NTUMUN 2021 Press Corps

[ntumun21presscorps]

Moving Towards An Era of Sustainable Fashion

By: Nayana Chandralal

Climate change​ and ​Fast Fashion​, at first glance, may look as if they are two extreme poles of a magnet by themselves. Upon closer scrutiny, you may realize they are, in fact, two sides of the same coin. When you first come across the term Fast Fashion, perhaps you are reminded of the numerous glamorous fashion outlets the more economically developed countries have in place, spread across the globe. Perhaps, when you come across the pressing issues of Climate change, you are ironically reminded of the same Fast Fashion industries that invariably contribute to this global issue. Nevertheless, before pushing the blame and deeming the ethicality of the detrimental effect of Fast Fashion industries, ever wondered how consumers religiously contribute to this drastic global issue unknowingly? 

Recent statistics revealed, "An average of 70 pounds per consumer annually throws away shoes and clothing that could be recycled 95% of textiles in landfill sites each year."The availability of ready clothing has increased than before and has brought about changes in consumers' behaviour. With the use of clothing as short-term resources instead of long-term investments, consumers add to wasteful consumption patterns, inevitably leading to dramatic climate change. 

Slow Fashion, therefore, was the antidote to the vulnerabilities brought in by Fast Fashion. It is a deliberate, willful, and all-encompassing solution that was first coined up by design activist cum-professor, Kate Fletcher.Promoting slower production, Slow Fashion embraces sustainability with ethics and requires customers to invest in enduring clothing. By integrating both shopping practices of a consumer and manufacturers, Slow Fashion attempts to achieve the idealistic goal of replenishing consumers' clothing relation. 

Fashion brands are almost weekly spraying new collections on sales floors and recycling into new clothes less than 1 percent of all apparel commodities. On the contrary, Slow Fashion brands aim at reducing waste materials that obstruct landfill sites with their slowed production cycles, smaller lot collections, and zero waste designs. These brands use sustainable styles with layering choices rather than following trends and produce traditional and flexible parts. 

In this respect, Slow fashion, with its emphasis on quality rather than quantity, relieves time constraints. It encourages vendors to plan orders, forecast the necessary number of employees, and invest for the longer term. It allows businesses to develop mutually beneficial partnerships. Suppliers would no longer be required to hire transient or subcontracted workers, or to force employees to work unnecessary overtime to fulfill unexpected orders with impossible deadlines. Instead, employers would have stable jobs with regular hours and the potential for advancement. 

[ntumun21presscorps]

Veto Power : The Once Sought After Installation In The UN Now Turned Into A Point Of Concern

By: Alex Mathew

New York, United States Of America - “You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become a villain” - the infamously uttered words by the Christian Bale portrayal of ‘The Batman’ is one that associates itself with a large array of topics and focus points of which includes the once critically acclaimed introduction of ‘Veto Power’ for the victors of World War 2 that has now fallen far from grace due to recognition of bias that the P-5 countries may have and is now an agenda of discussion with the secure walls of the United Nations Security Council. The controversial nature of this topic has led to a series of opinions and comments by countries and has the potential to change how the UNSC makes decisions in the future. 

It is universally agreed by all countries that the current system on veto power and membership is anything but perfect and is flawed in many ways. A majority of countries which comprises France, Algeria and India agreed to the need for new reform of membership and it is of popular interest that the G4 countries which include Brazil, India, Germany and Japan, as well as the inclusion of any two African Union countries is necessary. An actual like this is pushed forward by nations as the decisions made by the UNSC should be agreed upon by all countries and not just the P-5 countries. 

Another point brought up is the need to limit and restrict the veto powers of nations as the delegate of Algeria states that countries such as Russia and China have misused this in the past. The group of countries would hence like to limit this power and completely restrict it when it comes to issues such as genocide and crimes against humanity to which a large majority of the committee agrees. 

