VAMOS PROTEGER- WE WILL PROTECT

SCMUNEWS

SCMUN 2017 NEWSLETTERThe fourth estate of SCMUN, the delegates of the Press Corps will undertake the identities of various

news agencies, reporting on debate and other events throughout the conference. Delegates will be

challenged to understand differing political perspectives, compete to get their voices heard, shaping

debate in its course.

As the theme of SCMUN 2017 is Vamos Proteger – we will protect, the news agencies will try to

deliver the message of hope to deliver and maintain peace, security and prosperity featured in the

debate of various councils.

We wish you a productive and fruitful SCMUN 2017!

Volume 2 Issue 115th March2017

Inside this issue

Agence France Presse

Al Jazeera

Deutsche Welle

Press Association

Reuters

Russian News Agency TASS

The Straits Times

The Washington Post

Xin Hua News Agency

Superhuman Crisis: Unresolved?Luke PhangLau See KeiA crisis was introduced halfway throughout debate, on the rights of superhumans. France, Germany and the UK are strongly anti-superhuman and feels that “militarising superhumans is wrong, and requires them to register themselves for accountability”, and “any superhuman that is not registered will be taken as terrorists or fugitives”, comparing the registration of superhumans to a driver who knows how to drive, but cannot do so without a license.

There were conflicting opinions. In the broader coverage of issues, this news agency covered a myriad of countries. Afghanistan, a very vocal delegation, felt that there should be some restrictions on human rights, for the sake of safety, because superhumans will “upturn the little Toyota”, implying that superhumans would disrupt daily life. UK then proceeded to slam Afghanistan’s speech by saying it made absolutely no sense. However, a general consensus was that the rights of superhumans should be clearly defined, so that they would not abuse their power. Denmark remarked that integration of superhumans is of utmost importance, emphasising that they “are the same as other humans”.

The use of superhumans in military powers has also been generally frowned upon by the delegations. DPRK added that “They are not superhumans, but normal humans, and the only superhuman is Kim Jong-un.”Singapore echoed Korea’s thoughts that “human rights should be placed first, and foremost, before the political and social implications.” Switzerland took a neutral stand in this issue, but feels that superhumans should not be used in the military, as it disadvantages those with fewer superhumans, adding that superhumans should be given the same punishment as other humans, should they commit a crime, as they are “only humans with enhanced abilities”.Vietnam, on the other hand, feels that superhumans should be given the right to join the army, should they wish to do so. Also, Ethiopia thinks it is hilarious that while France wants to integrate superhumans, they are however not allowed to join the military. Egypt added on, “Do you remember the 9/11 terrorist attack? Now imagine it with superhumans. Allow superhumans into the defence forces and we will be able to prevent such an occurence from happening ever again. I believe that the UN should not interfere with the country’s own defence proceedings.”

Moving onto debate on the resolution, the delegate of India mentions the lack of initiative. Germany also

pointed out that there are many flaws in the resolution, one being that superhumans are not allowed to

join the military. “It is oppression, a violation of human rights, and a sign of xenophobia”. China agrees,

and values the rights of all its sovereign states, believing that superhumans should be given the right to

contribute to the country. DPRK believes that we must “fight fire with fire” by allowing superhumans

into the military, as fighting “bad superhumans with good superhumans” is the only way to win.

“Do you know what fire looks like? It looks like nuclear weapons. And nuclear weapons are out of this

world” Singapore remarked, in efforts to propose the disarmament of all weapons. A delegation that

really shone during this time of intense debate over the resolution, who’s delegates were spearheading the

discussion by setting an agenda and creating a comprehensive resolution. France was pertinent to the

advancement of debate as it repeatedly called for council to move on in debate and stop beating around

the bush. In an interview with a delegate from France, he said: “This is a crisis, which means that we have

to stop going round in circles, and deal with the most urgent issue at hand quickly.” The delegation of

France spoke multiple times to convive the joint councils to reach a consensus on the comprehensive

resolution, it constantly met opposition in the form of rogue nations such as DPRK who were adamant

and aggressive

This resulted in the rejection of 6 proposals due to conflicting opinions, and due to a lack of time, the

councils were unable to come to a consensus, despite the best efforts of France and its bloc, and the crisis

failed.

Delegates lobbying

By Luke PhangOpinion Article

Reformation and Resolution in HSS: Who’s on the right track?In the Historical Security Summit, delegates from around the world engaged in intense debate with regards to the very tiered issue of the Abyssinian Crisis resolution. Delegates all brought different ideas, perspectives and lines of logic to the table, but some delegates’ arguments and suggestions really shone through, and such as the delegate of France. This is clearly evidenced by the fact that numerous other delegations concurred with the delegate of France, legitimizing the views of France.

The ideas and suggestions put forth by France were very comprehensive and covered the multi faceted issue of the Abyssinian Crisis, which tiered into two issues: the indirect solution of reforming the League of Nations (LON), and the direct solution of imposing an ultimatum on Italy should it turn aggressive, and this was supported by the collective security consensus that France spearheaded. The victimized country in question, Abyssinia, also echoed the arguments of France, among others such as that of Poland and Czechoslovakia, showcasing that the bloc lead by France was on the right track. One of the most notable ideas forwarded by France was that the LON has an urgent need to achieve collective security because only then will it be portrayed as a secure place where countries can thrive, incentivizing countries to join, increasing its legitimacy and empowering its capabilities as an international arbitrator. Apart from lines of logic, France and nations such as Poland also put forth practical solutions, namely the addition of various departments to better enable the LON to arbitrate international affairs. One of these departments was a department of peacekeepers, essentially the militia of the LON, to enforce decisions made by the LON. Another of these departments was a court of International Justice, where countries which have been deemed to have breached international law will be tried, and appropriate punitive action will be meted where necessary. This clearly showcases the thoughtfulness of France and its bloc in resolving both current issues and planning ahead for future incidents.

However, the delegate of the USSR, who was France’s main opposition in the advancement of debate, forwarded the idea of sanctioning Italy from the get go. Clearly, the delegate had not considered the implications of such rash actions, namely antagonizing Italy into greater aggression. Perhaps the delegate

should have considered more diplomatic pathways like France did, in order to resolve tensions and not to stoke it. As council advanced, USSR then put across the suggestion of reforming the LON such that it would deal with cases of aggression on a case by case basis, by addressing individual problems with individual methods, essentially taking an attitude of crossing bridges when they are reached. However, this is not a reform that should be undertaken as it is too vague and unfeasible as countries would be unable to fully comprehend their consequence of the actions. Instead, a clear and concise set of guidelines, regulations and punitive actions should be set, which is what France sought to achieve.

Towards the end, a resolution was proposed by France and co-submitted by the delegates of Poland, Czechoslovakia and Abyssinia to the council, and after debate about it, it was passed and the issue was finally resolved, and this serves to show once again the legitimacy of France’s ideas and suggestions as endorsed by the council. It is hoped that France will bring this thoughtfulness and critical thinking to other issues, and continue to spearhead discussions for the fruitful resolution of crisis.

Luke Phang, Agence-France Presse

by Luke Phang15/03/17

Electoral Reform in USCOn the second day of debate, the delegates of the Press Corps arrived in the United States Congress just in time to see the concluding moments of debate on the topic of Electoral Reform in the USA, namely on whether more people should be given the opportunity to vote, and how to better the vote counting process. The specific tiers at hand mainly revolved around the issue of accessibility and security of the voting process. The delegates of the Democratic and Republican Parties were divided on the topic. For the Democrats, Nancy Pelosi was extremely vocal on the issue, passionately defending her stance on a progressive online voting system by emphasizing the proposed increased cybersecurity that will safeguard the votes online, preventing “rigged” or “faulty” elections. Democrat delegates such as Tim Kaine and Steny Hoyer shared similar sentiments. Kaine stood strongly for extending the accessibility of the vote to the disenfranchised, and also those who have low levels of education and literacy, because that is the foundation of democracy, to give everyone a say in the issues that govern them. Hoyer forwarded the idea that with increased security and an empowered breakdown prevention system, online vote counting systems will be both safe and efficient, and is better able to reach out to masses who are unable to be physically present at booths, and stated that this is the way that will appeal to the masses and will make “everyone happy”. Additionally, the Democrats also stood for an electronic vote counting system that would streamline the vote counting process and make the electoral process faster and more efficient as a whole.

However, there was opposition in the form of Republican speakers such as Orrin Hatch and McCarthy. Hatch felt that the policies envisioned by the Democrats were extremely idealistic and unfeasible, gong so far as to say that ‘the government [was] not omnipotent”, and is severely limited by the economic demands in other areas of the US, and money should only be spent where absolutely necessary. McCarthy addressed the issue of hacking and spoiling of the electoral process through the use of electronic vote counting in an unconventional way: If the counting system is not connected to the internet, there would be no hacking at all, implicitly condemning the system. McCarthy also stated that the implementation of such systems would be too expensive, a burden too large for the straining economy of USA to bear.

Unfortunately, before a final consensus could be reached on the issue, a crisis broke out and delegates were forced to adjourn to gather with other councils to resolve the crisis.

However, despite the abrupt end to debate, a question that would surely linger in the minds of delegates would be: Is not the very foundation of democracy implemented in a self-proclaimed nation of liberty like USA the ability of all to vote for issues that govern them? Then shouldn’t the government that advocates democracy try its utmost to extend the accessibility of vote to all?

That is a question that the all the delegates of the USC have to strive to answer.

CRISIS: ARE SUPERHUMANS HUMANS TOO?With the emergence of superhumans, the UNCTSC discusses immediate actions to deal with these humans with special abilities.Delegates of the United Nations Committee for Transhuman and Superhuman Communities (UNCTSC) passionately debated the issue of the emergence of the superhuman community in crisis today, 15th March 2017.

