Message from the Sub-Editor: 6 months! That is how long we have ‘officially’ been planning and preparing for CBITMUN 2012. I take pride in the fact that I, along with a small yet brilliant IP team, had been given the opportunity to cover such a magnificent conference. Every soul who had worked for the CBITMUN cause right from day 1 has put in their 100% and more! Organising an ordinary conference is not easy… Organising a grand conference is hard… Organising the greatest experience of a lifetime is close to IMPOSSIBLE…! As an MUN, our goal was not just to simulate 7 councils; it was to create an environment, though only for 4 days, where the participant would be in the shoes of a delegate and try to experience a world like never before! Organized in the spectacular conference of Mahindra Satyam, we have strived to ensure that every delegate walks away with a sense of satisfaction and happiness. It has been a sleepless, yet awesome 4 days of my life. I would like to thank my small team of journalists for running around continuously and helping me compile this newsletter. I hope I wasn’t too demanding of you all. I would like to specially thank the Head of IP, Shruti Hari, for being incredibly understanding and guiding me whenever I needed to be. It’s been an absolute pleasure working for you! Kudos to the entire CBITMUN team for actually pulling off our Secretary-‐General’s ‘phenomenon’! I hope to see you all again at the next edition of CBITMUN! Srikara Chaitanya Sub-‐Editor – International Press CBITMUN 2012
CBITMUN 2012 Team: Core Committee: v Secretary General -‐ Sreekar Reddy There is no other man more fit for this job than Sreekar Reddy. His unparalleled leadership qualities combined with his passion for MUN-‐ing are what kept the entire team unified and working efficiently throughout. Turning his dream into a reality has been a privilege for the team.
v Deputy Secretary General – Suraj Peri Though he vehemently denies it, Suraj Peri is arguably the most hardworking member in the team. Right from training the Directors to handling the delegate allotments, he has ensured smooth proceedings with minimum glitches. v Under Secretary General -‐ Yaswant Adiraju Apart from his impeccable MUN-‐ing skills, Yaswant Adiraju is someone who can be approached on any issue, anytime! v Chargé d’affaires – Tanmay Krishna Sharat Chander In charge of the entire Organizational Committee, these two were instrumental in the success of the conference. Running around constantly all the four days, they have transformed an ordinary conference into the extraordinary gala spectacle that CBITMUN 2012 was! Organizing Committee: o Head of logistics – Accommodation: Shimoni Agarwal Vamsee Bopann Harish.T o Head of logistics – Delegate Resources: Ruchika Singh Rohit Reddy o Head of logistics – Design : Pranav Kondala Kirtana Bavanaka o Head of logistics – F & B: Nikhila Gandikota o Head of logistics – Human Resource: Yashika Handa Akhila Somayajula Akshit o Head of logistics-‐ Sponsor Relations: Nagarjun Redla Avinash o Head of logistics – Transport: Bhavik Rao Syed Omer o Head of logistics – S.R.D: Anjan Yerubandi Vishwa Teja
Saloni Jain Treasurer: Sujit Kumar Special Mention: Pranav Kondala – Head of Logistics (design) and delegate coordinator The unsung hero of the CBITMUN 2012 team, Pranav Kondala has undertaken the mammoth task of being the creative head -‐ right from the team shirts to the placard design and from the CBITMUN official webpage to the facebook and Twitter pages, he has contributed immensely! He is an integral cog of the CBITMUN machine without whom the conference would still be just a dream! o
Secretariat:
Ø United Nations Security Council -‐ Director -‐ Jyothirmayi Katralapalli Being the directors of one of the most important councils of an MUN, Jyothirmayi Katralapalli was more than capable for the job. Ø Historic Security Council -‐ Director -‐ Moneer Koshani The only international member of the CBITMUN 2012 team, Moneer Koshani has worked exceptionally hard to ensure that the delegates of the HSC had a great experience. Ø United Nations Emergency Response Committee -‐ Director -‐ Abbas Hyder Abbas Hyder’s relentless passion for MUN-‐ing has helped simulate one of the best councils of CBITMUN 2012. Ø General Assembly IV-‐SPECPOL -‐ Director -‐ Lakshita Reddy Known for being soft spoken, Lakshita Reddy has gone out of her way to ensure the smooth running of the largest council at CBITMUN 2012. Ø United Nations Development Programme -‐ Director -‐ Chandrayi Saha Chandrayi Saha’s hard work can be attributed to the success of one of the most technical councils of CBITMUN 2012. Ø United Nations Convention Against Corruption -‐ Director -‐ Riyaz Sundrani Known for his endless array of perverted jokes, Riyaz Sundrani keeps a cool stable head when it came to co-‐chairing the UNCAC. Ø Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organisation -‐ Director -‐ Akshay Kulkarni Known for his Charter fetish and for being another ‘Suraj Peri’, Akshay Kulkarni has exhibited sheer class by single-‐handedly chairing the CTBTO. Ø International Affairs Analyst -‐ Prasoon Trivedi Having had run around all the 4 days, Prasoon Trivedi has helped simplify and smoothen the work flow for the directors.
International Press: §
§ §
Head of International Press – Shruti Hari Very well known for her hard work and her gifted ability to multi-‐task, Shruti Hari needs no introduction. Her hard work, guidance and experiences have inspired not only the International Press but the entire CBITMUN team. Sub-‐editor – Srikara Chaitanya Journalists: Adarsh Matthew Very experienced and hardworking, his dedication for the art of writing has added nothing but class to the team. Deepthi Pisupati
Being a first-‐timer, Deepthi has worked hard in all the work she has undertaken and has submitted brilliant articles. Ipshita Roy Using her experience well, Ipshita has shown nothing short of passion in her writing. Nayanika Ghosh Although just a 12th grader, Nayanika’s passion for writing has made her an asset to the entire team. Puneet Prakash Being one of the oldest and most experienced members of the team, Puneet is an interesting person to work with and is very punctual and meticulous with his work.
DaY 1: Formal events and socials Date: 30th August 2012 Venue: CBIT Campus The first day of CBITMUN 2012 had kicked off with an amazing response. Delegates from all over the world had come down to participate in the formal events – Paper presentation, Resolution Writing, Extempore and Quiz. Delegates had interestingly participated in the quiz, hosted by Sidharth Soni (chair of UNSC). It was an intense competition that was finally won by the team Ashwath Komath (delegate of Saudi Arabia – UNERC) and Aditi Patil (delegate of Switzerland – GA IV SPECPOL). The day ended with the delegates being transported back to the accommodation after a Cultural Night where some delegates had put up memorable performances.