However, the P-5 countries of the USA and Russia have opinions that bring about mixed reactions. Both countries mentioned that Veto power is ‘instrumental’ due to how it helps provide the decisions made by the UNSC to be multilateral in nature and is essential for the safeguarding of nations, thereby disagreeing with the many opinions of discarding this feature. Though they agreed with the restriction of Veto power during crimes against humanity, they are against the stance of increasing the permanent members and providing them with veto power as they believed that it would disrupt the functioning of the committee and its ability to make decisions. The delegate of Russia also liked to clarify the accusations of misuse of Veto power over the Syrian government and disagreed with the accusations with whole heart and later went on to state that the country still supports Bashar al-Assad in all his decisions. 

Though there has not been a firm agreement between all the countries over this agenda, the discussion is full of promise and potential and an agreement will be reached that not only affects the United Nations Security Council but the universe as a whole.

[ntumun21presscorps]

Commentary: SOCHUM’s Reso, Loopholes in Loop

By: Nguyen Xuyen Chi

At 14:30 (GMT+8), SOCHUM ultimately passed their resolution on the protection of the rights of indigenous people.

The most contentious aspect would be Article IV, Clause 23 which “[guarantees] the Indigenous Peoples’ rights to their lands, especially in areas prone to deforestation and exploitative extraction of natural resources”. This move was strongly deemed as giving land away “out of pity” and enabling human rights violations to prevail in “less civil societies”.

However, the majority of the council spoke for the clause. “It is not the giving of land. It is the protection of history”, said New Zealand. This statement was seconded by Brazil, stating that deeming tribal laws as “savage” is dangerous.

With the strike of Clause 23 voted against by majority, it remains a question whether sovereignty preservation or the rights of a mere minority takes priority for each state in SOCHUM.

The strike of Clause 11, which “encourages each country to build facilities and training for indigenous teachers”, met the same fate.

Teachers of indigenous origins, after training, will likely be placed in a dilemma between being accused by their own people of “enabling foreign forces and assimilation” while carrying the heavy burden of being the so-called “bridge” for the sovereign state. This is especially true in nations where there has been little effective effort to reconcile the relationship of ethnic minorities and the state.

Scholarship, based on merit and financial need, will be given to indigenous students to further their passion and thereafter, contribute back to their community. However, studies conducted in Vietnam where a similar policy is in place proves that this usually enables gentrification where indigenous people settle in metropolitan cities, in order to seek a better condition of life.

The very first clause calls for data collection on well-being and sentiments of indigenous people in nations where these populations are significant. This research-based approach is greatly inspired by Australia’s success in past research voyages.

Yet, Australia has remained neutral about whether they will be sharing their expertise with other nations, and their stance on the Resolution is still unclear. Australia has also opted out of Voting.

Although celebratorily deemed a success, this resolution leaves a lot of questions unanswered, and doubtedly adds to the success of its precedents. With major stakeholders either remaining a low profile or not present for debate, it is foreseen that the implementation of approved policies will meet resistance when put to the test.

[ntumun21presscorps]

Global Red Alert: We Are Now Contributing To An Extremely Toxic Industry Situation

By: Joanna Grace Fernandez

The Fashion Industry shines bright with glamour and allure, but nevertheless has significant drawbacks especially in the areas of its environmental impact. It begins with Fast Fashion which essentially are clothes that are produced in mass quantities with questionable ethics and product quality that are offered in mass markets at relatively cheaper prices than other clothes. 

Consumers essentially fall into the trap of the low alluring prices, only to realise their clothes would not last for more than a few months. Fast Fashion companies produce clothes of lesser quality and that deteriorate and have a toxic effect on the environment within a few months of their disposal. 

Producing low quality clothes, forces consumers to buy more of their products. To a consumer the cheap prices seem like a win-win scenario and a hidden deal. However what consumers fail to acknowledge is that their products deteriorate extremely quickly and therefore in the long run they spend more money replacing the product. On top of this, regularly purchasing and discarding clothes generate huge amounts of waste. This is extremely hazardous to the environment.  

The two main problems with the Fast Fashion Industry is that one, it is extremely environmentally taxing and deteriorating. The second is that the workers of the industries are abused in toxic work conditions. Both of these problems are extremely alarming and therefore it is important to address them and come up with sustainable solutions. 