Through the first unmoderated caucus at the chair’s discretion, and the opening speeches, it was clear that the council had sharply contrasting views on the crisis and what should be on the agenda.

The opening speeches were ended off with an update by Doctor Y, informing the council that an experimental cure had been discovered to treat these superhumans. Yet as council eased into the General Speakers List, delegates seemed to be ignoring the existence of the experimental cure and debate focused on the most contentious, and least important issue -- the agenda. Countries with a more communist slant such as the delegates of China, Denmark, EU countries, Singapore and more believed that human rights were more important and should be looked at first. On the other hand, the delegations of Australia and Afghanistan believed tackling political instability and preventing superhumans from becoming militarise was more important, and should be discussed on the agenda first.

With so much contention over the agenda, it is inevitable that the discussion was not very fruitful, and by lunch break, the delegates had yet to start proposing and discussing solutions to the crisis in detail.

Back from lunch break, things are finally moving on in council, with the introduction of a resolution.

Things took an interesting and amusing turn when main submitters of the resolution, the delegates of China and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, betrayed their bloc, speaking against the resolution and strongly objecting to “the frankly illogical solutions proposed”, as

described by China of clause 3 of the resolution, which “Strongly discourages all countries from forcefully or otherwise recruiting superhumans in the military and condemns countries that do so in order to prevent countries with a higher concentration of resources and superhumans from having an unfair military advantage”.

At this point in time, debate was

interrupted by a political actor, acting as a Filipino lady, running onto stage, screaming incoherently about witnessing the mistreatment of a telepathic girl by the government forces.

However, instead of shaping the debate in a positive way, this just generated even more confusion amongst delegates. This led to misunderstandings among delegations and the council, which led to heightened tension among blocs. This resulted in a series of verbal attacks on one another, with the delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) likening “verbal harassment to the delegate of France’s speeches”. Upon which the delegation of France retaliated by calling the DPRK “like a communist gorilla in the United States” and that the “DPRK’s argument [was] as weak as a Brazilian tool”.

Finally, motion to move to direct voting procedure on the resolution was introduced and delegates raised their placards high, as eager to move into direct voting procedure on the whole resolution as we were. This process was however hindered by the irresponsible voting behaviour of the delegates which forced the chairs to resort to roll call voting.

Delegates voting to move into direct voting procedure (Al Jazeera)

Despite the numerous debates for and against the resolution, friendly and (failed) unfriendly amendments, the resolution was not passed. The crisis has thus failed, and the council was dismissed for tea break. Some may thus wonder what was in the minds of both the chairs and delegates at that point of time--though the odds seem to point to filling their stomachs being more important than resolving the crisis successfully.

Overall, the debate in UNCTSC crisis was not only chaotic and messy, but also unproductive and debate mostly revolved around the same topic, leaving the crisis unresolved and painting a negative image of the entire UN. As the council prevented the motion for passing the resolution, among many was the reason of “state sovereignty”. But in a bid to protect the sovereignty of the state, what have we sacrificed on the issue of human rights?

ENTERTAINMENT “This delegate likes tea. He likes green tea, but above all, he likes sovereignty.” -DPRK“The delegate of DPRK has mentioned black tea, green tea, and sovereignty. But he has not mentioned that he is very salty” -France“....like verbal harassment or the delegate of France’s speeches”- DPRK“...like a communist gorilla in the US” -France“We understand that DPRK has concerns being known as a fair and sovereign state” -France“DPRK’s argument is as weak as a Brazilian tool.”- France“Fighting fire with fire” -china“Fire sounds like nuclear weapons, and nuclear weapons sound like not a world to the world” -Singapore

UNSC: CIVILIANS IN PEACEKEEPING ZONESBattle of views between delegates in council as solutions to the protection of civilians during peacekeeping missions are debated over.On the second day of debate in the United Nations Security Council, delegates began proposing solutions to the problem of the protection of civilians during peacekeeping operations. Solutions included both short term solutions -- the prioritization of resources for the elderly, children and the sick, the creation of an independent sub-committee to regulate resource distribution, increased media coverage to encourage MEDCs to donate more, using 10% of the total funds for an emergency stash, as well as the establishment of safe havens run by NGOs which cater to civilians, and long term solutions -- increasing the effectiveness of peacekeepers, by means such as punishing those who misbehave, and screening them for STDs in order to protect civilians.

In the beginning, it seemed as though the United Nations Security Council was having a fruitful debate, discussing the issue of transparency in resource distribution, how to improve the efficiency of peacekeeping officials etc. Countries with opposing stances resolved their differences amicably through the general speakers list, moderated and unmoderated caucuses, and there was great potential for a quick resolution.

However, debate was interrupted by crisis, which seemed to stir things up.

Back from crisis, the formation of two separate blocs soon became clear -- one being Ethiopia and Egypt, and the other being France and her allies. This led to rather desperate attempts by the Ethiopian and Egyptian side to throw out many amendments in hopes of gaining support but were all eventually rejected by the council. This constant nitpicking of “minor details” as the delegate of France said, was definitely taking a toll on all members of the council who simply wanted to move on. This was a substantiated reason for all points of the resolution had been clearly discussed and stated.

Eventually, after much pain and unproductive and stubborn objections by Ethiopia and Egypt. the council finally passed the resolution. As applause rang out through the room, we note that the bitter animosity in the room seem to lighten considerably, and we wonder whether there was only debate for debate’s sake.

Relating back to where Al Jazeera is based in the Middle East, war and conflict wreak ISIS-controlled Iraq and Syria, and the protection of civilians in the numerous peacekeeping operations is of utmost importance. We cannot reiterate the importance of protecting innocent civilians in war-torn zones and, on the behalf of the people, are relieved that some form of resolution has been created and mostly agreed on, giving all of us peace of mind.

Delegates of UNSC vote in favour of the resolution (Al Jazeera)

A global code of conduct to facilitate proceedingsDiscussion on a code of conduct which all countries must adhere to in a case of dispute over maritime After an unfruitful debate the previous day on their primary issue, the issue of Maritime Territorial Delimitation, the council started off the next day on a better note where they began a discussion on the possible solutions to resolve dispute over maritime territorial delimitation. China started the debate by setting the agenda where we stated that discussion about the South China sea was irrelevant, and wanted to focus on the issue as a whole. He wholeheartedly wished for a code of conduct to dictate the procedure should there be any conflict over this issue. This was backed up by France who pressed for a more binding code of conduct, and hoped to globalize the effort to put in place a code of conduct. As the debate progressed, it was clear that many of the countries were in favor of a code of conduct though what it should entail had yet to be covered.In a very declamatory speech, China concurred that the council should enact actual change and progress instead of devoting it’s time to “outlandish and outrageous propositions about nature”. He pressed for no military intervention unless the country was provoked, a proposition that many other countries felt very favorably towards. Moreover, Russia supported having a body of neutral countries to arbitrate the conflict, to ensure that the judgement reached would not be biased towards any side in the argument. This was strongly supported by Iran which wanted to impose economic and military sanctions on any country who refused to listen to the judgement of the third party. The delegate of China then reminded all member nations to respect UNCLOS Article 298, and not arbitrarily call on international courts and tribunals to issue rulings on matters of territorial disputes, or conduct any action that violates the article.

Caption: Unmoderated caucus to discuss the issue at handThe delegate of Iran gave fresh perspective to the council, proposing the idea of having a three-tiered approach of a multi-lateral agreement, a bilateral agreement and the United Nations to be exhausted in that order. This did not receive much support from the council, who favored a code of conduct for nations to comply should two or more neighboring countries have conflict over their claims on maritime territories. The debate came to a pause for crisis and resumed after the 5th council session.The delegate of China introduced a resolution in a bid to show its sincerity over the handling of the crisis with the co submitters being Norway, France and Germany. The resolution called for a code of conduct which should be complied to in the event of dispute arising from claims over maritime territories.

Caption: The passing of the resolutionThe resolution was passed almost unanimously with very few delegates talking for and against the resolution.Gracia Chua

Super humans: Protect or attackDebate over how to deal with the super humans has arisen, should they be exploited or should they be given free willAs explained in the previous article, the the issue of contention during the crisis of SCMUN was super humans, the use of their special abilities and how governments should deal with them.The debate ascended with the delegate of Iran stating that there was a need for government bodies to identify the various abilities that each super human was capable of and to set up a special police force whose sole task was to keep the super humans in check. He asserted that they should be given the freedom to utilize their abilities in any situation and that the government should not exploit their genes for self-serving purposes. However, the delegates of Italy and Mexico argued against Iran’s last point, because should the super humans be given free reign over the use of the super powers without any limitations or rules, they might use their special abilities to affect the stability of its country. Both further elaborated on their point, where they wanted to impose certain restrictions on the super humans where they could only use their abilities for the good of society and they could not use it to infringe upon other’s privacy. The delegate of the United States was unhesitant in voicing out his support for their idea of imposing rules on super humans and was supported by a majority of the council.

Caption: Speaking for the resolutionIn a surprising twist of events, France contradicted its stance on liberty, fraternity and equality when it pressed for the super humans to be differentiated from normal human beings and to be treated differently as there was a higher chance of them causing more harm. France also baldly stated its intention of exploiting the abilities the special humans had to create a breakthrough in its medical, military and scientific factor. The delegate of China spoke in support of France where he wanted to create a branch of the military specially for super humans, though he was equally concerned about the rights of the super humans where they urged the council to consider having super humans in government bodies to act as a voice for the small minority in question. The delegate of Iraq added his insight into this issue where he felt that the special humans should only be utilized for issues that were hard to resolve such as ISIS, though he contradicted his close ally China where he wished for the UN to pass a resolution which would prevent power abuses by the super humans.In response to the countries pressing for the exploitation of super humans, a German representative argued against the usage of super humans in war as only the number of super humans are few as yet and only certain militaries would have them. He was also very against utilizing super humans to advance any field of study as only countries advanced in biotechnology would be able to manipulate the skills to fit the requirements which would create a distinct and unfair advantage over others. The delegate of Poland was very enthusiastic on his support for this stand against the exploitation of super humans.In the middle of this discussion which had gone in circles for several hours and the same points had been repeated over again, a motion to adjourn the council for lunch was raised and eagerly seconded.

