Agenda: “Possibility of establishment of an independent and international reserve currency as an alternative to the US Dollar”
The committee commenced with an extremely up-beat Chairperson who seemed ready to face another five hours of committee in session, determined to prove wrong the earlier press release about his stupor during the second session of the previous day.
The session began with the General Speakers List, the zealous delegates yielded to Points of Information showcasing their self-confidence and reflecting their thoroughly researched points.
The aura that pervaded the room was electrifying, the delegates debated over the US dollar and its sphere of influence on economic activity around the world. There were instances when the air of formality would fall; the Delegate of Cuba reminisced of the days of the Great Depression of the twenty first (sic) century.
The ECOSOC committee truly got us thinking; it was like watching a youth version of the world’s future. Through the points put up in support or to reprimand the agenda, one could agree that the world was paving the way for a set of very intellectual minds, ready to take the world by storm.
- Rhea Srivastava
The second day began with immense passion from the delegates though, occasionally, some could be seen yawning and rubbing their eyes. However, the flow of debate was not to be deterred by this, and soon after roll call, the committee was engrossed in debate on the agenda of Human Trafficking.
The day commenced with the resumption of the General Speakers List and the delegate of Belgium enlightened the committee about how strongly his country condemned the practice of human trafficking and had taken initiatives to curb the said practice. He was instantly challenged by the Chair who demanded to know what Belgium was doing to decrease the massive influx of foreigners through human trafficking but to this the embarrassed delegate had no answer.
The Chair frequently questioned the delegates on the legislations of their nations with regard to human trafficking and whether or not the delegate was aware of this Ministry or that recent study. Needless to say, most delegates sat down with faces tinged red and a meek “Sorry, Chair, the Delegate is not aware”. However, unlike yesterday, the Chair didn’t get as many chances to point out that delegates could not second their own motions.
Suddenly, a motion was passed for a moderated caucus on the topic, ‘Role of NGOs’. There was a raging debate on the topic; the committee seemed to be suddenly wide awake. There were many who commended the work of NGOs and stated that NGOs were essential for fighting the battle against the heinous crime of human trafficking. On the other hand, there were some, like the delegates of Kuwait and Angola, who strongly believed that the government needs to intervene more into such matters and that NGOs, on their own, were not enough to curtail human trafficking.
The Chair kept questioning the various delegates on topics such as the Sharia law, preventive measures, etc., often looking rather amused with the responses he received. The scintillating Delegate of Italy also raised a motion on a topic that nobody understood. He also yielded to the Chair after raising the motion. The poor delegate repeated his motion three times before the Chair finally deemed it a correct manner of raising a motion.
Oh, and there it is again: “Delegate, you cannot second your own motion!”
Finally, the committee went into an unmoderated caucus to discuss the Rome statute.
- Yuganshi Singh
Following yesterday’s committee session, members of the All India Political Parties Meet have now formed brand new coalitions. Mr Manik Sarkar is not a part of the Indian National Congress anymore, which seems to be rather shocking. Mr Omar Abdullah has supposedly resigned from the Indian Nation Congress. I wonder how he can resign from a party he isn’t a part of?
As of now, the following members have joined a third front political party: Mamata Banerjee, who was in the All India Trinamool Congress, Manik Sarkar from the Communist Party Of India, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and Sayed Hyderali Shihab Thangal from the Indian Union Muslim League, Omar Abdullah from Jammu and Kashmir National Conference, H.D. Deve Gowda from Janata Dal (Secular), Nitish Kumar from Janata Dal (United), Sharad Pawar from National Congress Party, and lastly Chandrashekhar Rao from Telangana Rashtra Samithi.
Advantages and disadvantages of state funding of elections is a vital topic being discussed in AIPPM. Issues such as lack of transparency have been brought up; Mr Manik Sarkar strongly felt we should not have state funding of elections. Many delegates felt that it was a complete waste of money. Ms Sonia Gandhi was very neutral about the whole affair. Lalu Prasad Yadav insisted that, “Funds of the public should be used for the public.”
The members of the AIPPM enthusiastically waved their placards and viewpoints echoed through the room.
Rather interesting debate topics were raised, such as “Decriminalisation of Indian politics”, “Reason for criminalisation of politics”, “Advantages and Disadvantages of the recall instrument” and “Banning of communal politics in elections.”
There seemed to be an exceptional amount of heat between Mr Uddhav Thackeray and Mr Sharad Pawar. Mr Sharad Pawar also seemed to be confused about which pronoun to use for Mr Narendra Modi, who is being represented by a girl, eliciting many giggles.
At the end of the moderated caucus, there was a request for opening another motion instead of reverting to the General Speakers List: extremely unusual, but the delegates seem to have a lot to discuss.
Electoral reforms to reduce unsuccessful votes were being discussed in AIPPM. The election commission felt that in due course of time, the technological and financial capabilities must be improved to reduce rigging! Mr Manik Shankar felt that there should be no change in the voting system and that too much power is given to an individual and even the illiterate part of India needed to be taken into consideration. A point very well noted in committee!
- Tanvi Bhatnagar
The start to the second day in Security Council was unavoidably delayed with the Chair running late; however, the delegates were determined to discuss the agenda.
Splitting into small groups, they began arguing heatedly about the use of nuclear weapons in DPRK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) while the Vice Chair looked on indulgently. When the Chair finally arrived, the delegates got down to business and the session finally commenced. The Chair wasted no time in discussing the standard procedures required while presenting a draft resolution along with emphasizing other committee regulations. The Chair discussed the merits of a provisional speakers list (PSL) versus the moderated caucus to discuss the draft resolution. Delegates voted upon both motions. The majority of them were intent upon establishing a PSL. However, after this, a crisis was introduced, and the international press representative was requested to leave the committee and had no access to any information in relation to the proceedings.
The delegates sat tapping away on their laptops, eagerly waiting for the session to begin. Subsequent to the roll call, the Chair asked the delegates what they had discussed regarding the agenda, ‘the illicit trading of small arms and light weapons’, in the unmoderated caucus that took place the previous day. The delegates stood up one by one, each stating what their individual groups spoke about and what they felt needed further discussion. The delegate of South Africa got much too excited at this proposition, raising his plaque card one too many times. This even caused the Chair to prohibit him from raising it during the informal session again. Topics such ‘weapons trade in Africa’ and ‘weapons trade in developed nations’ were brought up. The Chair took these topics and advised the assembly to put these motions up as moderated caucuses, he also advised them to combine motions, such as the ‘source and destination of the trade of weaponry’. The general speakers list started from where it left off the day before, and a number of successful moderated caucuses followed it.
The Chair made the delegates who hadn’t spoken till then to raise motions in the assembly. Embarrassment was extremely clear on their faces: they spoke so softly that you couldn’t even tell that they were using microphones.
- Mannat Mehta