The abuse of workers in the fashion manufacturing sector is unfortunately very common. In recent years, it is seen that workers in countries like India and Bangladesh are subject to abuse. Workers of the industry, especially women are physically abused when they fail to reach impossible production goals set by the companies. These abused workers fail to speak out and voice their stories and problems in fear of losing their jobs. The workers are also paid extremely poorly, some even don't end up getting paid the mandated minimum wage. 

The environment detriments of the fashion industry must not go unacknowledged. It is said that the fast fashion industry is costing the world economy a little over 400 billion dollars. It also contributes to 10% of the world’s carbon emissions. The industry also takes the place of the 2nd most water consuming industry in the world. In addition, this fast fashion industry pollutes existing land and water bodies.  

For most of us, these facts come as a shock to us. It is natural to blame the failures of the Fashion Industry on the system of capitalism. However, what we as humans fail to consider is that companies and industries produce in accordance to the wants and demands of the consumers, which is us, humans. 

Consumer awareness is key to overcoming this challenge. Essentially it is our responsibility as humans and as consumers to drive change and combat these problems. If consumers advocate for the rights of the industries workers and for more sustainable clothing, companies will eventually produce in accordance. 

At the end of the day, it is up to us, the consumer, to be aware and educated, and to demand change in these concerning areas. It is enlightening to see that consumers are now demanding fair working conditions for the industry's workers, as well as more sustainable clothing. We have taken the first step towards combating the problems that lie within the industry. With that said, we have a long road ahead with much scope for improvement and betterment in the areas of workers rights and environmental sustainability. 

[ntumun21presscorps]

De-weaponization in UNCOPUOS

By: Jennifer Lim

Delegates of UNCOPUOS emphasised on the importance to have a tighter and clearer definition for military and weaponry. After several rounds of discussion, the council came to an agreement to de-weaponize outer space and ensure that all machinery to be released into space were free from aggressive activities. The council also prioritised ground assets. 

Since the start of council, the delegates had difficulties identifying the definition of military assets, weapons and space assets. With utmost support from the delegates of the Russian Federation, the Republic of Ghana and many more, the delegate of the United States of America emphasised on the importance in reassessing the relevance of terms for Military and Weaponry in the treaty. 

In an interview with the delegate of Columbia, the council agreed that the new definition is “space weapon as an offensive construct which can damage either space or earth-based infrastructure either directly or indirectly, whereas space assets would be spacecraft, which would benefit the state that launched it through peaceful means such as resource collection or scientific research. Military assets would simply be infrastructure used by the military for any purpose such as surveillance.” 

Whilst some delegates managed to bring up and highlight the registration for satellites should have been more transparent to enhance and tighten regulations, the Delegate of the United States mentioned that it might jeopardise national interest. Therefore, regulations for space machines launched by private companies remain the as per agreed on in the last treaty.  

[ntumun21presscorps]

Subjectivity in the DR’s Open Debate

By: Grace Abigail Liu

The ILO council has been assembling for two days now, and a draft resolution to restructure global supply chains in the midst of the pandemic have been written. As of now, only one draft resolution has been recognised: DR 1.1 submitted by Argentina. Its contents encompasses a wide variety of solutions, including digitisation of information regarding the global supply chain, implementing fiscal policies, increasing labor to both migrants and seafaring workers, economic integration, and several more. Even though these large topics have been reached, why are numerous countries still present to counter the seemingly perfect draft resolution? Is it a lack of content found in the clauses, or is it simply a multinational bias that is made to support specific countries to win without any concrete reasoning? 

To give a chance for opposing countries to voice out their stance, an open debate is made for all delegates to comment on Argentina’s draft resolution. From there, various arguments were issued (mainly by the delegates of Russia and Belgium) to point out the flaws in the resolution. The implementations of the solutions were questioned thoroughly, and even one delegate boldly mentioned how the draft resolution did not answer the 5W+H basic details. These questions, though they are heavily insightful, give no effect whatsoever to the proposition team. 