When the reporter returned, the council was in the midst of a debate regarding the torture of super humans and the conditions that they should be subjected to. In the midst of this debate, the United Kingdom introduced a resolution which called for a central database of all super humans, separate laws and policies which the super humans were subject to, freedom to not be exploited in any way for their mutant cells, and freedom in choice of occupation. An interview with a representative of the United Kingdom revealed that they felt that the super humans should have their own rights and should not be discriminated against as a few exceptions did not reflect the values on the entire super human society as a whole.

Caption: Voting on the resolutionAfter a very round-about debate, the resolution was unable to be passed with the main dissenters being the delegates of China and DPRK.Throughout the debate, the delegates of the UNCTSC were very unfocused with many falling asleep or writing cringe–worthy pickup lines to the chair, such as France asking Indonesia to draw them like one of their French girls, or a bold delegate asking the chairs if they were a chair as he wanted to sit on them. Gracia Chua

Super humans spark off worldwide fear and tension The increased presence of super humans and their preternatural abilities is causing much terror among citizens and headaches among governments Just as China was launching into a tirade against the delegate of Iran, events took an exciting turn as the lights were suddenly turned off and the crisis video was played. Recent events showed that a superhuman, Luke Billingham caused a fatal explosion by superhuman abilities at the United Nations Headquarters, causing much chaos and distress. This event was hardly one of a million, but rather an event in what seems to be a long string of public displays of their abilities by the super humans. On a previous occasion, an aggressive display of powers by a young girl on her university campus caused a fatalities and serious injuries to her fellow schoolmates. The reason for her sudden outburst is as yet unknown, but she is still under investigation. Another superhuman making use of her abilities was filmed on a security camera where the superhuman in question used her abilities to make passers-by do her bidding such as helping her to carry her shopping bag.The increasing number of these super humans and their willingness to make use of their abilities for self-serving purposes has caused much debate and controversy amongst governments who are as yet unsure how to deal with the super humans.

Fear amongst government officials where a concentration of these super humans will affect international relations and political stability is rampant, as these super humans can affect the votes and decisions that officials in high government positions make, giving certain parties a powerful advantage over others which will affect political stability.

North Korea supports the use of super humans in the military

The mystery surrounding theses super humans and the lack of information about them has created much disharmony and social discord where there is increased suspicion of the super humans.The super humans will affect many factors in the running of the country, especially the political factor where a main concern is how to prevent the super humans from using their abilities in political negotiations. Social concerns such as how to cater and treat super humans with differing abilities have also arisen. Citizens have been in great distress and many governments are still trying to think of ways to reassure the public about the danger that the super humans pose to society and its people. Human rights given to the super humans have been questioned as these super humans have abilities not available to the target of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.Super humans have caused much controversy in the political sphere while countries scramble to deice their stance on super humans. China has made it clear that it is committed to integrating the super humans into their society and will treat them equally because they are the same as everyone else. This view is shared by many other countries including Russia and North Korea amongst others. A representative of the United States of America has stated that it will protect all citizens regardless of whether they are super humans or humans. The US condones acts of hate against everyone and will maintain inclusivity as everyone is equal under the eye of the law. A breakthrough in gene technology has led to scientists being able to safely remove mutant cells from a live super human. These mutant genes form as young as 6 years old but stabilize only in the super humans teen years. This breakthrough has given rise to a new set of issues with regards to laws being put in place to ban or allow these invasive procedures.

Delegates debate on the issue of super humans

The entry level councils have taken on the role of the UNCTSC and are in the midst of debate, while the world awaits the changes and developments in decisions about these super humans. Gracia Chua

Opinion articleAn international tribunal in The Hague delivered a sweeping rebuke of China’s behavior in its first time before the international justice system on the issue of the South China Sea, including its construction of artificial islands, and found that its expansive claim to sovereignty over the waters had no legal basis. In its most significant finding, the tribunal rejected China’s argument that it enjoys historic rights over most of the South China Sea. The tribunal also said that China had violated international law by causing “irreparable harm” to the marine environment, endangering Philippine ships and interfering with Philippine fishing and oil exploration. In view of the recent events, Germany hopes for both countries to be subjected to international law and is disappointed that China has boycotted the proceedings and its statement that it will “not be bound by it”. Germany supports freedom of navigation in international waters, but should the resource rich sea fall into China’s hands, it will not allow for the passing of other countries ships. The solution that several countries have offered of ASEAN negotiating a Code of Conduct on the South China Sea issue will fall through as in reality, ASEAN does not have the capacity to meet such high expectations as ASEAN is a much more fragile intergovernmental organization than the EU. It is important first of all to recognize the fact that the South China Sea conflict is very much asymmetric, and therefore cannot be dealt with in a symmetric way. China is indisputably a superpower in the region and the Philippines, Vietnam, and other claimants are just smaller states. Consequently, it is impossible to expect a fair solution that treats every participant equally. The ASEAN countries have to learn how to work with the regional hegemon, China, in a proportionately mutual beneficial way. Quoting international law or forcing China to agree with ASEAN’s proposal for a Code of Conduct is indeed unfair to this superpower. The only thing that ASEAN nations can do is to first focus on developing the individual countries’ economies and together gradually try to reduce their dependence on Chinese products, markets, and aid. ASEAN should reduce competition among its members, increase internal aid programs, and exchange technology and experiences. Only when every ASEAN nation enjoys cooperation within the organization, can a common approach be considered. Seeing ASEAN growing stronger economically will motivate China to behave moderately — to cooperate rather than take the offensive in the South China Sea. Gracia Chua

The Press Association

Stances of UNESCO member states

Here’s a quick recap of the UNESCO debate on the topic of cultural artefacts.

An unmoderated caucus to wrap up the friendly amendments that delegates would like to see in the resolution.by Isabel Sue and Lynette Quah on March 15On this quick recap of the UNESCO discussion on the preservation of cultural artefacts, the countries adopted various stances on the matter, summarized as follows:

UKThe United Kingdom, being a source and market nation, had provided great insight into the situation. On the idea of reintegration into society, UK still stands strongly that incarceration and rehabilitation should be implemented even though it is detrimental to the integration into society.

CANADAThis delegate had a very strong stance, echoing the sentiments of Greece that source countries should have their artefacts repatriated

GERMANY

Germany believed that relevant expertise and financial support was crucial in preserving the

value of cultural artefacts in museums

INDIAIndia had strongly expressed the sentiments that the council body should determine if source countries are deemed suitable by third party members of UNESCO to house these artefacts. It further emphasised that value of these artefacts, that these artefacts served to provide a common identity that is able to bind citizens together. However, there was also a rather biased viewpoint of museums, criticising museums that their main objective is money, that they are extremely profit driven, and that there is no regard for the cultural significance only the source countries can understand. Upon expressing this, it was clear that there was deep personal resentment for the British and this had affected the way this delegation viewed this issue, placing it in a negative slant

USA

The USA had expressed the concern of market countries not being able to actively represent the stories behind the artefacts, for source countries have a more personal and heartfelt connection towards the artefacts but also recognised that there are a spectrum of source countries within the council, where there are countries that can and cannot protect their artefacts. However, it also stated that in market countries people have spent lives studying the artefacts, and that it would not be fair to label the market countries as bad people. It ultimately concluded that any decisions made should be built on international cooperation and compromise and possessed a hopeful stance towards the issue

FRANCE

This delegation had expressed the concern that the bank transfer every month to ship materials and manpower to create a brand new museum in the source countries could be misused by corrupt countries. It also agreed wholeheartedly with the UK that all artefacts contain significance, and emphasised that art is of a global narrative, and is not specific to a culture, highlighting the concept of internationalism. It also suggested that source countries could send cultural experts to market countries to supervise the showcasing of cultural artifacts to display the artefacts in the best way possible

AUSTRALIA

Australia had mainly felt that discussion was based on an ideal scenario, where market countries are willing to give financial reparations to source countries

EGYPT

Egypt had questioned the clarity of the conditions, saying that if they were to take the source country’s account entirely into account, what would become of the market countries opinion.

SOUTH AFRICA

This nation had strongly believed that source countries are more than able to take care of their own artefacts, and all they seek is cooperation from developed western countries. It also posed a question which was “how would you like it if someone took your artefacts and said that they could take care of them better than you”

Overall, the different member states had seemed to have a difficult time coming to a consensus, and many debates had to be made to get close to having a similar outlook on the issue.

The resolution passes with unanimous votes by the entire Council

The Press Association

UNESCO’s Preservation of Cultural Artefacts

The Elgin Marbles, also known as the Parthenon Marbles, are a collection of Classical Greek

marble sculptures.

by Lynette Quah and Isabel Sue on March 15 2017 [SCMUN Conference Day 2]

On the second day of the SCMUN conference, the Press Association was dispatched to

the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). At the

council, the delegates discussed a wide variety of issues, with an overarching issue of

the Repatriation of Cultural Artefacts, such as the conditions for repatriation, illicit

trafficking, reviewing and safekeeping. Overall, the delegates engaged in a meaningful

discussion and addressed all points raised in an insightful manner.