Paper Presentation: Puneet Prakash The presentation is a revolutionary concept introduced by CBIT. Not only are the delegates presenting on current affairs but also the points from these presentations carry forward for their respective awards. There were forty presentations out of which 15 were selected for a presentation of 7 minutes. Just as the competition is fierce so too are the attitudes of the delegates who are determined to win. Anansh Prasad, Chair of HSC, Gufran Pathan, Chair of SPECPOL and Monica Seif, Chair of UNERC were the judges for this event. Needless to say, the expertise of the judges was boundless and varied. Topics ranging from South China Sea, to the Arab Spring and drug cartels kept both the judges and this IP member thoroughly refreshed. The participants, although through in their research, had more than a few slips including some of the participants not comprehending the questions of the judges (maybe they were too smart), to not adhering to the time limit. Something that this IP member wants to throw into the limelight is that other
participants made a lot of ambient noise while other participants were presenting. However, the participants came up with some brilliant points which varied from pointing out Mexico’s drug routes, to overlapping of maritime borders concerning the South China Sea. Ishaan Singhania, a 13 year old participant seemed impressive to this IP member. Guess the younglings do have the most enthusiasm! If this is what the presentations contain, I can only wonder as to what the committee proceedings hold in store. Truly a phenomenon! Interview: Q1. According to you, what is the most important judging factor for the presentation? A)
Anansh Prasad: Analysis of information would be most important. Making appropriate use of the information is most important. Monica Seif: The way that the delegates present themselves would be more important. It is important to know what you are talking about.
Q2. What are your opinions about such unique events before committee proceedings? Do you think this concept helps or hinders the concept of an MUN? A) Anansh Prasad: From a holistic point of view, I think that these events are really helpful because as such there is no clear definition of an MUN. Also I think events like the presentations should have a wider audience like school children because given the range of topics, it will really help them think outside the box. Monica Seif: This concept helps because it not as formal as committee proceedings so this helps to break the ice and is helps prepare for public speaking. Q3. What is the last minute advice you would give to delegates? A) Anansh Prasad: Be original. Monica Seif: . I’m assuming that the research is in place so knowing what you have researched is important. Go in with a negotiating plan, know the position of your country related to the events and prioritize the issues respectively. Q4. CBIT MUN inspires change so according to you, what would you prefer; a regular social’s night that the MUN’s across the circuit have, or, a social outreach programme that helps to inspire change? A) Anansh Prasad: I think programmes like a social outreach programme would be more constructive to an MUN because one can party anywhere but helping out would make more sense to the concept of the MUN Monica Seif: It is important to have such events but it is equally important for the delegates to relax and get to know each other in an informal environment so socials are important but an extra day should be assigned for such programmes.
Resolution Writing: Deepthi Pisupati It’s the first day of the much awaited CBIT MUN and it is indeed Pangaea le Reunion witnessing students from 11 different countries converging to participate in the 2nd International CBITMUN. To start off the MUN in a creative and fun-‐filled manner, a number of events such as resolution writing, quiz, presentation, extempore, etc are being conducted to test the communication, interpersonal and intellectual skills of the delegates. Here I am, at the resolution writing event and one cannot help but gaze in wonder at these young delegates as they exercise their tiny grey cells to come up with feasible solutions to solve pressing problems facing today’s world as would be done in reality by the UN. The Draft Resolution as we know is the most important aspect of any issue tackled by a council as it offers tangible solutions to questions previously posed. Today, the delegates have been given a choice between “Human Rights Violation in Syria’ and ‘The Question of the Palestine-‐the ongoing conflict’. What is enthralling is watching thirty young adults racking their brains to put forward all their ideas onto the paper in the form of a possible solution. Reading the material given to them and coming up with a proper solution on the spot could be quite daunting but our young delegates proved that age is no bar when it comes to great and inspired ideas. Kudos to these brilliant minds and here’s wishing them all the best! (Psst… some delegates were more engrossed in their fellow delegate’s spaghetti top! Wonder if you get an award for that too…oh and here’s hoping that spaghetti tops and denims soon becomes a valid dress for a MUN….till then let’s try and find out who that delegate is. Any guesses?!)
Extempore: Nayanika ghosh It all started with judges Siddharth Soni (Chair, UNSC), Geetika Budhiraja (Vice Chair, UNDP) and Antoine Skayem (Vice Chair, UNERC) enlightening the participants about the rules. While a certain participant was curious about vulgarity in their speeches being entertained, the judges said that they were looking for compelling substance over humor. The variety of topics ranged from ‘Women in Combat’ to ‘US Hegemony in World Politics’, our judges’ favorites being ‘Should the Anna Hazare Movement Become a Political Party’ and ‘Legitimacy of Intervention on Humanitarian Grounds’. While the delegate of UK from CTBTO stressed upon trivial expenditure on nuclear weapons being the catalytic cause of world poverty, the delegate of Israel threw
light on how poverty leads to terrorism by highlighting our very own (yes, the Indian government loves him) Kasab’s example. “The Arab Spring is a beacon of hope for countless number of civilizations under tyranny’, says the delegate of USA from HSC. Opinions ranged from the death penalty being something human beings do not have the authority to determine and carry out to women being allowed to take part in combat in attribution to their excellence in every field possible. The statement of the day was ‘Whose creation is Osama bin Laden’ made by the delegate of India from SPECPOL who spoke about US hegemony. When asked ‘What’s the most annoying thing about a speaker?’, Judge Geetika replies ‘Not being able to speak.’-‐ a privilege the participants didn’t strip the audience off, probably wanting to save their voice for tomorrow’s conference. While the delegate of UK from CTBTO turned out to be the judges’ favorite, the delegate of USA from HSC wasn’t far behind either. It was a great platform for delegates to express their opinions outside committee and it was interesting to hear what they spoke about, the boldest statement being ‘Same sex marriages aren’t a taboo’!