The factual evidence already available in the draft resolution is sufficient to combat the attacks made by both Russia and Belgium. Through the open debate session, it is demonstrated that delegates opposing Argentina’s alliance have not taken proper attention to the draft resolution itself, but only to tackle the alliance formed. With that being said, can the council really trust the Russian team to actually amend the resolution? After all, it is pretty much seen that Russia and her alliance would rather attack those outside their team instead of the quality of the resolutions themselves. It is therefore hoped that if any amendments are to be done, the Russian block will objectively see any weaknesses in the contents itself, and prevent any unnecessary biases in the council.

[ntumun21presscorps]

TikTok, SOCHUM’s blocs need to take stock!

By: Nguyen Xuyen Chi

SOCHUM entered its afternoon session insisting on merging four working papers, condemning the focus on differences in previous sessions. 

Russia, Saudi Arabia and Greece have repeatedly stated the desire to move forward as one council. South Korea, likewise, has identified and presented four areas as a backbone for a unified draft resolution.

Yet, after much debate, the four blocs could not find the common ground. Peru persistently pointed out the nuances in each paper in an effort to work towards an agreement, but is met with animosity by the rest of the Council. 

Kenya has expressed grave concern over the progress of the council, questioning the council’s seemingly shared interest in the merger. 

Debate has greatly shifted from the topic of contention - the Well-being of Indigenous People - to the fate of existing working papers. With no bloc willing to withdraw their papers, the council has decided to bypass unifying working papers, and moved straight into crafting a draft resolution. 

Despite slow progress, this new phase is observing SOCHUM working cooperatively and new solutions introduced. The potential draft resolution may enable for countries with large indigenous populations to voice out their concerns, guaranteeing a more inclusive resolution for all stakeholders.

It is predicted that identified nuances by Peru will crop up during substantial voting. However, council seems to have established common understanding, and are willing to look past nuances  for international cooperation.

[ntumun21presscorps]

Interviewing The Esteemed Chair Of The United Nations Committee Of Peaceful Uses Of Outer Space

By: Alex Mathew

The United Nations Committee of Peaceful Uses of Outer Space is a committee that aims for the betterment of outer space in future and is one of the most innovative and bounded to be a very influential committee in the near future. But to head and coordinate a committee of this importance required a group of high skilled people. Falling into the same category as Ocean’s Eleven, The Three Musketeers and The Expendables, is the three-man stack of Huspi Anwar (Head chair), Jason Ong (Assistant chair) and David (Assistant chair). Huspi Anwar is a final year student in the course of International Relations in the University of Indonesia, while Jason Ong is a twenty-year-old student that just got out of high school and David is a student that lives in Vietnam and is going to join Seoul National University later this year. All of three of the executive board members have a multitude of MUN’s under their belts and are head over heels prepared to guide and coordinate this conference.

Q. After two sessions of packed and organised committee discussion, how satisfied are you with the committee and rate them out of 1-10.

Jason: I would give this committee a decent seven, because while I enjoy listening to debate, I hate network issues.

David: If I had to rate this committee, I would give it an eight, because the delegates are well prepared and since this is my first time as a chair on a council with more than forty delegates, I am impressed by how the delegates are able to communicate their stances on the topic.

Huspi: Eight actually, because the delegates are well prepared and they are aware of the fundamentals of a committee and due to that we don’t have to give them too much prior training. I am also grateful that I have Jason and David as they can help coordinate the meeting even when I am facing the issues and because of all this I am satisfied.

Q. The militarisation and weaponisation of space has been a point of focus ever since the space race. Could you give me your perspectives and stances on the topic?

David: First of all I’m happy that the committee has discussed and got over the topic and difference of what weaponisation and militarisation is. If I were a delegate, I would focus on the laws that govern space weapons such as the kinetic energy weapon and also to create laws on weapons that can cause mass destruction to all other spacecrafts. I would also like to implement the restriction of collateral damage in space weapons just like shown in for example how tanks which can cause collateral damage in an area are restricted not to. 

