Sixth Committee of the General Assembly — Press Release

From: The Delegation of France and the Delegation of the United States of America

We were saddened to see that instead of participating in the debate during an unmoderated caucus, our Committees Members decided to write a defamatory and misleading press release.

Intervention in case if humanitarian crisis is an important topic. Unfortunately, armed conflict and illegal war practices, such as the use chemical weapons, continues while the United Nations Security Council has been unable to intervene and protect. The majority of our Committee agrees, passing motion after motion to fully debate the topic.

It is incorrect to assert that we are pushing through this topic against the wishes of half the committee. Rather the press release was written by a disgruntled minority who is more interested in playing ‘the blame game’ and blocking any productive discussion.

Intervention in case of humanitarian crisis saves lives. We believe we have a moral imperative to protect innocent civilians and save people from the scrounges if war as set out in the United Nations Charter.

We were disheartened to see that our fellow comittee members care more about defaming us then saving innocent civilians.

Advertisements

Concerning Actions by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s

By Kelli-Anne TIM

In light of the news of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s commitment to continue its nuclear program, the United Times has uncovered some distressing information. According to our sources, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has, on multiple occasions over the last month, delivered highly enriched uranium to Iran. These actions by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is most concerning with the summit with the United States of America only a few days away. This investigation is ongoing and we will continue to update you as information is discovered.

General Assembly First Committee — Press Conference

By Yucheng GU

Day two was an extremely stressful day for the United Times as the press conference is a new section introduced to the CologneMUN2018. Thus the entire team was stepping into an area unknown to all. Nervousness was in the eyes of everyone, I, myself, almost experienced my first panic attack ever while questioning the representatives during the first press conference.

At the time the press team came to DISEC for the press conference, I was already feeling the familiar and confident with the entire concept and was about to really push for the limits during the press conference. It is, after all, our deed, as United Times journalists, to report as realistically and detailed as possible to our readers about the progress that committees had during the sessions.

The moment when the press team stepped into the room, there was a sort of happiness in the air. The draft resolution which DISEC had been working on since day one was passed as an actual legal document during the session RIGHT before the press conference. This would explain why representatives were so excited to present their results to the United Times.

The biggest issue, which accurses across all committees at CologneMUN2018, is the solutions presented tend to be vague and not bounding. The question of funding is often forgotten or ignored as a direct result. DISEC representatives, eager to present their results, found themselves cornered by questions from the press team throughout the press conference.

The delegate of Germany had to announce that the resolution, when confronted by the press team concerning the resolution being rather weak, were only a start of the effort put forward by the international community. And while talking about the issue of national information security, the delegate of Russia went as far as shouting at press team members calling the author and his co-journalists “fake new” although the United Times sees itself with all self-respect and integrity as an independent free press with PassBlue as its moral example.

Beyond any doubt, the press conference was still mostly productive for both the press team and the committee members, as it helped to clarify all paragraphs of resolution. Hopefully the DISEC committee can take the aspects pointed out during the press conference as a lesson and incorporate it into its work on Day 3.

A Question of Implementation: The Passed UNHRC Resolution Addresses Far Too Many Issues

By Sofia RISCHIO

The UNHRC began the day by submitting a Draft Resolution with a total of 42 Operative Clauses — a massive undertaking. Encompassing far too many aspects, including the refugee crisis and equal access to education, the paper was extremely broad. After an entire session was dedicated to going through and improving the paper with the help of the Chair, the delegates were able to slim it down and finally submit it.

However, the Draft Resolution still covered a vast range of issues (perhaps too many) concerning Women in Conflict Zones. Financial aid, problems of refugees, an international conference for women, medical centers for women, staff training and education were just some of the ideas mentioned in the paper. The main problem was the lack of specific methods to implement the proposed ideas. Although thorough, the propositions were unclear in terms of their execution. No specific methods were stated in the Resolution, leaving many questions for the press during the UNHRC Press Conference.

Nigeria, the Philippines and Germany took part in the Press Conference on behalf of the UNHRC. The main question posed was how so many aspects of education, the group’s main concern, are expected to successfully be addressed. The representatives, nominated and voted to represent their committee, were asked what, specifically, they imagined should take place in the affected regions. The question, however, was more or less avoided and no clear answers were presented. In regard to the finances of such a big undertaking, the delegates referred to working with local and international NGO’s and requested ECOFIN to monitor the money flow to prevent corruption.

The United Times pushed forward, trying to understand how the UNHRC truly believes such a broad Resolution could lead to real results. The delegates were insistant, that the Resolution is a step in the right direction, as they have found common ground after a day and a half of debate. It is still unclear whether this resolution will lead to a betterment of the situation of Women in Conflict Zones.

At the end of the day, the committee parted ways with their first topic, moving to a topic which is very interesting to us at the United Times: Free and Independent Press in the 21st Century. As this is a relevant issue in our world today, we are eager to see in which direction the committee will go, looking forward to the last day of debate.

Sixth Committee of the General Assembly — Press Conference

By Emilia KLIX

Today, the first press conference of Cologne MUN 2018 was held at the Legal Committee. The delegates, who were nominated and voted to represent the committee,

were given five minutes in order to present what happened so far and then, for the following ten minutes, they got questioned by the members of the Press.