TODAY’SOPINION

“This delegation of South Africa does not want repatriation. We want the return of

cultural artefacts that have been held by bigger, richer countries for too long. South

Africa’s tourism has risen by 22.6% and this proves that she is able to handle these

cultural artefacts on her own and does not need another state to hold on and protect her

artefacts!” He added an analogy comparing McDonald's The delegate of South Africa

declared. Immediately, the delegate of Syria stood up to retaliate, “McDonald's and

cultural artefacts are fundamentally different. McDonald's is about commercialism while

cultural artefacts concern the nationalistic sentiments…”

Adding on, “an Expert Panel should address the concerns to have a neutral body

decided with regards to the discrepancies in decisions of preservation and repatriation

of cultural artefacts.”

All of a sudden, India pointed out the fact that UK holds onto India’s artefacts

being the “toxic aftermath of British atrocities committed on Indian Nationals. They [the

British] said that artefacts are invaluable and so were the lives of millions of Indian

nationals under colonial rule. But they were all dead. For too many years, India’s

cultural artefacts have brought in profits for the killers of citizens of India, the British.”

Such a speech was uncalled for - are us British people truly so inhumane? Have the

ungrateful Indians turned against us, turning a blind eye to all that we have done for

them during colonial rule - the girders for every bridge, the track for every mile of railway

and the vast array of machinery required for India's infrastructure. UK has provided the

many engineers who laid the cornerstones for India's development from a developing

nation to a developed nation. It is timely to note that even the Sunday Express has even

written an article on “Why Britain should be proud of its rule in India”.

Well, it seems like it is because of such minor issues that the whole discussion

has progressed nowhere - one full day has passed since the start of the debate on the

sub-topic of repatriation of cultural artefacts yet no conclusion has been reached. How

disappointing.

Following that, the delegate of France smeared South Africa by targeting the

McDonald’s analogy. “Let’s be more productive and start discussing loaning systems

and the presence of experts with nuanced cultural views to assist Less Economically

Developed Countries (LEDCs) with understanding and possibly regaining their cultural

artefacts.” Finally, thank you for pushing the debate forward, but is France the only one

recognising the pressing need to increase the efficiency of this long-drawn debate?

This raises a multitude of questions and lamentations: UNESCO, why are you

going round in circles, digging up topics that have already been settled? UNESCO, is

this a place for you to shame other nations, relentlessly asserting the dominance of your

country’s stance on this platform where we value equal voices? Dear UNESCO, how

can we trust you with our cultural artefacts if in the time you take to conclude a sub-topic

of your resolution, so much action could have already been taken?

Out of the blue, the founder of the British museum burst in, clarifying that the

British museum does not believe in repatriation as holding on to cultural artefacts has

“allowed education to take place, for knowledge to be shared.” Once again stressing

that repatriation will serve not only to “take away the treasures of global, but also the

prestige of the the British museum,” she left the room in hope that repatriation will not

take place.

This sparked great debate within the council and many delegations soon fought

to have a say in the matter.

Just then, crisis struck and the issue of the Repatriation of Cultural Artefacts was

abandoned for several hours.

Once the crisis had ended, The delegation of France soon presented a

resolution, to wrap up the issue swiftly. However, he also mentioned that although not

all delegates may not be represented fully in this, he likened it to a “french baguette”,

saying that it is a “long piece of bread that can be used to make many sandwiches”

highlighting the ability of the resolution to be applicable to each country, where the

universal set of guidelines can be applied to the nuances of each of the countries.

UK further supported this resolution with pleasure and pride, stating that it was

“extremely proud” of the resolution and that it had tackled the 4 main points of agenda,

namely the conditions for reparations, illicit trafficking, reviewing and safekeeping. It

stressed the concern of not all countries being included by stating that the 4 countries

involved in this resolution, UK, US , France and Syria, had tried to include all countries

point of views, so as to create the most wholesome resolution possible.

However, this resolution was met with some dissatisfaction, with the delegate of

Egypt saying that the issue of the resolution was that the market countries seemed to

be more favoured than the source countries, and that the Binary system proposed is not

suitable for this issue, rather a tiered kind of system with different levels of suitability,

before proposing her own unfriendly amendment to the resolution. The Delegate of

Greece supported this, saying it’s more systematic, which is what UNESCO needs.

However, the delegate of France responded back by stating firmly that the

binary system is less complicated, questioning how the council were to quantify each

level, and that it would be difficult to measure relative concepts. The matrix cannot be

force fit into this issue, and has to be more loose to allow for better grounds.

Ultimately, the unfriendly amendment had been passed with great effort. The

resolution submitted by UK, USA, France, Syria and Egypt was successfully passed

with the full support of the council.

IMAGES

UNESCO IN ACTIONby Lynette Quah on March 15 2017

Explanation of the unfriendly amendment by the delegate of Egypt.

“Delegates wishing to vote against this amendment please raise your placards. … As a simple

majority has not been reached, the amendment does not pass.”

“The resolution passes.”

PRESS OFFICE

+44 (0) 20 7963 7513

communications@pressassociation.com

The Press Association

CRISIS: Superhumans

by Lynette Quah & Isabel Sue on March 15 2017 [SCMUN Conference Day 2]

On the second day of the SCMUN conference, the Press Association witnessed the

outbreak of a Crisis regarding superhumans. News broke out at 9.30am that

superhumans have invaded our world and taking on the role of the United Nations

Committee for Transhuman and Superhuman Communities (UNCTSC), the Council

took swift action to discuss and debate upon the implementation of new laws to deal

with the advent of superhumans in our society.

TODAY’SOPINION

Are superhumans a “tangible threat to society” or are they “humans first,

superhumans second”? This article brings you the latest updates from the United

Nations Committee for Transhuman and Superhuman Communities (UNCTSC).

Starting with first things first, for the social aspect particularly on human rights,

there was a general consensus for equal human rights to be given to superhumans,

with a possible extension of the UN’s declaration of human rights to accommodate the

needs of superhumans.

Then, the delegate of Egypt proposed a timely agenda for what the Council

should discuss on: the social aspect, infrastructure, then the militarisation of

superhumans.

Firstly, integration into society. It is of utmost importance to clear

misunderstandings between superhumans and non-superhumans because

misunderstandings are the root cause for the proliferation of prejudices, biasness,

discrimination and alienation.

Effective media campaigns, as stressed by the delegate of Canada, is useful for .

France echoed this sentiment, stating that media such as newspapers and television

programmes is an effective tool to reach out to the populous and get the message of

building a peaceful society across to the masses.

Secondly, infrastructure. New laws to allow the integration of superhumans into

society. This is supported by Denmark who called for increased opportunities for

interaction to clear up misconceptions of superhumans. The idea of social integration

was supported by the delegate of South Africa who suggested grassroots activities in

the neighbourhoods to allow for greater interaction between humans and superhumans.

France also suggested to pass laws against workplace discrimination and introduce

syllabi in the Education system that prevent spread of misconceptions so that

superhumans can coexist harmoniously with mankind.

The delegate for Portugal, however, was against the idea of infrastructure. He

believes that “this is diverting state fund to a specific group”, hence such an act

underlines discrimination. Furthermore this is not constitutional and it perpetrates

mutant phobia, hence Portugal is strongly against infrastructure specifically for

superhumans.

Thirdly, in the political sphere. “We need representation of super humans,”

highlights the delegate of Egypt. “This was we can have laws to deal with issues

exclusive to them such as in the education system and workplace.”

Lastly, the militarisation of superhumans. It has been decided that the Council

supports the allowance of superhumans to utilise superhuman abilities for military

purposes subject to the review and approval of the United Nations Security Council

(UNSC), also recognising the importance of preventing the exploitation of the use of

superhumans in the military against their will.

With an effective debate, the United Kingdom was the first delegation to submit a draft

resolution to the United Nations Committee for Transhuman and Superhuman

Communities (UNCTSC) at 2.20pm, getting the ball rolling on resolving the issue. The

delegates of Syria and France had promoted and advocated for this resolution strongly and

showed great enthusiasm for it. The resolution had been viewed as addressing “various

concerns raised by various delegates” and promoting “social integration”. It was also expressed

that the resolution was “complete and full” and that it was extremely “extensive” , “laying out a

good framework” for this new wave of humans. However, despite the comprehensive and

thorough resolution, it was still met with several objections, where the delegates of Australia and

Belgium both addressed their concerns regarding the issue. The delegate of Australia had said

that the resolution had not been comprehensive enough, and that it did not address the short

terms issues such as the current damage brought by the superhumans. Delegates of Egypt

also stated the lack of specificity of national screenings, and provided information of how certain

screenings cause controversy.

But, the delegates of the United Kingdom had responded powerfully, and tried their best

to make sure that all concerns were met. Regarding short term solutions, the delegation

promptly amended the resolution by implementing short term resolutions, showing effort to tie

up loose ends in the resolution.

In the end, the resolution proposed by the United Kingdom was passed at 3.15pm, with

a simple 3/4 majority being reached. When asked, the delegate of Greece concluded it nicely,

stating : “We support the resolution as something needed to be done to solve this Crisis and this

is quite comprehensive given the limited time.”

PRESS OFFICE

+44 (0) 20 7963 7513

communications@pressassociation.com

SCMUN DAY 2: HRC PASSES RESOLUTION ON FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION

By Gwen Cheng and Chua Fang Wei

After a day of intensive debate, the Human Rights Council (HRC) began the second day by discussing methods to

alleviate the problem of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). This was in line with the theme of the conference, Vamos Proteger, meaning “to protect” in Portuguese.