Jason: Before I talk about my stance on this topic, I would like to express my definitions of weaponisation and militarisation. Weaponisation is basically the conversion of assets into weapons while militarisation is the allowing the military to use the satellites for military purposes such as recon. I believe that militarisation is important and necessary while weaponisation is unnecessary. Militarisation is a means of development that will be inevitable in the future and will help us fight and solve wars.

Q. In your opinion, what makes a great delegate?

David: A great delegate is one that is able to bring up strong points, has the ability to lead the argument, able to form blocks with other delegates and who is able to lobby delegates. The delegate must also be able to help other new delegates and help them learn how the committee works as being able to teach someone is an amazing thing to do.

Q.  The rise of the Corona Virus has affected the whole of humanity and has forced NTUMUN 2021 to be conducted online. What were the complications and difficulties faced during the MUN and how did you overcome it?

Jason: Other than the preexisting network issues we face, the functioning and working of ‘Gatherly’ is confusing and sometimes hard because of how it’s very new to us. It does take all of us sometime to understand how it works and also sometimes when we broadcast, the network just crashes. Yeah, but that’s about it, there are no other problems other than that.

Q. As we talked before, the Covid 19 pandemic has affected us all in numerous ways with the introduction of lockdown. How has this impacted you?

Jason: What do you mean by impacted?

Alex: Impacted as in your health, for example I gained a lot of weight.

*Cue laughter*

Huspi: It’s safe to say we have all gained weight, my mother feeds me so much food now. But in terms of MUNs it has been a benefit actually as beginners have the opportunity to experience a fraction of how MUNs are and helps them anticipate and prepare for an offline version of it. So in that regard it is very helpful

[ntumun21presscorps]

After fiery debate, UNEP reaches consensus on extreme heat solutions

By: Nguyen Xuyen Chi 

By the end of Friday, 19 March, 2021, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) had concluded their first council session, agreeable that climate change is entrenched in the rapidly developing world. To tackle occurrences of extreme heat, it would require international collaboration to both impede climate change and enhance preparedness against extreme heat events.

Following up on this consensus, the council opened the floor today with a surprising divide on seemingly different interests in policies. Denmark proposed adaptation and improvement of carbon tax to all countries and was strongly backed by the United States of America (the USA). “Despite proven to be one of the most harmful fuels to the environment, coal is taxed at a rate close to 0%.” claimed Denmark. In contrast, Ethiopia opposed this policy, citing difficulties in policies regarding heavy carbon emitting industries within its borders. “Tax is only a portion of the profit they earn” said Ethiopia. Regardless, the council quickly reconciled over hope provided by the potential of research and development.

Peru, along with Turkey’s support, proposed the establishment of Disaster Hazards and Management Research Centers (DHMRC) to facilitate international research, ease data sharing and improve current disaster prediction and management systems. This solution received resounding praise for its ability to alleviate the threat towards vulnerable groups, such as the elderly and children, in the event of extreme heat.

With regards to privacy, data collection and sharing is promised to be conducted with caution and careful selection. “The knowledge of previous occurrences in one country can facilitate planning in another”, stated Turkey.

The council was also unanimous about generalisation of carbon tax policies, as UNEP is tasked with drafting non legally-binding guidelines.

Alongside research and economic policies, sustainable construction and vegetation coverage were also highlighted. A notable innovation would be Zimbabwe’s advocating for concrete’s alternatives in infrastructure construction, especially in developing countries. “This is to steer the public consensus towards the urgency of climate change as well as reduce the impact of the urban heat effect.”

Russia also put forth the need for countries to adopt renewable energy, and more affluent nations to transfer technology to aid less affluent ones in this transition. The Environment-oriented (or Green) Economy Model was likewise adopted in the resolution, in hopes of accelerating environmentally ethical business practices.

At 5:15pm, the council unanimously passed the resolution, and UNEP opened a new era towards more efficient disaster management. UNEP’s resolution operates in accordance with previous international agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol (1997) and Paris Agreement (2015), while acknowledging and bridging specific gaps in mentioned precedents.