Sports and CULTURAL NIGHT: Deepthi Pisupati ‘All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy All play and no work makes Jack a mere toy’ This definitely seems to be the mantra of the colorful first day of the CBIT MUN 2012. After rigorous brainstorming sessions of presentations, quizzes, resolution writing and extempore the delegates were seen playing a wide range of sports including football, basketball, volleyball, tennis, table tennis etc. The most talked about event was the cricket match between India and Bangladesh. Interestingly Bangladesh not only won the hearts of people with their soulful guitar and dance performances which took place as part of the cultural exchange later but the match too! The football ground came alive with the shrieks and passes of the delegates enjoying a highly accelerated match. A young man in a yellow shirt was seen to be exceptionally good. Is he Varun Munjuluri? Well he certainly does look a lot like him. When it comes to football height is no bar as we saw a kiddo in purple with brilliant reflexes. The football match seemed to be a great way to rejuvenate and gear up for an exciting and tricky MUN session tomorrow. After hectic sessions of various MUN related events and sweaty sports it was time to let down your hair with beautiful music and lively dances. The very gracious foreign delegates of the MUN 2012 came together and gave some truly outstanding performances which kept the audience asking for more.
First to perform were two very talented boys from Bangladesh, while one of them strummed the guitar; the other one sang a full throated Bengali song. The beautifully deep voice of the delegate was very much appreciated by the audience. The Indonesians were next and everyone stood up in rapt attention as they started off with their melodious national anthem. One of the delegates sang an Indonesian song in her crystal clear voice and it was hard to believe that such a young lady had such a soulful voice. The Afghans proved that they weren’t far behind and their delegate actually gained the audience’s support with our very own Hindi song-‐ chaudhvi ka chaand with the entire hall singing along with him. We also had a foot tapping pop singer from Bangladesh who kept the crowd engaged with his groovy music. But the icing on the cake was the spectacular dance performance by the beautiful Bong khukis from Bangladesh. Dressed in colorful saris each one depicted a major aspect of their life with dances showing their tribal customs, patriotic dance, folk dance and finished it with a modern one. It was definitely a brilliant way to end the evening and it was a tired but very content crowd that went back to its accommodation.
Plenary session: Clash of the Titans?! Puneet Prakash The plenary session although starting with a very technical orientation (the mike system was still haphazard), quickly turned into what we as the IP aptly put as the ‘Clash of the Titans’. The EB, who were now delegates, were eager to participate in debate with the esteemed Secretary General, overseeing the proceedings. Seeing this ‘joint committee’ of sorts, it was only a matter of time before someone lit the spark and that was none other than the chair of the UNCRC or in this case the delegate of Syria. Varied statements from the UN not being equal, to the witty retorts by the other delegates, to the ‘’delegation’’ of USA walking out of proceedings were some memorable events from the highlight reel. On a serious note, this IP member believes that the EB, reprising the role of delegates, set the bar for how the delegates should be in committee for all days to come. Be it the venue or the gathering of giants, this once-‐in-‐a-‐lifetime war of words was truly a spectacle for some to see and I hope that the delegates learnt a lot from this. Brilliantly done!
COUNCILS: Council sessions were kicked off on day 2 where the first session was held in the CBIT campus, the rest of the sessions were held in the gloriously lavish conference halls of the Mahindra Satyam Learning World.
United Nations Security Council: Agenda: Possibility of military intervention by the UN as an independent entity. DAY 2 – Srikara Chaitanya Off to a Good Start…! As expected, the council started out with a serious mood. The delegates had begun lobbying and forming alliance blocks even before the Rules of Procedure were even explained. The chair, Sidharth Soni had promised to stay lenient with the procedure as it was the first day and the council was dominated by first-‐timers, though this did not dampen the quality of debate thanks to a very substantive study-‐guide. After an elaborate and illustrative explanation of the Rules of Procedure, the session was kicked off! The Quorum was established with a total of 10 delegates (including the P5) having a simple majority of 6 delegates (50% + 1). We saw fierce yet rational arguments regularly made by the Delegates of USA, UK, Republic of Korea and France with the occasional chipping-‐in of Russia, Afghanistan and other countries. The debate was essentially a discussion of the pros and cons of the UN having a standing army with an emphasis mainly on the Geographical location and the practicality of having a UN standing army and how it would differ from the already existent UNPKF (Peace Keeping Force). The delegate of USA had been adamantly insisting on the fact that no country will be willing to accommodate a multinational army as it would be considered a breach of their sovereignty, but that argument was quickly countered by the delegate of UK making a noble statement wherein he stated having no problem in having a UN army In his country due to the fact that the army would be under the control of the United Nations and the nationality of an individual soldier would be irrelevant. Other key arguments brought up, among many others, were, the quick and effective response of a standing army (as compared to the PKF) to a time-‐sensitive crisis and also the financial aspect of it.
On interviewing the chair, Although he was quite content with the quality of debate and the delegates’ research, Sidharth Soni was quick in pointing out that the council lacked the procedural rigidity that is usually expected of a Security Council due to the number of first timers. His expectation from the council is a resolution which either contains the viability of the UN standing army or proposes a preparatory committee for one. Having found the Organization of CBITMUN 2012 absolutely brilliant, he does, however wish for more council time. His judging criteria for the Best Delegate award would be based on these main criteria i.e, the Amount of Substance and persistence that the delegate puts forth, his Diplomatic nature and his adherence to the Rules of Procedure.
