, that of the proliferation of “hacktivism” in the world, and hence the

necessary consideration for how governments worldwide are to intervene and regulate such related acts.

dearth of active listening and clarifying of other countries’ interests contributed to a muted discussion.

Debating was primarily focused on the issue of hactivism, however, progress was considerably slow. Prepared speeches on the Budapest Convention, resulted in little forwarding of the debate, as one after another many delegates simply postured on their own countries’ positions with poor awareness of other countries’ various stances and greatly varying levels of interest and knowledge of the issue at hand. Moreover, the apparent

Furthermore, while much time was spent attempting to formulate the boundaries for discussion and to elucidate fundamental aspects of the issue, such as how terms like hacktivism and cyber crime should be defined and how one could be defined from the other, common agreements were typically nowhere close to being attained. Efforts at initiating moderated caucuses that could possible further the debate in a specific direction, such as to

discuss whether to modify the Budapest Convention or seek other solutions to tackle cyber crime, which although important, became ultimately misdirected and unproductive.

Shaky start aside, the persistence of a handful of dedicated delegates did manage to reap some dividends. A working paper swiftly written in secret by the delegate of the Russian Federation with the delegate of the Republic of the Sudan greatly advanced the cobbling

together of a response from the Council in light of a crisis event involving an EMP explosion due to hactivist retaliation. In spectacular fashion, lights were switched off and a red light flashed, creating an atmosphere of frenzied suspense due to the crisis. This brought along a proposal by the delegate of Sri Lanka, which the Council subsequently built upon to craft its overall immediate response strategy. Such developments hopefully signal a more effective discussion for the Council’s agenda, come day two.

Once the committee had moved into general debate, delegates wanted to discuss specific aspects of the issue at hand. Moderated caucuses were the order of this session. The first disagreement in the council arose when delegates

Crisis situation in Day One United Nations discloses government backing for Austria, Greece hackers

BY: R ohit D ass The revelation is the latest of to have rocked the International Multilateral Partnership Against Cyber Threats (IMPACT) on day 1. As though Saturday’s hacking reports were not bad enough, Austria and Greece are now facing now facing the brunt of the UK as well as many IMPACT delegates. Condemnation was swift from Ethiopia whose resolution called for a “shortterm and immediate response” to the crisis. Meanwhile, the delegate of Austria in IMPACT has denied any by his country involvement in “this act of criminal activity”. Greece has, however, stated that it will be “conducting intensive investigation”. It too denies responsibility. Much of the UK’s rage has centered on the specificity of the attacks targeting its aerospace defense industry on Saturday. There are unconfirmed reports that sensitive defense information had been stolen. The UK

welcomed the United Nations’ findings and called to question the actions of Greece and Austria. However, potentially exacerbating the crisis at hand, are allegations that the hacking operations were aided by China. While there has yet to be official confirmation of this, countries have expressed their grave concern, should it be proven. The Russian Federation has been quick to recommend that China too speak on the issue, and to explain if Chinese hackers were involved and “complicit in these attacks”. Regardless of this development, there still has not been any let-up of pressure on Austria and Greece. “Austria and Greece are clearly guilty given the United Nations’ confirmation”, maintains the delegate of Sri Lanka, who with the British delegate is seeking to pass a resolution, aimed at curbing state-approved cyber attacks. Furthermore, concerns have been expressed about the

COSOC opened with the intent of discussing and dealing with the economic and social impact of the Arab Spring. Despite initial nervousness, the delegates spoke on their countries’ stances and what they hoped to achieve during the course of the committee sessions. Throughout the opening speeches, delegates expressed support for the Arab Spring nations and the hope for that Arab Spring nations would regain stability and make smooth and peaceful democratic transitions. The focus of the opening speeches were notably on economic factors and economic impacts from the event.

Delegate of USA, providing a stark warning about the possible long-term effects of the issue at hand

The USA is therefore concerned over the recent increase in the number of the terror groups that have risen due to weak governance….. poor economic conditions and a unstable social environment will drive individuals to consider terrorism as a means to survive.

began disagreeing whether the political environment in these countries was important to the issue at hand. Some, believed that to deal with the issue countries needed to attain a stable, probably democratic status before the economic and social proposals proposed by ECOSOC would actually have an effect. In the interests of debate, the council decided on an unmoderated caucus, the conclusion of which was that the council would group countries into certain categories (namely: in civil

war/transition/stable) and tailor their strategies to each category. This proved contentious. A faction in the room (led by the delegates of Australia, Pakistan and Indonesia) were of the opinion that the most effective and comprehensive solutions could and should only be provided to countries of classified as ‘stable’. Delegates from France and South Korea led the counterattack, aided by the presence of the delegate of Algeria which had made a mysterious appearance to fiercely defend the rights of the ‘less stable’ countries (of

P hoto

credits

which Algeria was classified as). This led to a Consultation of the Whole, motioned by the chair in order to move the discussion forward. Fierce debates raged over whether ‘less stable’ countries deserved the full range of aid and whether certain strategies would even work in

| Hana Theresia Lamtarida a countries with low political stability and security. The committee ended with the delegates of Chile, France and Korea stating that they would suggest a framework as a way of creating workable solutions for the topic.

impact of increased security measures on third parties.

The Crisis in Argentina

Delegates from countries involved and uninvolved have questioned if IMPACT has the jurisdiction to approve measures monitoring cyber activity by governments. Afghanistan raised concerns about the infringement of sovereignty while Israel questioned the disclosure of sensitive information to monitor and moderate cyber attacks, lastly, United Kingdom demanded technical expertise to investigate the matter.

BY: Y ash M ankani

The ECOSOC was not spared from crisis happening on both days, when delegates where plunged into darkness and forced to work in these conditions.

P hoto

credits

| Melody Madhavan

here were intense arguments, loud rebuttals and a lot of drama in the ECOSOC as they took upon the topic of Argentina’s economic crisis. Argentina’s ambition to improve their economic status lead to some risky business. They were involved in trades which unfortunately did not turn out to be in their favour and resulted in defaulting .This lead to a serious loss and Argentina were in dire need for some immediate help to get them out of the imminent economic crisis. The session started with an unmoderated caucus voting, which did manage to win a majority .While the delegates seemed blank about how to solve the crisis, the chair stepped in and advised the delegates about

the situation. The delegates of the countries in the crisis such as Argentina ,Chile and Mexico seemed rather confused about the situation in hand, the delegates representing countries like Portugal and Libya stepped in and asked NGOs, ECOSOC and prosperous nations such as USA, U.K and Norway to fund Argentina.This proposal failed as the prosperous countries believed that their economy was not too strong to fund Argentina and the delegates were sure that it would cause dissatisfaction amongst the people of their respective countries, however they did agree to provide a small amount of funds to diffuse the situation. The delegates of other powerful

countries such as China decided to not interfere and stay quiet inspite of insistence from the chair. While the entire council seemed unsure of what to do next the delegate of Libya made the next move and provided ideas such as structural reform, maintenance of high domestic rates and to peg their currency to dollars. After an other unmoderated caucus of 8 minutes , the committee did manage to resolve the crisis by using a combination of ideas provided by the delegates of various countries .This provided a solution and prevented the imminent economic crisis in Argentina.

ECOSOC Delegate of Chile to Delegate of USA.

By screwing up my economy, you’re going to be deprived of your salmon. By screwing up my economy, you’re going to be deprived of your copper. By screwing up my economy, you’re going to be deprived of your wine.

P hoto

credits

| Melody Madhavan