The resolution, however, called for more proactive assistance from non-governmental organisations (NGOs) regarding medical recovery, and little involvement of states. The council seems to assume it is the region’s responsibility to alleviate each other’s burden in the event of extreme heat. Yet, “calamity is man’s true touchstone” and this assumption stands to be challenged when the time comes.

[ntumun21presscorps]

Iran’s Stance: What are They Really Planning?

By: Grace Abigail Liu

Finalisations on the proposed solutions are being made. Delegates who have come from all over the world have prepared themselves for this moment, where each delegate may contribute to abolish the raging fight found in the JCPOA issue. Yet no matter how long they have prepared for this, the final decision of reconciliation will come down to the two main countries: the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Ever since the beginning, the United States have been relatively cooperative, willing to abide in the conversations, and even proposing their own conditions to be able to continue the JCPOA. Heavy sanctions that the United States have made under Trump’s office will even be lifted for good under the right circumstances. However, the issue of Iran’s willingness to abide in the JCPOA is not yet clear. The whole committee have been restlessly waiting for a confirmation from Iran on whether Iran is willing to abide by the restrictions of uranium production and also the makings of nuclear weapons. Though Iran has confirmed their agreement on not developing any sort of nuclear weapons, the developments of other weapons of attack are not yet specified. Moreover, their stance on the JCPOA is still unheard of by any delegates.

Hence, several inquiries are to be made regarding Iran’s stance. The delegate has made suspicious moves throughout the whole committee by remaining silent in such an important and fateful meeting. Can there be anything that the delegate of Iran is hiding, so that the delegate has not tried to contact the United States as a form of appeasement? To further confirm this, the representatives of AFP began an interview with Iran as a press conference was being held. When being asked about Iran’s hopes and stance on the JCPOA negotiation, no response was made whatsoever. Can this mean that Iran is indeed hiding something? What kinds of violations can Iran possibly make that may enrage the entire council?

[ntumun21presscorps]

EMPLOYMENT AND INTEGRATION: DO THEY GO HAND IN HAND?

By: Ishan Biswas

The proceedings on the agenda of ‘Integration and employment of refugees’ finally commence in UNHCR as the representatives of each country are eager to speak on the issue of unemployment and the integration that refugees face. The countries raised an interest on debating on the country’s actions for the integrations of the refugees.

Canada has already taken action towards this by introducing two main programs which include GAR which stands for ‘Government Assisted Refugees’ where a person outside Canada who is a refugee would be entitled support after resettling in Canada. It also includes PSR which stands for Private ‘Sponsorship of Refugees’, this is a pioneering Canadian resettlement program where members of groups, organization or even fellow citizens can sponsor these refugees. Obviously, these programs to provide support require a hefty budget and would need the coordination of the entire respective country so the developing countries should not just follow blind optimism. To tackle this financial issue, Spain has proposed a tax policy that refugees would need to pay in order to be provided the same benefits as the citizens. Malta has been a country with the least unemployed refugees in Europe since 2016 and also wishes to change the stigma of refugees and their lack in skills by providing free education to the children. Ireland profoundly agreed with the delegate of Malta referring to the resolution of free education as Ireland have also provided free medication to the refugees residing in Ireland.

With alike opinions would also bring out different judgements, China and Sweden states that refugees end up staying situated in their respective host countries for over a decade and rely on resources and support given to them by the host country. The refugees end up becoming too dependent on others and cannot do anything by themselves to live a suitable life.

Employment and Integration are associated in more ways or another and refugees need to be reminded that they are not allowed to work unless they apply to do so via the facilities and opportunities that are given or should be given by the host countries. 

[ntumun21presscorps]

France’s FCIC: Solution, or Worthless Sacrifice?