HRC delegates began with a moderated caucus to discuss potential solutions to prevent future cases of FGM. Delegates proposed solution such as community outreach programmes to educate rural communities on the harmful effects of FGM and minimising gender equality. In the same moderated caucus, the delegations of Portugal, Canada, and France discussed the issue of insufficient funding in LEDCs (Less Economically Developed Countries) to implement suggested measures. This council remained unresolved on this issue.

After some debate in the General Speakers’ List revolving around the same topics, a moderated caucus on short term solutions for FGM was proposed by the delegation of Norway, and passed at the discretion of the chairs. Delegates engaged in back and forth debate on the possibility of an international blanket ban on FGM. The possibility of stricter legislation and concomitant tougher enforcement was raised by various delegates.

Shortly after, another moderated caucus was motioned for by the delegate of Iraq, with the aim of discussing long term policies to empower women. It failed to garner a simple majority of the vote. The delegation of Iraq responded by calling for an unmoderated caucus of three minutes to clarify the direction of debate. This motion was passed, receiving the vast majority of the vote. At the end of the caucus, the delegation of Iraq summarised by stating that delegates were opposed to discussing long term solutions as education had already been discussed at length, following which he motioned for a moderated caucus to discuss long-term measures to prevent FGM, but with education excluded from the scope of debate. This time, his motion passed. Debate largely centred on judicial reform to meet the needs of victims of FGM. Several delegations expressed their concern on the capability of the HRC to call for thorough judicial reform. Delegates did not make much headway into the issue before the crisis commenced.

Following up in the fourth council session, delegates of the United Kingdom presented their resolution to “ensure the ultimate safety of the superhumans and humans” as well as “ensure that safety is of utmost priority and will be paramount”. The resolution was then supported by Canada as its delegates felt that the UK’s solutions took into consideration every parties’ stands and opinions, and the USA also agreed that it “promoted justice” as it protects humanitarian rights. On the contrary, China expressed strong disapproval as it felt that one of its clauses, “genetic differences from regular people”, suggested deep-seated discrimination against Superhumans and that China would not tolerate the word choice used. Then again,

delegates of Thailand retorted that China was “nitpicking on the US” since China chose to point out a subclause. The debate over the resolution then intensified as Korea felt that there were other points in it which put down

Superhumans. Halfway through the debate, the council entered a crisis as the Filippino government and officials used superhumans to mind-control its citizens, yet, delegates were too focused on the UK’s resolution, oblivious to how fast time flew. During the open debate, Italy expressed concerns towards the UK’s solution on unanimity as “it is not the solution to the problem”, instilling fear instead of trust. Belgium also felt that in the end, the resolution did not mention anything about the inclusiveness of Superhumans into society, sparking off more confusion and complications in the council. The UK, out of frustration and exasperation, then accused China of “having no knowledge of the debate” and tried to persuade delegates that suggestion and persuasion was all they could implement. As such, the motion for the resolution eventually did not pass and there was no more time for any more resolutions to be introduced. Furthermore, as delegates had failed to be mindful of the time given, they failed to debate and form solutions to the recent crisis as well.

During the fifth council session with only the HRC, the debate continued as delegates continued to find ways after ways to explain the reason for the continuance of harmful traditional practices (such as female genital mutilation and child marriage), as well as come up with impactful and logical ways to prevent them from persisting. Again, the United Kingdom came up with a resolution supported by Canada and France. Delegates of France felt that the UK had addressed important issues such as finance and education, an aspect which France felt was of great importance. However, the resolution soon began to receive much criticism as Germany felt that some of the points listed out, especially with references towards law enforcement and punishment, generalized all indigenous communities, and Norway felt that feasibility and accountability had not been mentioned. Netherlands also agreed with Norway that the bank in which the UK has suggested forming was “unreliable” and many countries demanded for more amendments and changes to the present resolution.

However, even after amendments were made, Iran argued that the UK had “failed to highlight the abuse within child marriage”, and many countries expressed great disapproval as the solutions supported a meritocratic system for reporters reporting harmful traditional practices. In the end, the UK’s resolution was unfortunately rejected by majority of the nations despite much efforts to save it.

However, in the last half an hour of the council session, Norway presented the council with another resolution, with surprisingly more than half the council signing and contributing to it. The resolution tackled all issues and despite the UK’s strong approval and arguments, focusing on how “HRC had no funding so education could not be introduced without infrastructure”, delegates of the Norway explained that “funding is through private foundations as they are the ones fighting for human rights”. Eventually, more than two-thirds the council supported the resolution and in the end, the motion was passed and the issue, solved.

At Reuters Opinion, we recognise consumers’ need for comprehensive, insightful analysis at SCMUN 2017. As such, for this section, our journalists have been allowed to express their personal opinions on council happenings, provided that their views can be substantiated by accurate, reliable facts. It is crucial to note that these views are only the views of the journalists themselves and do not represent those Reuters.

SCMUN COUNCIL SESSION DAY 2: HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL: SESSION 2: FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION

OPINION ARTICLE

What should really be done to solve the issue of FGM

HEALTH | 19 March 2017 | 10am SGT

By Gwen Cheng | Singapore

The human rights council has spent over a day trying to decide on a solution for the problematic issue of Female Genital Mutilation taking place in 27 countries, yet failed to come to one due to the differences in views and opinions. However, we would like to prompt the council: where has the focus gone to? Therefore, we have came up with some solutions to prevent this outrageous problem so that, we hope, will trigger it and so that chances of female genital mutilation occurring will reduce and (if possible) eradicated from our contemporary society.

Firstly, the UN and African governments should not only ban FGM but enforce a broader system of rules to emphasize the seriousness of rebelling against the law. Security in areas where minority groups are formed must and should be tightened so as to ensure that the laws are being carried out and obeyed. This can be done through regular spot checks performed by the relevant authorities and by installing monitoring systems to ensure the safety and security of the minorities. Also, there should be negotiations made between cultural leaders and governments of countries, as leaders need to be aware and acknowledge the unbalanced disadvantages of the ritual. With these being implemented, more victims, potential victims and staunch cultural leaders will be convinced of the consequences of FGM and “so that other women can confide in the legitimacy of the government”, as ruled by the delegate of Japan.

Furthermore, awareness regarding this issue should also be raised to greater heights. Victims of FGM themselves are unaware of their personal rights due to the patriarchal system in the community they live in, thus oblivious to the absurdity of this ritual. Non-governmental organizations and volunteers should conduct public awareness campaigns for potential victims of FGM, and girls living in the area in general. The talks should not only highlight the physical and psychological effects of FGM, but also, the sexual attraction and personal rights of girls as well, so that girls can then have control over their own lives and be granted freedom of choice as well. Furthermore, for campaigns to be effective and impactful, mentors need to emphasize on the importance of the prevention of FGM not only in the current batch of girls, but for future generation of girls in minorities as well.

The delegate of Norway has suggested long-term solutions for the empowerment of Man, however, is that truly the most urgent situation? Is an attempt to build stronger individuals going to solve the entire issue? And how are we sure that Man will be willing to work with the government? We feel that solutions, whether long- or short-term, should be focused solely on resolving all parties’ problems in this issue before working towards the good of society.

In addition to the above, financial assistance should be given to families of the minorities and people involved in this issue. Non-governmental organizations can raise awareness to collect donations for families which do not have enough to make ends meet, especially towards families who will potentially encourage child marriage and FGM for the sake of dowries and money-related issues. Money should also be given to doctors in need of the money, in the hope that they will not comply to parents’ request of female circumcision. This will also help parents and cultural leaders see a lesser need for rituals like FGM that will lead to deprivation and disadvantages for future generations.

Lastly, physical and emotional healthcare should be given to victims of FGM. Medecins Sans Frontieres (“Doctors Without Borders”) should assist victims of FGM, to prevent victims from further bleeding, chronic pains and ultimately, death. Counsellors should also be deployed to treat victims suffering from PTSD and depression, as a result of a harrowing FGM experience. Healthcare will not only tend to the urgent needs of victims, but also increase trust between the minorities and the governments rather than cultural leaders.

One of the main obstacles in preventing FGM is that it can be misunderstood as disrespecting and eradicating traditions. However, we have come up with solutions that do not put down culture, but instead persuades society to look towards healthier and “less fearful” rituals that will, in the end, complement tradition positively.

Female genital mutilation is still happening in many countries till today, and every day thousands suffer from the effects of this ritual. We hope that the council can stop beating around the bush

and prioritise the lives of victims and potential victims first.

BEHIND THE SCENES: TALE OF A NOTE-PASSER

By Chua Fang Wei

Unfortunately, the backroom staff of Model United Nations (MUN) conferences are too often underappreciated. Our journalists have approached a Note-passer, Panaree Avasadanond, to hear her views on the conference.

Our journalists discovered Avasadanond, a Secondary Two student of Singapore Chinese Girls’ School (SCGS), was a member of the SCGS Debate Club, and, since MUN is closely related to debate, she was interested to see if MUN was her cup of tea. This conference is her maiden MUN experience. “[MUN] is pretty cool as it is a microcosm of what is going on in the world,” she commented.

MUN lovers would definitely be heartened to hear this.

World, 15 March 17:17

Consensus yet to be formed among UN on the issue of Superhuman

Instability and tensions rising within the plenary council when discussing the crisis at hand

Delegation of France and India seen to be trying to spearhead the unmoderated caucus

SINGAPORE March 15 ./TASS/ - With the occurrence of a crisis, members from the UN from

various councils have came together to discuss the issue of super-humans. Since the beginning

of council, the house has splitted into two obvious blocs, with differing viewpoints, and a

consensus on an approach to the issue has yet to be reached. This clash between the blocs

has therefore proved detrimental on discussions within the council and has perpetuated the

existing tensions between member states.