DAY 3 – Srikara Chaitanya Constricted Debate Debate on day 3 didn’t have anything substantive in terms of the variety of the topics at hand. Debate seemed to be revolving only around the UN Standing Army. A lot of issues were barely touched upon. The day progressed monotonously until a deadlock was reached among the 10 member countries present in the council. The day began with the resumption of the GSL (General Speaker’s List). The delegate of Afghanistan was the first speaker on the GSL. In his speech, he showed his support to having a UN Army and stressed on the fact that it should have Nuclear Permission. Shockingly, no country sitting in the committee had any problem with that statement. The delegate of the Republic of Korea then made his speech, in which, he stated that the UN should concentrate on the effectiveness of its approach to a pertinent problem rather than the response time, however, the next speaker, UK, was quick to counter his statement by stating that the response time to an issue is a crucial factor which determines the effectiveness of the response by the UN. A motion was now entertained by the Executive Board to enter into a moderated caucus wherein the delegate of ROK stated that a UN army was not required at this point in time and stressed on the cultural and religion problems that might occur with such a multinational army. As time went on, debate slowly began to stray as discussions shifted from the viability of a UN standing army to the technicalities of having one, a debate that should have taken place in a preparatory committee. Highlights of the debate on day 3 include the delegate of UK stating that the regional governments, mainly in countries like Sierra Leone and Syria were ill-‐equipped and unable to handle the issues at hand and having a UN Standing Army would greatly help, a valid point that drew a lot of attention in council. Another important part of debate was the GSL speech of the delegate of Russia wherein he asked the council pressing questions like the versatility of having a UN army, its expanses and right to nuclear power. He also went on to state that the world is divided into alliance blocks and that countries will refuse to provide troops for deployment against its allied countries. A very valid point! Another shocking observation made in the council was that, though having a few references, no substantive references were made to the UN charter and no discussion on the legality of having a UN army according to the charter was held. Before breaking for lunch, the chair, Sidharth Soni had moved into informal session where he stated that the debate was more like a GA debate rather than that of an SC debate. His disappointment with the council proceedings was clearly noticeable. He felt that the debate was too constricted and linear and he urged the committee to discuss other pressing issues in the Study Guide.
However, even this couldn’t stop deadlock that was reached 5 minutes into the post-‐lunch session. It was interesting to note however that the deadlock was reached not due to a disagreement among the P5 as it traditionally always has, but, due to the fact that no delegate had anything left to say. At this point, the chair had suddenly decided ‘to abscond’ from committee leaving the moderating to be handled by the Director. After a little bit of investigating, it was revealed to the delegate of the International Press that a crisis was being weaved into existence and a joint crisis committee will be convened having delegates from the UNSC, CTBTO and GA IV SPECPOL.
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organisation: Agenda: Viability of CTBT over NPT Day 2 – Nayanika Ghosh Session 1 at the CTBTO started off with Chair, Suraj Peri and Director, Akshay kulkarni briefing the delegates (with the first timers were listening eagerly) about the rules of procedure. Being the unique organization that it is, it was brought to the delegates’ notice that the CTBTO doesn’t pass draft resolutions but something called an ‘outcome document’ as it’s an Article 14 Conference. Substantive debate in committee on the agenda ‘CTBT over NPT’ saw the prevalence of different shades of opinion on the issue. While Russia expressed the need of USA ratifying the CTBT, Pakistan wanted changes in the treaty itself. Considering the friction and ideological differences USA and Iran have, delegates of the said countries couldn’t help smirking at each other as Iran voiced the requirement of decommissioning of nuclear weapons in nuclear-‐weapon states for it to ratify the treaty. DPRK wasn’t far behind in expressing its concern over undetected nuclear testing either. While Israel exclaimed its three ‘NOs’-‐never tested, threatened or proliferated a nuclear weapon, stressing upon the nation using its nuclear capability for peaceful purposes, the delegate of Iran called upon the “Zionist regime” to not state blatant lies! Germany, on the other hand declared its support for Israel and its respect for Israel’s statements. France raised an excellent point about the importance of regular disarmament over nuclear disarmament in order to achieve world peace-‐something that will surely erupt a heated debate soon! All in all, one could easily come to the conclusion that CTBTO is by far the most vanilla committee in this conference. Interview with the EB: Going up close and personal with the Executive Board of the CTBTO, it was interesting to gain some insights on what’s their take on the topic and what annoys them about delegates most. Both, the Chair and Director, Suraj Peri and Akshay Kulkarni respectively were initially disappointed with the flow of
debate in committee as they felt that the committee was turning into a political council and not a technical council, which it’s supposed to be. Though the delegates did spend an awful lot of time accusing each other, they did seem to come to conclusions towards the end of the session. ‘Research’ is what the Chair had to say when asked what makes a good delegate, while Director Akshay Kulkarni believes a good delegate must possess originality in thought and the ability to shift positions. Both of them maintain the same opinion on who is the most annoying delegate yet-‐ Pakistan! Though they were both upset in the beginning of committee, they continued to hold on to the belief that the committee has immense talent and potential; they weren’t wrong! Day 3 – Nayanika Ghosh Accusations, accusations, accusations…! Though the committee did start off on a technical note (which was a mathematical confusion over the number constituting two-‐thirds majority), the delegates seemed to forget (well, for most part of the session) that the CTBTO is not a political but technical council-‐something which the Executive Board was upset about as well. Debate began with UK urging nations who haven’t ratified CTBT yet to not wait for others, while Pakistan said that the treaty itself is immensely flawed-‐something he couldn’t get over saying the entire session. Though the entire committee seemed hellbent on the flaws of CTBT, the motion proposed by China on the assessment of CTBT shockingly failed. Iran made valid points about nuclear-‐weapon states getting rid of their stockpiles. France however, disagreed saying that then these nations are deeming themselves defenseless and have no incentive then to sign the treaty followed by Iran making the Point Of The Day-‐“The UN is not meant please anyone.” And the banging went on a while. Then came the discussion on India and Pakistan ratifying the treaty. Not only did it see some heated debate, but quite an interesting statement by Pakistan calling it all a ‘conference of the ridiculous’. That statement did perhaps have an impact the committee as a moderated caucus on interdependency proposed by Japan was passed! The delegate of UK mentioned three main interdependencies namely Iran-‐Israel, India-‐Pakistan and China-‐USA. If only these nations could be selfless. Russia pointed out that the USA has no moral authority to urge other nations to ratify the CTBT when they haven’t done so themselves. It’s something the United States as a nation always does-‐expecting other nations to bow down to them in attribution to their military capability. The accusations finally came to a halt as the delegates came up with a number of substantive proposals. Just when prospects of solutions were attaining visibility, the petition by Pakistan ignited things again. The petition however, failed. The Australian delegate was one of the few to urge all nations in the committee to arrive at a consensus.
All hell broke loose when the crisis was announced. The CTBTO, UNSC and GA IV(SPECPOL) are now in the Joint Crisis Committee to discuss Pakistan’s questionable intentions as indicated by the pictures given in by the CIA. AH, isn’t the USA involved just about everywhere?