By: Grace Abigail Liu

The Delegate of France is yet to give up on trying to help Iran and the USA regain their trust for each other. With each motions being raised, the Delegate of France repeatedly reminded both sides of the council of France’s willingness to help. The FCIC remains to be the only policy in the council so far that offers a concrete plan on what France will do to resolve the continually heated debate on the renegotiation of the JCPOA. With $5 billion on the line, France has demonstrated the sacrifice they are willing to make in order to maintain peace. However will this “credit line” be effective enough to both solve the JCPOA conflict as well as glorifying France’s name as the pioneer of the resolving of these issues? For if any of this negotiation does not go as planned, it is plainly obvious that France will lose a huge asset and therefore highly disadvantage their own people.

The Delegate of France was inquired on whether or not the money that they are willing to release will impact the country of France in any ways. He said, “ Our president has made similar policies like this in 2019 during the United Nations assembly. Though the money we have prepared now is not specifically prepared for this reason, we believe that it will not give a downgrade to the work of the French government nor its citizens.” Especially with France’s excellent system of using a credit line, they are able to ensure financial safety for the people of France. They have also created a flexible policy whilst helping Iran with the credit line, so that the deal formed between Iran and the 5P+1 countries is guaranteed to be continued with both sides following the terms and clauses made.

The whole UNSC have also seemed to fully support France’s initiative to make a first move and reunite these countries. With the financial support given to solve the issue, it is hoped that Iran might open up to more renegotiation. Other countries have also been invited to do the same in order to help the countries in need and hence solve the JCPOA renegotiation together. By the financial collaboration created, greater peace will be secured on a global scale, thanks to France, and their admirable will to create this solution.

[ntumun21presscorps]

The Fine Yet Distinctive Line That Separates Militarisation And Weaponisation In The Field Of Space

By: Alex Mathew

It is common knowledge that the field of outer space is one that has been least explored and moreover, least exploited by mankind, but that was until October of 1957, when Russia (then USSR) had launched the first ever man-made spacecraft to outer space and thus began the infamous ‘Space Race’ between United States of America and the USSR. Fast forward to almost seventy years into the future and nearly six thousand satellites have been launched into space, excluding those that are not presently orbiting the Earth. Stating this feat as an astonishing achievement would be an understatement as the once believed impossible realm known as space had finally been breached. However, this brings numerous areas of concern to the governments, notably the militarisation and weaponisation of space. But what people fail to understand is the difference in militarisation and weaponisation of space and different stances that each country has over this controversial agenda.

Militarisation is considered as the use of spacecraft and satellites for the military purposes of a country which includes safeguarding and national security and is widely accepted by many countries. However, militarisation can also be harmful as countries can ‘spy’ on each other, as stated by the Delegate of Spain and many others. But regardless of this, a majority of the committee believes that militarisation is key to a country’s development in terms of security.

Contrary to militarisation, heavy criticism was received on the idea of weaponisation of space as a majority of countries state that it is a liability to every other country and could be misused. The Delegate of Denmark even went on to say that it should be banned and the concept of weaponisation of space must never occur. However the Delegate of Qatar gave a different perspective on this negatively viewed topic and stated that weaponisation was needed but at a bare minimum to help countries battle against any interstellar threats such as asteroids and against global threats presented by a country or a group.

“Not all militarisation is weaponisation but all weaponisation is militarisation” - this simple yet precise quote presented by the Delegate of Turkey sums up the common understanding of this agenda. Militarisation and weaponisation of space are concepts and ideas that have very similar yet very contrasting meanings and they both have the potential to change how the world works. And to prevent the negative effects of the UNCOPUOS must take a brilliant decision as this agenda not only impacts the government, but also humankind as a whole.

[ntumun21presscorps]

Restricted Freedom of Speech – Right or Wrong?

By: Ishan Biswas

Delegates of UNHCR hammered on the topic of freedom of speech for refugees. The Delegate of Kenya put across a motion to mention the political views on refugees in the respective host countries. A lot of the countries had a similar say on it which was to allow refugees to be given freedom of speech and does not welcome any sort of discrimination towards refugees. Mexico introduced article 19 to the committee that states, ‘everyone has the freedom of right to voice out their opinions and express feely without interference.’