The main point of contention plaguing the council is the lack of understanding behind the

reasoning behind the arguments presented by each country. There is strong lack of depth when

it comes to the engagement on many issues, with many delegates still left confused even after

the issues were deemed sufficiently discussed.

Delegate of France on the left hand side seen to be trying to get his point across during an unmoderated

caucus

With the wide spectrum of issues that need to be discussed and touched upon, there has been

confusion in the proposal of solutions and the direction of debate, with the delegate of France

urging council to move towards looking into short term solutions instead of long term solutions,

The fact this direction of debate was taken by the council shows a lack of foresight, and a sense

of impulsivity on the part of many delegates within the council. The council needs to realise that

whatever solution that is taken by the delegates now will set the foundation of how these

superhumans are viewed in society now and in the future. While the delegation of France is

correct in arguing that a crisis calls for short term solutions in order to mitigate the current

problem, current solutions should not be a detriment to the image of superhumans nor hamper

future efforts to help these people.

Additionally, the amendment and voting procedure on the resolution proposed by the delegate

of France proved to be rather chaotic. Many unfriendly amendments were made by delegates,

such as DPRK, China as well as Afghanistan. While it is commendable that delegates have sent

in numerous amendments, much of this time could have been spent to further discuss and

improve their approach to the crisis.

Russia has firmly stated that the Russian Federation will work towards fighting for the rights of

equality for superhumans. ‘Equal, we believe that superhumans should have equal rights as

normal humans as they are still humans, just that they have special (abilities),’ as stated by a

member of the Russian Delegation. Russia also firmly stated that any registry that would have

to be in line with birth certification registry as, just like human beings, superhumans have a right

to an identity and a birth certificate, and so Russia believes that simply indicating their abilities

on such a certificate would help to differentiate them from the rest of the population while still

maintaining a sense of equality. They cited the reason was that it is verisimilar to differentiating

gender or race, and so does not infringe on the human rights that we extend to superhumans,

and so render them equal.

While the delegation of the Russian Federation has expressed this sense of inclusivity, many

other delegates are taking hardlined stances against superhumans, with some countries voting

for a cleansing of these people. However, it does beg the question: by ostracising these people,

who technically have a physical mutation not of their own volition but simply due to birth, would

it prompt a repeat of history? Such a stance can prompt the consequences of the Second World

War, a mass genocide of an entire human population. The council needs more foresight, and

direction when discussing such issues.

World, 15 March 20:58

Tension on a rise between Singapore and Afghanistan

Opposing stances amongst a selected few countries left council in a state of confusion during the debate on the issue of substance abuse within the WHO

Delegate of Bolivia in support of Afghanistan, trying to bring her point across to the rest of the council

SINGAPORE, March 15 ./TASS/ - Ascension of tension could be felt throughout the council

when council commenced debate on the second issue, substance abuse. Afghanistan, with the

support of France and Russia proposed a discussion on the topic of curbing the production of

drug substances, such as micro crediting for farmers. The implementation of a grace period

would be included as well, to allow farmers to find an alternative crop to grow so as to prevent

the production of addictive harmful substances such as marijuana be implemented on all

countries to curb drug production in order to reduce substance abuse.

The delegate of China offered a suggestion on drug trafficking as it was perceived to be a

matter of importance. China was then vehemently criticised by the delegates of Afghanistan and

France, following the already heightened tensions from the previous issue on the affordability of

healthcare. Singapore then exacerbated the confused state by urging council to engage in

debate in punishment for drug abuse and trafficking. As delegates continued debating on the

issue of drug trafficking, there was still a lack of consideration on the root of the problem, and

this caused further discourse in the debate.

While this was a strong start to the agenda set out by the council, it failed to recognise the

intricacy of the issue of drug abuse and drug trafficking. The council dove right into the heart of

drug production, however, the root of drug trafficking had still not been established. As of now,

superficial solutions are being proposed, as they do not consider the depth and history of drug

trafficking. While these solutions will work in the short term, the long term effects of drug

trafficking will insidiously flow through the cracks of these solutions, and the cycle will be

repeated. Allowing farmers to find alternative crops will surely ensure the reduction in trafficking,

but the mitigation technique needs to be studied more carefully before the council takes a

decision.

Overall the tension within the council and discourse of debate premising this issue had

inadvertently set up roadblocks for delegates to come to a common consensus on the

methodology to tackle this issue. While delegates are working tireless to map out solutions,

much of these energy can be saved if delegates had been able to formulate and follow an

agenda that tackled problems in a more logical fashion. As of this point, delegates had

haphazardly jumped around the issue of substance abuse, without properly scoping out the

intricacy of the issues.

Press Review 15 March, 17:25

The rights of superhumans

The rights of superhumans has been a point of heated debate within the plenary after crisis struck the United Nations (UN)

Delegates engaging in heated debate during crisis

Before embarking any further, it is imperative to define what a superhuman is. As what many

delegates have outlined, they are a sector of society who possess unique abilities such as

telepathy, super-strength and invisibility, among others. The general debate during the plenary

surrounded this specific issue: can ‘superhumans’ be considered human, and by extension,

have the same level of human rights?

Definitions and parallels to history

Firstly it is important to examine the term super-human. The fact that the term itself contains

‘human’ is very important, since it draws a similarity between human beings and humans with

superpowers. In the general sense of the term, ‘superhuman’ is merely a conjunction of the

world's ‘superpower’ and ‘human’. The fundamental issue that needs to be understood is that

they are human.They were born from the flesh and blood of a human being, born on this earth,

born with these abilities, not of their own volition. Their abilities are a result of a mutation in their

genes, much like blue eyes, blonde hair or any other deviation.

Following that line of logic, if the council were to agree on the ‘cleansing’ of these people, is that

not akin to the violation of human rights during the cleansing of the Jews during World War 2, or

the mass genocide of the Armenians by the Ottomans and Turks during the Armenian

Genocide? Would we be doomed to repeat the actions of our predecessors, not too long ago in

the 20th century? It is often said that ‘Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat

it.’

Lack of consideration on the root of the problem

The council also debated heavily on the militarisation of these superhumans and the detriments

they may pose to smaller and less economically developed countries. Many countries, such as

Ethiopia and Egypt, felt that larger and more militarily dominant countries would pose a risk to

these smaller countries citing that countries that are larger will have a larger number of

superhumans that can be used as weapons in warfare. Many delegates, such as the delegate of

Singapore, linked this back to the notion of nuclear proliferation, conveying the gravity and

danger allowing these people to conscript into the army because of their heightened abilities.

However, there was limited debate in council about the rights of these superhumans in relation

to military conscription. Many delegates brought up the fact that these people would be allowed

to follow the laws stipulated by the jurisdiction, as this will grant them equality. However this still

begs the question: how do delegates plan to balance geopolitical tensions with that of the rights

of superhumans, who have been gifted with these abilities, not asked?

Delegates have also brought up grand ideas of education, conveying that many countries would

be amenable to specialised programmes to teach these people how to control their abilities, so

that there would not be a repeat of the incident where a girl accidentally caused 8 casualties at

her school in a fit of anger. Unfortunately, this fact was not expounded upon effectively, with a

lack of consideration from delegates on how to tackle the root of many that can be fixed with

education. Education breeds understanding, knowledge and most of all, and especially for this

demographic, control. Delegates instead were harping on the geopolitical impact of these

humans, ignoring the fact that education is a viable method to curb many issues.

Delegates voting upon unfriendly amendment on resolution, as resolution had many loopholes with

certain issues not addressed

The dangers of ostracisation

While the delegate of China managed to succinctly echo sentiments of many delegates, stating

there was to be a more ‘human-rights based approach’, it is undeniable that most countries

were looking out for the safety of each of their jurisdictions, forging deeper tensions with one

another rather than coming together to form a sense of cohesiveness that can foster equality.

And is this not what the council was debating upon - whether or not equal rights can be given to

these people?

John Wyndham’s book The Chrysalids details of a dystopian society, whereby mutated human

beings with special abilities, ranging from telepathy to having hands for feet, were casted out

from society. They were casted out because they were born with a mutation, a mutation they

were unable to control. The reason? Because they posed a threat to the very fabric of what was

considered normal by the society. A society ruled by fear is the breeding ground for hate and

inequality. By rendering these people a threat because they are different, Wyndham’s book

might one day appear on the shelves of non-fiction, a prophecy to humanity of the dangers of

those that are different. That it is best to fear because only then we are safe. If this is what the

council has decided, then one only has to look through the pages of The Chrysalids to

understand the dystopian nature we are headed towards.

TASS is not responsible for the material quoted in the press reviews

World 15 March, 10:46

WHO debates on affordable healthcare, resolution passed despite contentions

Fuelled by rising tensions between France and China, suggestions made by council yet to come to a close. France and Afghanistan forms bilateral alliance

Delegates voting on resolution on affordable healthcare

SINGAPORE, MARCH 15 ./TASS/ - The World Health Organisation (WHO) has been

vehemently discussing the issue of affordable care for the last 2 days, with a current draft

resolution proposed by the delegate of France. A wide spectrum of issues were discussed in the

resolution on the issue of Affordable Care, ranging from the implementation of support for Less

Economically Developed Countries (LEDCs), as well as many improvements into existing health

schemes that have already been adopted by member states.

Delegates were otherwise supportive of this draft resolution, with the delegate of Afghanistan

describing it as ‘extremely comprehensive’, with delegates from Mexico, Iran and India echoing

this sentiment. However, many delegates have also felt that the lack of debate and discussion

on employment difficulties will prove detrimental to the very fabric of their societies, with

delegate from Australia and Singapore vocalising that they would have preferred to have more

debate regarding this issue.