General Assembly IV -‐ SPECPOL: Agenda 1: The situation in Kashmir Agenda 2: The situation in Falklands Day 2 – Deepthi Pisupati THE FIRST SESSION OF THE MUN As I enter the hall I’ve been allotted the first sight that greets me slightly anxious students poring through thick sheets of paper. I’m here at CBIT for the first half of the entire MUN session. I’m told that the council is SPECPOL and their agenda is the INDIA-‐PAKISTAN KASHMIR ISSUE and THE FALKLAND ISLAND ISSUE. When given a choice by the chair person Mr.Gufran Pathan to choose one among them the vote was unanimous-‐the Kashmir issue and no guesses as to why only that particular topic was chosen. The Kashmir issue has been of constant probing and scrutiny in the past and present, and will continue to be until it is resolved once and for all but till then it definitely is a very sensational topic to be discussed. The first hour or so the chair person Mr.Gufran discussed the general procedure for the MUN to be held and was very patient in answering all the queries posed by the delegates. After a quick coffee, the actual session began its proceedings. It took only 5 minutes into the conference for me to realize that the SPECPOL is going to make for extremely interesting articles. Sparks flew instantly between the delegates of India and Pakistan as they got into a fully fledged discussion on the topic at hand. The delegate of India’s constant refrain ‘Kashmir is an integral part of India’ was something which was commented upon by every delegate later. With amazing oratory skills and an in-‐depth knowledge on the facts, the delegate of India made her impression on every other delegate. After 4 Moderated Caucuses, it was time for an Unmoderated Caucus and that was the last discussion before lunch and for the next sessions of the MUN we were taken to the Mahindra Satyam. SECOND PART OF THE SESSION Day 3 -‐ Deepthi Pisupati I’m here at the large conference hall of the Mahindra Satyam at Hi-‐tech city for the second session on the Kashmir issue. After a plenary session and dinner later on, the students were transported back to their accommodations last night and have now gathered to resume their talks on ‘Who does Kashmir belong to’! Naturally every P5 country had a lot to talk about the issue and gave their stance and solution to the problem at hand.
Several Moderated Caucuses were proposed with some being voted with a positive and discussed. The general solution to the problem could be categorized into three-‐ make Kashmir a sub sovereign state, an independent state or give it one of the two countries fighting for it. The delegate of India, Vibha, a law student at Christ College Bangalore came back with full rigor and lashed out at anyone whose idea was not the same as hers-‐Kashmir is an integral part of India and the Pak occupied Kashmir or azad Kashmir as it is also known, is rightfully theirs too. She was opposed by an almost equally strong delegate of Pakistan, Maryam, a student of St.Francis Hyderabad. There was no doubt that the delegate of India was here to win but definitely made a few enemies in the process, not that she cared! When the Working Paper of Russia was discussed by the delegate, the delegate of India went as far as to propose a Moderated Caucus on ‘the ridiculousness of this working paper’. Well, one couldn’t help but marvel at her courage for taking on at the entire council single handedly helped only by a rather feeble Bangladesh. Though there were instances when France and Switzerland extended their hand and commiserated with India. The delegate of Pakistan was well prepared and gave fitting replies to all of India’s allegations against them and was hugely supported by Syria, or could that be because they were friends? Whatever it is, the SPECPOL was the place to be and one hopes that the discussions lead to a fruitful conclusion. Proceedings were interrupted when a joint crisis committee was convened for all delegates of the CTBTO, UNSC and GA IV SPECPOL. Joint Crisis Committee (Day 3 and DAY 4):
Royal Rumble?? Puneet Prakash At a point where everyone was thinking the day is over, the UNSC, SPECPOL and CTBTO councils were amalgamated together to form one Joint Crisis Committee. This unique committee following the mandate of the GA plenary was called by the esteemed Secretary General to avert ‘destruction’. Dead in the middle of the night, there was a situation in which the CIA received a report stating seismic activity which was supposedly because of nuclear activity in a relatively remote area of Pakistan. What followed was a series of updates and a wide variety of delegates to condemn Pakistan and henceforth the blame game was played until the suspension of the committee for the delegates to go home but with a ‘warning’ given to delegates not to sleep late. Though many people did get the hint this IP member did not see what was to come. At 5 in the morning the committee was convened to discuss further developments. The Indian security agencies had further approved the CIA’s report, which was considered fraudulent by many nations, and the India had even threatened to wage war for the preservation of peace. Following the barrage of updates, Indian air force squad flew over the troubled area, head of states from both India
and Pakistan gave their respective opinions, detecting of tritium, Al-‐Jazeera releasing a video claiming that the spokesperson for Taliban had come close to stealing the nuclear missiles, thus confirming their existence and delegates of countries like UK and others stated to put their missiles on high alert. Humorously radio interference from the UNCAC evoked a few giggles which helped lighten the heavy air of seriousness surrounding the council. Expectedly, after the break the committee got back rolling in which Pakistan’s absence from NPT and CTBT is because of developing nuclear missiles. Pakistan stated that the suspension of India from the UN, sanctions will ‘maybe’ cause them to forgive India for the air raid. Surprisingly the delegate of USA proposed an immediate cease fire which was shunted in committee. Since there were two blocs, naturally there were two resolutions formed by the two blocs. One called for the expulsion of India, trial of the air strike Indian nationals at the ICJ whereas the second resolution talked about the secession of hostiles, India’s action is seen as a defensive preemptive strike, obligation to Pakistan for nuclear proliferation, a ceasefire etc. Shockingly so as the IP member got to know later, both the resolutions passed but wait…this was all scraped because of a new situation brewing in Syria! This council gets more melodramatic by the second; thank god someone adjourned session. Till next time folks!
United Nations Emergency Response Committee: Agenda: The Iran-‐Israel Conflict
Day 2 – Adarsh Matthew 19th December, 2012. The UN Emergency Response Committee -‐ which is arguably the mother of all geo-‐political conflicts at CBITMUN 2012 -‐ got off to a slow, deliberative start, with all countries trying to size each other up, looking for potential allies and foes. The multi-‐faceted nature of the Iran-‐Israel conflict has the Chairperson herself unsure about Iran is lead by a man who claims the direction the debate might take in the upcoming days. that the US Government was behind the 9/11 attacks. Can a In the short time that the council has had, the general tone of all country with such a whimsical speeches have been accusatory in nature, with two very tangible blocs being formed – the pro-‐Israeli bloc with the USA in its leader and regime be trusted with corner, and the sympathizers of Iran on the other side, whose the responsibility of possessing corner is conspicuous by the absence of a player as big as the US, nuclear weapons? at least in terms of unilateral support; the kind Israel gets from -‐ Delegate of USA, UNERC USA. The absence of Brazil and Turkey – important mediator countries in this conflict – might have a telling impact on council proceedings, as the council can end in a stand-‐off, with no side willing to come to an agreeable middle-‐ path.