Even though there were countries that were more than happy to find solutions in providing freedom of speech rights to refugees, there were also countries that wished to restrict the amount of freedom that is given. These countries include Turkey and Thailand as they believe if too much freedom is given then the refugees will turn to violence and be forceful when voicing out opinions. Nevertheless, the debate would not be fruitful if there were no differences in opinion!

[ntumun21presscorps]

ILO Pledges Digitisation; Migrant Protections in Landmark Resolution

By: Nikki Maly

On the evening of Friday, March 19, representatives from all over the world met in the International Labor Organization to discuss and address economic issues related to the recent and devastating COVID-19 pandemic. Preliminary discussions on Friday demonstrated a widespread recognition of the severity of the issue and a desire for action across the board.

By the morning of Saturday, March 20, these representatives had drafted working papers targeted at addressing issues. Many of these proposals share common ideas, including the encouragement of digitation, diversification of supply chains, decreasing industrial dependence on China, and implementation of protective measures for migrant workers.

The representative of Kenya, working with representatives of Saudi Arabia, the Philippines, and Peru, has created a working paper designed to address four main aspects of economic recovery: diversification of supply chains, implementation of fiscal policies intended to provide stability for supply chains, digitisation, and the protection of migrant workers, who have been disproportionately affected. Fiscal policies proposed in the working paper intend to stimulate economic activity, with the paper including the possibility of “stimulus checks” and lowered tax rates for economic sectors that have suffered the worst impacts from the pandemic. The paper’s authors, specifically the Kenyan representative, encourage the regionalisation of manufacturing in order to protect supply chains from disruption, as well as the use of local labor. The representative has stated that the goal of the working paper is to “mitigate the impacts of COVID-19 for the supply chain.”

Another proposal, presented by Germany’s delegation, focuses on industrial digitisation. The working paper encourages the use of predictive analytics and blockchain technology in industry. A similar working paper created by the Turkish delegation also includes the use of AI technology to increase efficiency. This paper, classified as Working Paper 3 by the ILO, focuses on five main points: fiscal policy, diversification and regionalisation, digitisation, aiding workers, and food security. The working paper is strongly in favour of regionalisation, emphasising the benefits of proximity and the decrease in positives of isolated manufacturing in Eastern Asia, especially China. The fiscal policy suggestions presented focus mainly on economic stimulus, and myriad initiatives related to the improvement of labourers’ working conditions are highlighted in the working paper.

As of early Saturday afternoon, the fate of these papers is not yet known. Moving into Saturday afternoon, debate is expected to take place regarding each paper and voting procedure may occur during the evening.

[ntumun21presscorps]

The USA vs Iran Affair: Can There Be Peace?

By: Grace Abigail Liu

As the UNSC assembles, countries from all over the world have come to discuss different methods to tackle the issue regarding the flaws so visibly seen in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement made in 2015. With the United States leaving the agreement so abruptly, and especially after a heavy sanction was placed by them upon Iran in the midst of Iran’s economic crisis, countries must come together with a solid plan to ensure global safety and welfare, while also attempting to revise the potentially troublesome JCPOA agreement made in 2015.

The connection between the USA and Iran have been critically worsening after this issue was brought up, since both of their actions to leave or violate the JCPOA agreement are deemed false by each other. Several delegates, including France and Turkey, all have been the face of the UNSC so far, for what they truly hope to achieve is the restoration of peace in the council. It is hoped that throughout the committee, Iran and the USA will be able to open a civil discussion to further discuss the issue.

However, several other countries like Kenya, Saudi Arabia, and Russia seem to have placed their loyalty to Iran since the beginning. Instead of stating their desire for peace, these countries reprimand the United States for their prior actions during Trump’s period, despite the fact that Biden’s office has now called upon renegotiation. Especially after knowing that Iran has stayed put throughout the whole discussion, the notion of peace is still unheard of so far.

Therefore, after knowing that several motions for peace have been issued in the council, in spite of Iran’s withstanding silence so far, can these countries be quick enough to first reconnect the broken relation of the USA with Iran? Or will the countries decide that an attempt at reconciliation is futile, so that the JCPOA will be revised without the help of these two countries? It is up to the delegates of the UNSC to decide.