Employment Difficulties

The issue of affordable and accessible health care directly impacts the issue of employment

difficulty. It is the key difficulty that many countries face when crafting various healthcare

schemes. France has superficially discussed this aspect in debate, and this fact has not been

addressed in the resolution, according to many delegates within the council. Many delegates

had not brought up many issues within employment difficulties such as the integration back into

society, which is one of the primary issues much of society when coming out of care.

This prompts the question: if the key consequence of the lack of affordable health care has not

been sufficiently addressed, will mitigation techniques and newer healthcare bring substantial

development? It is evident that when many people come out of long term health care, they have

trouble integrating back into society and receive jobs. Many employers even deem as those

mentally ill as those of lower competency, and while affordable and accessible healthcare is the

primary focus of the debate, employment difficulties are highly important in order to allow these

people back into society.

Escalating Tensions

Heated debate began when an unfriendly amendment brought up by the delegate of China on

the suggestion of a clause in Article 2 of the draft resolution on Social Protection Policies and

Universal Health Coverage. While France and Afghanistan have been working closely with one

another throughout majority of the debate, the amendment escalated tensions between France

and China, with Afghanistan in strong support of France’s ideals. The debate then took a turn

towards a question of ideology, with a misalignment of political ideals growing more and more

rampant as debate progressed. “China is forcing upon the house his capitalist ideologies and

socialist principles”, as said by the delegate of Afghanistan. This further emphasised on the

clash between the blocs and it may prove detrimental to further discussions within the council.

Calmly discussing solutions is a far better approach, as currently council is producing more heat

than light. The focus of the council is the welfare of the people, and these tensions tend to derail

the council from upholding this responsibility.

France has portrayed himself to be rather hardlined in his approach, with an uncompromising

edge to his rhetoric. When delegates confer with him, he is unwilling to see reason, and while

France does mean well, it does give the impression that France is not as accommodating of

other countries concerns. Afghanistan being a strong supporter France has also shown a great

deal of enthusiasm when debating on the resolution, vehemently denying any criticism towards

the resolution before steering the debate towards a rather unproductive direction whereby

delegates were harping on the legitimacy of suggestibility in relation to council consensus. A

strong steady direction is needed for progress, however this roundabout debate as well as lack

of discussion on a primary issue may prove that the solutions proposed in the resolution lack

consideration. More in depth analysis should have been carried out, and more countries should

have spoke on their contentions. However at the end of the day, the battle’s already lost once

the sword is unsharpened.

The delegates having a unmoderated caucus to discuss on their agenda for the day.

There was much debate and conflict during the conference which took place from 8 in the morning to around 6.30 in the evening at Singapore Chinese Girls' School. One of the few councils that caught our attention was the European Union. The delegates were discussing with one another trying to come a resolution for the overall conference. The delegates of UK were constantly initiating moderated caucuses, and bringing out points that are very useful and help to bring the whole conference forward, thus fabricating it to be more excellent, also preventing it from being too verbose. They also initiated an unmoderated caucuses, that were effective in explaining the motion more effectively. The fact that all other countries cooperated with them made the whole conference more proficient. Around 9.50 a.m., there was a crisis, and everyone had to report to their various venues for a topic that will be rushed to them, and they were given around 5 minutes to discuss, and come up with ideas that can be exhibited and discussed for the final resolution. The topic however, was a very interesting one, "The status of superhumans in the cosmopolitan society".

There were much debate about the fact that the superhumans should still be viewed and respected as a human being and how they are to be tracked and documented. It sparked off arguments and although most countries were agreeable to the fact that documentation should be implemented so as to track the superhumans, the delegate of Germany stood up, saying, “Then wouldn’t it invade the privacy of the superhumans?” Everyone came to a consensus that superhumans are first humans then superhumans and thus should be treated with due respect and have the same human rights. Suggestions for tracking the superhumans were setting up an international superhuman data base which can be helpful to track and identify them when in need. The delegate of UK also suggested that incentives will be given to those who voluntarily declare themselves as a superhuman and South Africa agreed to that. In addition, the delegate of USA emphasised that the superhumans has to have an informed consent before agreeing to doing checks to test if they have the superhumans abilities as quoted by the delegate of Denmark that “some of them might not actually know that they have such abilities.”

To better help these superhumans weave into society and not seen as an alien,  the delegate of Egypt raised that through social media, education, community activities and many more, they

can slowly be accepted and viewed as human beings.

Also, the notion that “All superhumans are bad” does not exist as it is not a one size fits all issue and therefore, the delegate of United Kingdom proposed that the superhumans can use their abilities to do good and play a part in society whilst protecting their privacy.

In the end, they came up with a resolution, “Include all the superhumans  in the society, and treat them with equal rights” This only helps to address the long term issues but no the short term ones like the constant threat that the superhumans posses.

Democracy Dies in DarknessECOSOC 2: Global Tax Reforms and Legislative BoardsBy Daryl Erfan B Othman March 15, at 6:15PM________________________________________ This reporter arrived at the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) just in time to watch the delegate of France bring up the topic of introducing Global Tax Reforms and Legislative Boards (GTRLB) in order to manage the issue at hand, namely the issue of tax evasion. He suggested that a board be set up in order to, as the delegate so vaguely put it, "combat the issue". He then immediately called for a moderated caucus to discuss the viability and details of implementing his suggestion.While most of the council conceded that implementing a governing body to specifically tackle such a large issue was a good idea, many countries had questions regarding the French delegate's GTRLB. These questions proved to be a massacre for France, with many countries picking apart his solution. The most commonly brought up issues were the governing body of such a board, the staffing, the funding and the exact purpose of the board. The delegate of France was seen to be unable to answer many of the questions proposed to him, dismissing them as unimportant due to the fact that the ECOSOC is a non-binding council and such details could be discussed later, sparking outrage among the other delegates. Quoting the delegate of Vietnam, "How could the delegate of France expect us to agree to a board which we have no idea consists of, no idea who runs or funds it?" There was much back and forth debate on the topic, as France struggled to bring across his point as the rest of the council continued questioning the viability of his suggestion, with further points such as the GTRLB only providing more unnecessary red tape and the way in which the body would enforce its power. The delegate of Norway supports the introduction of the GTRLBEventually, after many speeches by different delegates calling France out on his lack of thought regarding the matter, an unmoderated caucus was called, where France attempted to explain the purpose, governing body and the source of funding and staffing or the GTRLB that is to be set up.Quoting France, ‘The GTRLB is to be an administrative board that provides advice based on a country’s current economic status, acting as a central center of information to be audited and edited by the United Nations. It is to be staffed and funded by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and will receive country by country reports in the form of SAARs. It is to be a purely voluntary organization which allows countries to share reports for better efficiency in tackling the problem. Using these reports, the organization would be able to identify anomalies and strange trends their reports allowing them to more effectively solve the issue of tax evasion.’

Unfortunately, immediately after the unmoderated caucus ended, a large explosion occurred at the United Nations Headquarters, causing the loss of many lives and others to be seriously injured. The delegates were quickly rushed to a safer location to deal with this new crisis, leaving the council with the daunting question of solving the intricacies of the GTRLB.

Democracy Dies in Darkness

Crisis 2: The Rise of SuperhumansBy Daryl Erfan B Othman March 15, 2017 at 9PM________________________________________ In recent times, it seems that a new breed of humans has shown themselves. A kind with abilities normal humans do not possess, a kind we have only ever seen in comic books or movies. It seems that these fantasies have come to life, for humans with ‘super abilities’ have burst onto the global stage. These humans have been aptly coined, ‘superhumans’.Today, one such superhuman caused the loss of many lives and multiple serious injuries at the United Nations Headquarters. The individual has been identified as Luke Billingham who used his abilities to set off a large explosion in the vicinity. This is not the first instance of displays of superhuman abilities. There have been two previous occurrences, with one being aggressive in nature and the other being seemingly harmless. Before this, a superhuman by the name Petra Allen made a pyrotechnical display in a fit of anger, causing the death of one person and injuring 8 others. Another instance of superhuman abilities is when an unnamed teenager was caught on security cameras to be using her telepathic abilities to force others to perform various tasks for her, including carrying her shopping bags and others. However, the most recent case involving Mr. Billingham has sparked serious debate among the global community, causing an emergency meeting of the United Nations to take place.The delegates of various countries came together today to discuss the various issues surrounding this new breed of humans and the usage of their incredible abilities. These discussions revolved around four main sectors, namely those of the political, social, legal and human rights sectors. Many points were raised throughout the debate, with the council being evenly divided between two different stances on the treatments of superhumans. The most commonly discussed topics during the crisis was their status as citizens, the rights they would be given and the militarisation of the abilities of these superhumans. The delegate of Brazil suggests an unfriendly amendment to the resolutionThere was a general consensus among the delegates that these superhumans were simply humans who had been gifted extraordinary abilities. Hence, they should be treated as such and should be given the same basic human rights as other humans. However, there was a hotly debated suggestion by the council on whether or not a central registry of superhumans should be put in place. The main point of contention on this issue was the infringement of privacy that a registry

would incur on these superhumans in that their personal information and data would be made available to the entire world. Another major point of contention among countries was the militarisation of superhumans. Major players such as China and Russia supported the usage of superhuman abilities in order to increase their military prowess, using these gifts in order to incur the loss of lives. However, there were also many countries which were in opposition of this, citing that countries with more superhumans would have a much larger military presence and that the usage of their abilities for such purposes would ‘objectify’ them, turning them into weapons instead of people.The argument was tense and back-and-forth, with neither side willing to back down from their various stances. The United States of America led the charge on the side opposing militarisation, while China and Russia were the main drivers behind the argument for militarisation. In the end, the argument was a stalemate, with neither side willing to give it up and a resolution unable to be passed, leaving the rest of the world wondering, how exactly do we deal with these new superhumans?