While Iran has been gaining steady criticism for blocking off the Strait of Hormuz – which has caused a drastic increase in oil prices globally -‐ the council has heavily criticized Israel’s threat of using neutron
bombs, with constant references being made to its old promise that it would not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons in the Middle East. The validity of the IAEA reports regarding Iran are also being disputed, with China and USA making contrasting claims about Iran’s nuclear capability. Despite the economic ramifications of the blockade, countries seem unwilling to engage in military means to lift the blockade, with Germany choosing peaceful measures. Proceedings for the First Session ended on a very ominous note, with the Delegate of USA posing the question: Can a nation that is ruled by the ‘whimsical’ Ahmadinejad really be trusted with nuclear weapons? Interview with the chair: The press caught up with the Chair of the UN Emergency Response Committee, Monica Seif, for a general round-‐up of her council. Here are the excerpts of the interview: -‐
-‐
-‐
-‐
-‐
The ERC is a unique council, and the issue at hand is a volatile one. What are your expectations? Yes, the agenda on hand is highly volatile and very dynamic in nature. The sheer complexity of the issue – the religious aspects; the economics; regional power plays – should make for an interesting three days. I’m hopeful that the delegates will come up with a feasible solution. We’ve had 3-‐4 GSL speeches, and a moderated caucus. Your initial understanding of the delegates? Enthusiastic. Excited. Involved. Lots of potential for conflict. Should be interesting. Any points you think that haven’t been brought up yet? The economics of the issue; the ethnographic conflicts in the Middle East; the short time window -‐ to name a few. Do you expect protracted discussions on the issues which do not strictly pertain to the agenda -‐ the legitimacy of Iran’s nuclear program, the Palestinian claims. A discussion on such topics, despite being digressive, is inevitable; they provide the background to the issue at hand. Such discussions will be allowed, but only within particular limits. Important countries like Turkey and Brazil are not present in council. Do you think their absence will have an adverse effect to the council? It’s unfortunate that such crucial countries are not preset in council, owing to their influence in this matter. It might have an adverse effect on the flow of the debate. The delegates will have to overcome their absence and continue the search for a solution.
Day 3 – Adarsh Matthew Matters have worsened in the Iran-‐Israel conflict, which has become an issue for the entire Middle East. As this report is being written, Iran and Israel are officially in a state of war, with Lebanon also being a party to the altercation. As the UN Emergency Response Committee tried to find an acceptable solution to the Iranian blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, news came in that an Iranian aircraft carrier had been sunk in international waters after being struck by US Sea Sparrow missiles launched from the US army base in Qatar, as a result of ‘Iran’s non-‐cooperation’. There were also reports of the mobilization of US troops. In what was
to become the first in a series of retaliations that Iran’s Demands made things worse, an Alawite group in North Lebanon kidnapped a Qatari and a Saudi tourist. -‐ Compensation for the destroyed aircraft carrier. Also, two Israeli soldiers were kidnapped by the -‐ Permanent revocation of sanctions levied on Nov 1, 2012. Hezbollah, and in the ensuing fracas, one was killed. -‐ Temporary revocation of all unilateral Israel followed this up with an attack on the radars sanctions.* placed by Iran and Lebanon on the southern border of Lebanon, causing mass casualties and destruction -‐ Sanctions on Israel for nuclear weaponry. of the radars. The Hezbollah retaliated by launching *For the duration, third-‐party mediated talks the Iran-‐made Khyber missiles, targeting Haifa, and with the USA will be held to discuss possible threatening to go deeper, possibly targeting the permanence of said actions. Dimona reactor. Following this, the Israeli troops were mobilized and primed for action while Iran announced that their intermediate-‐range Shahab-‐III missiles have been kept on standby for possible retaliation. I’m willing to push Israel to sign the NPT and also entertain the possibility of future UNSC sanctions on Israel for its nuclear weaponry, but only if Iran ends the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz immediately.
Amidst these developments, delegates tried to play the dual role of trying to justify the actions of their country and air their opinions, while trying to solve the issue at hand, the immediate concern being the blockade. The threat of military action loomed large over council proceedings with Russia, USA, Israel, Iran, and Germany stating that all -‐ Delegate of USA, UNERC options were on the table. A NATO strike was also proposed unilaterally by USA, before it was shot down by the other NATO members in council. Russia and Syria also called for the expulsion of the US and Israel for violating the Charter. Despite repeated calls for restraint on the side of Israel and Iran, they have refused to back down and have threatened to escalate the issue further. As negotiations went further, Iran was willing to lift the blockade only if its demands (see box) were met, including sanctions on Israel for its nuclear stockpile. As the session comes to a close, rifts are surfacing in the Israeli bloc, with apprehensions regarding how much the US is willing to concede to lift the blockade. Day 4 – Adarsh Matthew I’m not a big fan of James Bond, but I like bits of Casino Royale; it was my introduction to poker. The UN Emergency Response Committee resembles a high-‐stakes poker game. Both sides have invested a lot. They have lingering doubts over the hand of the other player – is he escalating because he has really good cards, or is he just bluffing? And this uncertainty is having a telling effect on the consistency of the players. A few others on the table are egging these two on, but the rest are worried that the players might be sore losers. And the aftermath of that will not be a pretty sight. The Iran-‐Israel conflict, as mentioned before, is a multi-‐faceted, complex issue. Five or six sessions is too short a time to arrive at any solution, and when you factor in the rhetoric and accusations, it becomes a
mere dream. But, the updates from the Middle East regarding the situation on ground has thrown everybody off-‐balance. USA is struggling to adapt to the situation accordingly, and the Israeli delegate just seems lost and building on this are Lebanon, Iran, Russia, and Syria. Several calls were made by these delegates for the expulsion of USA and Israel. Despite the rhetorical speeches, they have effectively backed the US into an uncomfortable corner. Iran has manoeuvred smartly, using its control of the critical Strait of Hormuz as a bargaining chip. The damage to the global economy caused by the blockade has forced the rest of the delegates to side with Iran’s demands, exerting pressure on the USA. While Iran refused negotiations mediated by Germany, Italy, and UK, the delegate of USA is using the signing of the NPT by Israel and possible future sanctions on Israel for its nuclear activities as a bargaining chip with Iran, much to the displeasure of Israel. And this is just one of the many demands of Iran. Developments aside, the dynamics of the council have taken an interesting turn. Four discrete blocs have been formed – pro-‐USA; pro-‐Iran; a couple of mediators; and the rest of the council, who haven’t added a lot to the debate. The absence of Brazil and Turkey has hampered the council’s chances of arriving at a solution; the two obstinate sides need skilled mediators to hammer out an amicable solution, a viable middle path. While the Delegate of Congo has been trying, the rest of the council seems unwilling to proceed that way. More delegates need to realize the need for mediators and step up, if the council plans on ending this conflict, which could boil over into a full scale nuclear war.