Five members of the United Times listened to the Member States’ presentations by the People’s Republic of China, United States, Republic of France and Dominican Republic.

The delegate of the Dominican Republic started, explaining what had been discussing in general – Topic A: Jus ad Bellum – the Right to Go to War. The other delegates then furthermore elaborated on that.

When being asked about what exactly had been decided on the issue of pre-emptive self-defence, the issues that the Committee faced regarding effectiveness became even more obvious. The discussion’s outcome appeared to be limited to a general recognition of the need to be able to strike against non-state actors and that time is an important factor. The discussion regarding further definitions were not presented in the Press Conference.

Regarding the addition of non-permanent members to the United Nation Security Council(UNSC), it was very interesting that the P5 delegates did not seem to regard that as a threat to their power in the UNSC.

A question to the U.S.A about specific actions regarding Humanitarian Intervention was answered by emphasizing the general importance of that issue.

All in all, the impression given to the United Times is that several issues need more specific elaboration. Hopefully the Draft Resolution provides a solution for that.

A Heated Fight about “The Question of Jerusalem”

By Jenany VETHANAYAGAM

The day started with an unanimous decision by the committee to set the agenda. The agenda was set on the topic of “The Question of Jerusalem” as the priority by the outright majority. Just after setting the topic for the upcoming days, the United States of America got really euphoric by posting their first post on Twitter: Huge first win in the SPECPOL committee this morning… Jerusalem will be discussed first…[..] #makespecpolgrestagain#CapitalofIsrael”.

The first moderated caucus where the position of some countries were immediately recognizable led to really interesting and fruitful debates. But it also created a separation between the committee as the Russian Federation stated there are “the neutral supporter[s] for peace for Israel and Palestine” and the “Anti-Israel” side. Questionable arguments were posed by delegates, which increased the heat in this discussion. This moderated was mostly conducted by Iran who underlined their support for Palestine and made some countries, like the United States of America, Myanmar and New Zealand, disgruntled. The big supporters against the “Muslim countries”. The question remained: was there a direction to this heated separation?

After some intense debates, there were already some delegations working on possible working papers. It was very noticeable how fast the opinions had been set by the countries and how Member States, like Iran, Turkey and some other delegations, were trying to convince other nations about the importance of the separation of Jerusalem. On the other side of the room, Member States — like the Russian Federation, the United States of America, Fiji and Myanmar — teamed up to find the another way for the future of Israel and Palestine.

Two working papers have been submitted and both are focusing on one aspect: freedom. But how this going to end? Details of both working papers are not published yet and we are looking forward to another intense and heated debate tomorrow. Will there be a Resolution passed soon? We will see!

Discussions in the Legal Committee — a hopeless venture?

By Emilia KLIX

Today, the Sixth Committee of the United Nations (the Legal Committee) had their first three sessions regarding Jus ad Bellum — the Right to Go to War. So, what has happened so far?

Well, sadly, I need to inform you that the answer is: lots of talking and discussing, forming of blocks and insulting each other. But actually finding and deciding on a consensus? Not so much.

To the credit of all delegates: they do an amazing job at debating, but also repeating each other and themselves. The repetitions are necessary, because apparently there are lots and lots of misunderstandings. I guess truly listening to each other the very first time is just too boring for the delegates!

Someone who is especially present and active is the delegate of the Republic of France – not only is he a driving force in the drafting of working papers, but he also seems to be quite an expert on the topic of insults. Not only did he say that one cannot rely on the predictability of Member States, especially regarding the election of a “certain President”. (I don’t believe President Trump would think that’s a compliment, but then again…does he think at all?)

He later made some”strong” statements about China – laughing at China’s eagerness to stick to international law (as opposed to changing it) and calling the delegation out for “not [being] a credible defender of international law”. When I asked him about that even later, he remained with his position and pointed out that China’s government ignores decisions of international courts. Well if that isn’t the spirit of working together as truly united nations, then I don’t know what is!

China’s delegate, however, seems to be surprisingly relaxed. When I talked to him about the statements from France’s delegation, he told me that that “China stands for mutual respect, dignity and equality” of the Member States and that France’s statement “wasn’t well considered”. However, China nevertheless looks forward to working with all of the Member States and France’s statement will not hinder the diplomatic work.

Despite small fights like this, it appears that the Member States prefer talking about their differences in details rather than focusing on finding a consensus. At least it can be said about the discussions regarding the requirements for preemptive self-defence. As Mozambique’s delegate said it: there were hardly any differences between the two working groups in the end. Yet no solution has been properly decided on.

And what do we learn from that? Law is complicated. Definitions are complicated. Yet sometimes it is important to make amendments to your own suggestions in order to be able to produce a draft resolution within a reasonable amount of time.

I do believe that the delegates are able to do so, but maybe they need to realize that themselves. In the words of Switzerland’s delegate, “as long as we achieve this goal [of creating a consensus and legal certainty], it is worth to have this intense debate.” Let’s hope the second day this plan works out!