Anti-Superhuman Sentiments on the Rise

Singapore. March 15 (Xinhua)

Tensions were high as delegates clashed on the topic of the need to regulate and control superhumans in society.

There was a distinct air of fear in the room; words such as “rogue”, hostiles”, “indoctrinated”, “subduing”, “aggressive” were flung with abandon. Delegates from nations such as France and India have, during the span of the UN meeting, treated superhumans at arm’s length, even going so far as to assigning special task forces to control superhuman populations.

The delegate of Poland has even invoked the Jewish Holocaust, fearing a similar fate for superhumans who would be registered under an international superhuman registry that several delegates have been pushing forward.

Another delegate from Brazil even dared to liken superhuman powers to that of “nuclear destruction”. The fear of what such a country did not understand was extremely apparent, and at that moment, the future of peaceful superhuman and human coexistence seemed bleak.

In Chinese society, superhumans are treated as friends, family, fellow citizens, and an integral part of our workforce. While other nations insist on their own agenda and perspectives, the Chinese people must remain resilient in protecting the rights of their superhuman comrades, for the sake of the continued economic and military strength of the great nation.

Opposing delegates of the UN did not seem to understand that it was the individual responsibility of each nation to suppress superhuman crime internally scale; the UN

had no obligation to handle what is clearly a domestic issue. The UN has no capacity to deal with individual rogue superhumans, and some within it seem to want to compensate for this inability by carrying out superhuman oppression on a larger, international scale.

It is clear that China herself has reached this extent of internal security, employing well trained police and security forces which are more than capable of handling

either human or superhuman crimes.

Furthermore, serving the nation in the military is one of the greatest honours a Chinese may undertake in his or her life, and it is horrifying to see such a right being blatantly disregarded in some resolutions that opposing delegates have proposed. Even when the delegate of China attempted to make an unfriendly amendment to the resolution to strike off Clause 3 which discouraged countries

against allowing superhumans to join the military, the house voted against it.

This only goes to show how much resentment there is for superhumans even within the United Nations, even though most of the delegates claim to support human rights for these superhumans. This is indeed a worrying trend among countries who have merely paid lip service to the idea of respecting the rights of superhumans.

Hopefully, superhuman rights will continue to be respected on both an international and national level, preserving China’s autonomy and its progress on superhuman integration policies in the last decade.

Historical Security Summit; China Delegate Safeguards Collective Security

Singapore, March 15 (Xinhua)The level of excitement and enthusiasm was far from low as delegates debated on the possible solutions for the Abyssinian crisis.

Chinese delegate Chew Kay Hong played a leading role in creating a peaceful resolution in tensions between the Abyssinian and Italian authorities. While other delegates were bickering about whether or not economic sanctions should be imposed onto Italy to cripple its military force, the delegate of China presented an interesting alternative to the issue at hand, to use diplomacy to reach a compromise with Italy in creating, jointly with the delegate of Poland, “safety nets” to prevent an invasion of Abyssinia and to “catch” Abyssinia should it be invaded by Italy.

The Abyssinian crisis has been a pressing issue, especially in the League of Nations because it could potentially result in war between Abyssinia and Italy, should the issue not be handled with extreme care.

Italy has recently built a fort on the border between Abyssinian territories and Italian colonies, in clear violation of the Italo-Ethiopian Treaty of 1928. Such an action was popularly considered an action of aggression against Abyssinia and its sovereignty by the delegate of Japan and Abyssinia, while delegates of nations such as Czechoslovakia preferred to consider it inconclusive.

In addition to the use of diplomacy, two other solutions were brought up, namely giving incentives to Italy to ensure it has no reason to invade Abyssinia and to cripple Italy such that it is unable to take any violent actions. However, this notion was opposed by many, such as the delegate of Germany who reminded the council that this act would only encourage and affirm Italy’s aggressive actions and intentions.

Instead, the delegate of Germany proposed an alternative; to cripple Italy by limiting exports of raw materials such as oil, coal and steel into the nation, with the hopes that this would make them unable to wage a war.

Germany was opposed by several other delegates, such as the delegate of Egypt who brought up that in the context of the Great Depression, depriving the country of valuable raw materials would hit its economy further, and this in turn could affect the economy of the rest of Europe.

Furthermore, Italy and Denmark also argued that imposing economic

sanctions would harm the innocent civilians of Italy and would punish them more than the government.

The council was a heartening show of diplomacy and cooperation within the League of Nations, which has been less than effective of late in handling other international disputes, such as the secession of the Memel region to Germany in 1939.

Through collaboration between key speakers such as the delegate of France, Poland, Abyssinia, Egypt, Japan and China, a resolution was soon formed, under careful inspection by all members across the room.

Chinese delegate called to attention the vested interest in the resolution, where the resolution took an “(in)accurate representation” of stakeholder nations. The Chinese delegate called for “a fair system to ensure the lobby group is representative of countries in the region”.

In an interview, the delegate of France told Xinhua that his intentions were “to ensure that Italy and Abyssinia are able to resolve tensions between them in a diplomatic fashion, without the need for physical altercations.”

There was amenable bilateral cooperation between Chinese, Japanese, Russian and German delegates, with numerous unfriendly amendments

pushed forward by this bloc to further qualify and refine the resolution and its various clauses.

The Chinese delegate took further steps to reach out to opposing blocs ensuring a smooth process of reaching a conclusive resolution.

Significant debate was centered around Clause 13 of the resolution, where delegates

No Safety For Superhumans in UN

A sudden explosion; actions taken by a Superhuman has injured eight people and has caused one fatality today in a tragic incident at a local university.

This incident has began a series of debates on the treatment of Superhumans in our society.

The Chinese government has released a statement affirming their protection of Superhumans in the face of such uncertainty, assuring the public that Superhumans will receive any and all support necessary in such a

crisis, a gesture that is greatly approved of by Xinhua.

China has always shown tolerance and acceptance of Superhumans, encouraging their successful integration of Superhumans into the workforce. Placing China’s security at the fore, Superhumans have helped bolster China’s military forces, working in harmony with each other in order to create a stronger, more peaceful nation for all. Thus they should not be alienated from human society, and a line should not be drawn between them and other citizens of the country, as clearly pointed out by the delegate of China during the UNCTSC Conference.

In the beginning unmoderated caucus, China had already gained the support of several other delegations such as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, Singapore, Vietnam and Poland. This bloc strongly supports the equality and indistinction of human and superhuman rights, remaining convinced that the perpetrator of the crime has to be convicted in a regular court with all basic human rights afforded to her.

Other blocs, such of that of India and France, have demanded the short-term segregation of superhuman citizens. The French delegate has even branded superhumans potential terrorists, echoing the intolerant and divided political climate of his nation.

On the other hand, the United States has proposed an alternative solution with the aim of suppressing these superhumans, an act which would be considered unethical and unfair to superhumans.

“The US government will try to be idealistic and promote equal treatment and rights for superhumans as far as possible, but their policies will fail. Their people are too privileged to entertain superhumans in their society and ostracisation WILL continue.” Said a delegate of China in a crisis gathering of the UN.

“They’re humans, just like us. They will be tried under the judicial system, as are humans.” The delegate of Vietnam has stood up to defend superhuman rights, citing the Universal Charter of Human Rights Article Six, against larger opinions that sought to take away superhuman rights to privacy and military participation.

Delegates from UK and Ukraine have echoed sentiments against superhuman freedom, reminding the house that their superhuman abilities pose dangers to society, fearing for their nation’s security from their uncontrolled superhumans. Chinese delegates have, in response,

advocated its own progressive policies, hoping other nations would follow in China’s footsteps.

However, Chinese delegates have been consistent in their stand to protect the military careers and the continued economic rights of their superhuman citizens, standing firm against other delegates such as that of Brazil who are persistent in encroaching on the basic rights of its citizens, calling for a “human rights approach” to the issue. The Chinese delegation, and its allies, seek to protect China’s continued defence capabilities, and prevent discrimination against our superhuman citizens.

As the debate progressed, the mood of the room got more impatient as several delegates called for the council to come to a consensus and move on. Unfortunately, many nations, particularly the French bloc, still opposed the protection of superhumans and the entitlement of basic human rights to enhanced individuals.

After many rounds of debate, a draft resolution was submitted by France and an unfriendly amendment was proposed by the delegate of China to strike out Clause 3 which discourages countries from using superhumans in their military. Chinese delegates and their allies refused to let abuse on superhuman victims run rampant and fought hard to ensure that superhuman citizens still retained their rights to military participation and to serve their country. While the opposing sought to infringe the sovereignty of member nations, China also fought the encroachment of unjust influence on the private matters of smaller, less powerful member nations.

It was a narrow victory for Chinese delegates, who finally managed to rebuff the resolution passed, and ensured the continued protection of superheroes on sovereign Chinese territories. In the end, the resolution was not passed, to the joy of the Chinese delegation.

71

SCMUN 2017

The Secretariat

Leah KohAileen CatalloNatalie LimRachel QuekSu Thet Htar SanFaith LeongSu Thet Hnin San

The Press Corps

Genevieve Khoo Ngan Anh

The news header of each Model News Network is the sole property of the respective news network.

The theme for the eleventh SCMUN conference is “Vamos Proteger”, which is

Portuguese for “We Will Protect”. Our vision is for participants to recognise their

responsibility in defending liberties, ranging from that of social cohesion to

international relations, whilst maintaining security, stability and sensitivity. SCMUN

2017 will enhance participants’ awareness of current affairs and heighten their

sense of duty as global citizens. Apart from providing a platform for intellectual,

social and cultural exchange, the conference also provides a chance for participants

to make an active difference by lending support toorganisations in need.

72

73