United Nations Convention Against Corruption: Agenda 1: Illegal drugs and weapon trafficking in Latin American States Agenda 2: Conflict Diamonds in Africa Day 2 -‐ Puneet Prakash
Kinky-‐‘ness’ all round! The UNCAC was perhaps the most entertaining committee conceived in the history of the MUN, having a motion to entertain on the very first day! Equally entertaining were the chairs viewpoint of the venue, who described it as ‘orgasmic’. This committee, comprising of the ‘’perfect mix’’ of international, new and experienced delegates, was a joy to cover for this IP member even though the international delegates did ask to chair to slow it down because of their difficulty with the Indian dialect. Although the committee started off really slowly, there were three turns taken just to open the GSL, the dreariness did eventually dissipate after the coyness of the international delegates was squashed away by the chair and vice-‐chair conducting an introductory session, acclimating the delegates, both old and new, to the committee. An informal session though it was, the delegates did not
shy away from socializing through chits. The highlight of the day was obviously the motion for entertainment where the delegate of Mexico pole danced, using the delegate of Angola as a pole. As if this were not enough; the vice-‐chair gave a lap dance to the delegate of USA to ‘Ass Like That’-‐Eminem, whilst being ‘encouraged’ by the chair to ‘’get down’’. All in all, a great day to loosen up the delegates due to the kinky antics of the chair! Keep it coming (no pun intended). Interview with the EB • •
Milind Sharma , Chair, UNCAC Riyaz Sundrani, Vice Chair, UNCAC
Q1) What are your immediate expectations for the delegates? A) Milind: I think they will perform well. It will be exciting to see the international delegates lobbying with the others. Riyaz: This is the perfect blend of experienced, new and international delegates so the expectations are naturally high. Q2) What would be your criteria in evaluating the best performer? A) Milind: There is a strict criteria which we are going by which includes yesterday’s performances, the level of debate i.e , quality over quantity and the level of diplomacy displaced. Riyaz: Events Performance , along with the delegates research, following rules of procedure and above all committee discipline are the criteria we would see. Q3) Do you think the venue(MSAT) is appropriate to this committee? A) Milind: Amazing! The venue is absolutely brilliant! Riyaz: The venue has a professional look about it and therefore is apt for this committee. Q4) Any final words to the delegates? A) Milind: Be happy Riyaz: Stick to your research and lobby properly. DAY 3 – Puneet Prakash
UNCA’k’-‐ United Nations Convention Against Kinky-‐ness! The issue discussed in UNCAC today was drugs and trafficking. The committee started out slowly and the continuous failure of the 9 moderated caucus’s really tells us about the difference of opinions the delegates had. Some of the useful points raised by the delegates were to curb the demand to directly
affect the supply of the drugs. Furthermore there were initial slips like the delegate of Italy not voting for her own motion and the delegate of Venezuela calling USA the ‘’cocaine capital of the world’’. Illiteracy and poverty were defined as the grass root causes for drug trafficking and Mexico whilst being accused of corruption, accepted the fact with ‘great humility’. However, USA blatantly denied any allegations made by a certain report, by the delegate of Russia. The delegate of Liberia and Qatar came up with exceptional points to stop the supply, restrict trafficking and most importantly raise youth awareness. An interesting thing to note here is that when the USA walked out to ‘freshen up’, the Chair followed him, presumably to comfort him. What emotions! Due to drug trafficking the common man is afraid to report to the authorities since they are also ‘in on the deal’ which was extremely apt to this committee, whilst Italy proposed that punishments for drug traffickers be adjudicated appropriately. Thus multiple working papers were formulated which furthermore resulted in a comprehensive resolution. Sadly this IP member was thrown out before the voting began so yeah… In other news, the Chair was usually ‘’active’’ in his flamboyant sexual innuendos in which he exclaims that ‘’USA wants it faster, press the keys harder’’. The vice-‐chair; who also participated, when asked ‘’how long’’, replied by saying ‘’Mine is very long’’. Hmmm… Day 4 – Nayanika Ghosh Zzzzzzzzzzzz...! UNCAC, where the delegates were still getting over not having gotten enough sleep due to being woken up at 4 am did, however, ultimately manage bidding goodbye to sandman and began the final session. Liberia, USA, Mexico, Russia, Somalia and Sudan actively participated in debate over the crisis on conflict diamonds. The others however, were constantly being urged by the Executive Board to present their opinions. Apparently, they were still in the process of attaining their acceptable level of cognizance; perhaps more coffee would’ve helped. The kidnapping of the Sierra Leone delegation had created quite a stir in committee. Things took an unexpected turn when the return of the Revolutionary United Front (perhaps one of the most dangerous rebel groups in Africa) after all these years was confirmed. While, the RUF publicly declared that it would be using only non-‐violent means, all the delegates were highly doubtful of this declaration keeping RUF’s history in mind. The Sudanese delegate was the only one at the time to express his suspicion over al-‐Qaeda’s involvement. And turns out, he was right! Thankfully, with this update all the delegates in committee finally sank into the realization of the seriousness of the situation at hand and heated arguments prevailed. While Mexico said that the global community should help the Sierra Leone government, Russia stated that this is now not a conflict in Sierra Leone alone but in the whole of Africa. And then came yet another update. The abducted delegation’s whereabouts were traced in Liberia. This new development was followed by some fair bit of alleging.
While the debate began getting more and more heated, Chair Milind Sharma kept reminding the delegates to not raise frivolous points of orders-‐can’t really blame them when their government’s reputation is on the line! In the end, our capable diplomats managed to find viable solutions to this crisis. They (including the Executive Board) could finally get their sleep in peace now.
United Nations Development Programme: Agenda 1: Need for a global strategy to reduce Carbon Emissions Agenda 2: Environmentally sound management and prevention of illegal international traffic in toxic products Ipshita Roy The session started off on a nice simple introductory note by the EB. Once the chair was done explaining all the rules of procedure, the list for the GSL was quickly taken down. The delegate of Denmark went in first, followed by active participation from the delegates of Djibouti, USA and UK. The GSL turned out to be quite brief speeches about the agenda (of carbon emission problem) from the respective country’s perspective. The council faced a little technical problem with the mike at this point of time, but the delegates were very patient and the EB too was very cooperative. The first motion of feasibility of global strategy to reduce carbon emission was set by the delegate of Djibouti. It was now that a little hint of a debate began, few of the delegates were coming up with solutions but there were no practical approaches to solving the issue. So, the chair helped the council in getting back to track on the issue by giving suggestions, out of which one was to go in for an unmoderated caucus. As suggested, the council did have an unmoderated caucus for 15 minutes. There were heated discussions and loads of screaming in that! Just when the council looked like a heating volcano, the news came in to have lunch break and then head to the next venue-‐MSAT. Then the council closed, hunger struck, food was all over the canteen, lots of chatting and chewing and finally we were all transported to Mahindra Satyam. On the last day of the committee, there was a mock session held, to imitate our whole EB. The roles were played by delegate of DPRK (as director) , delegate of India, Ryan,(as chair) and a liaison officer (as vice – chair). It was 20 minutes of complete fun and even the EB took it sportingly. After this the council resumed with its formal session. The session started off with a 5 minute unmoderated caucus to draft the resolution. After an eternity of unmoderated caucuses, surprisingly, the first resolution passed with 100% consensus in the committee! Well, happy ending! The UNDP that had started off with complete chaos had no direction towards solving the global concern initially, had evolved into a well groomed, smart and focused lot! On a less formal and much lighter note, here are the highlights of UNDP :
• • •
The delegates of Philippines and Thailand allegedly had the best sleep of their lives. Delegate of Zimbabwe’s flirtatious nature The famous lap dance given to the vice chair, Geetika Budhiraja, by the delegate of Venezuela.
Historic Security Council: Agenda: The Vietnam War DAY 1 – Nayanika Ghosh Interview with the EB: Immensely experienced Anansh Prasad, Chair, HSC has been to a mindboggling 48 MUNs! As intimidating as he seems, he’s by far one of the few Executive Board members open to points of order. His all time favourite UN committee is the Security Council as he’s a fan of technicality and traditional debating. What he looks for in a delegate is originality in thought, ability to propose novel solutions and substantive debate. Director Moneer Koshani, from CBIT looks forward to some good debate as well. Since the delegates were coming towards solutions pretty fast, one was curious as to why the problems weren’t being discussed substantially. To that the Executive Board says that since it is a historic council, the problems are already well known which is why it’s more than sensible to start arriving at solutions. The Executive Board members expect a lot from the committee in terms of solutions as going back in time, these delegates are bound to realize the complications faced by diplomats at the time. Day 3 – Puneet Prakash
A true ‘tale’ to tell The HSC was perhaps the most interesting council of the day. Chaired by the superb Anansh Prasad, the committee was the smoothest committee that this IP member has seen to date. There were equal delegate participation and the absence of USSR and China was dissolved by the Chair’s constant updates. The delegates extensively talked about biological warfare and ideas across the council consisted of ceasefire and territorial claims with some countries, *cough DRV (Democratic Republic of Vietnam) *, against the idea for foreign intervention. Profanity was abound in the chits and I would respectfully tell the delegates to tone it down in terms of the cussing. Amongst the major problems discussed, the probability of averting biological warfare to deliberate between a peace accord amongst the DRV and the ROV, and respectability of Laos and Cambodia were some of the useful points made by the delegates. In lighter areas, the motion for entertainment consisted of the vice-‐chair making the council dance to Afghani tunes (including the chair!). The delegate of DRV and UK talked after elapsing their respective time limits whilst the delegate of Algeria engaged in cross-‐talk. As a solution, the chair asked the delegates to write poems which according to this IP member were not technically poems (for more
information ask the delegate of DRV) and also proclaimed to the USA that the charter ‘’will not help you in any way possible today’’. Updates came in regularly in which the ‘boycotting’ delegates of USSR proclaimed to use military interference if USA increases military presence in Vietnam, and the ROV rejecting the possibility of recognizing the DRV. Numerous working papers were submitted but although some of them scrapped; others were passed and so we hope to see that the HSC comes up with an appropriate resolution on the last day. Day 4 – Srikara Chaitanya
A textbook finish! The day started with a crisis which was just an update to the current agenda wherein President Johnson of the USA, using the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, launches ‘pre-‐emptive’ strikes again Saigon. In retaliation, the Vietcong launches operation ‘CONDUM’ against USA. USSR has a fleet of Mig-‐13s poised to attack, they are said to be equipped with a dangerous chemical codenamed as ‘CBITMUN’. Hats off to the terminology! America launches operation Animal-‐Instinct which is to help increase fertility in areas affected by operation Blue in Vietnam. As the council started nearing the time of completion, the pros and cons of a 2 Nation State and a Transitional Federal Government were extensively discussed. The chair Anansh Prasad has done a terrific job in chairing the council keeping the delegates both entertained and serious at the same time. The poems and punishments were an amusing way of keeping the delegates interested in council and follow rules of Procedure at the same time! The council was then thrust into a long line of Unmoderated Caucuses where the delegates were bickering incessantly over a draft resolution. Everyone in the council was annoyed by the constant desk banging by the delegate of Cambodia. The council ended with a draft resolution being passed and the chair giving a very informative feedback session that is sure to have helped all the delegates. If there were a best chair award, Anansh Prasad would be a very strong contender for it!