Plenary
22 October 2017
By Jeremy Chin
By Jeremy Chin
Students, all 11 schools in harmony, flowed into the BlackBox Theatre for the last day plenary. With the soothing music, the sounds of laughter and happiness quiet down as they stared at the blank stage.
Delegates waited for their country speaker to go up, speaking up about their resolution, with a statement about it. Each one would like a chance to display their knowledge of each statement, hopefully leaving people in awe.
Each delegate showed great intelligence of their words giving questions and opinions. Delegates wanted to be known, shown as an incredible individual with persuasiveness with their mouth. Students were filled with ideas, and a desire to speak with power and capability of their words.
The beating heart of MUN has always been collaboration, and it always will. This event does not only bring words, but fame and friendships. This occasion will leave a scar to all delegates, remembering the collaboration of each person and how it showed that collaboration, not confrontation.
"Beneath the rule of men entirely great, the pen is mightier than the sword." - Edward Bulwer-Lytton
Delegates waited for their country speaker to go up, speaking up about their resolution, with a statement about it. Each one would like a chance to display their knowledge of each statement, hopefully leaving people in awe.
Each delegate showed great intelligence of their words giving questions and opinions. Delegates wanted to be known, shown as an incredible individual with persuasiveness with their mouth. Students were filled with ideas, and a desire to speak with power and capability of their words.
The beating heart of MUN has always been collaboration, and it always will. This event does not only bring words, but fame and friendships. This occasion will leave a scar to all delegates, remembering the collaboration of each person and how it showed that collaboration, not confrontation.
"Beneath the rule of men entirely great, the pen is mightier than the sword." - Edward Bulwer-Lytton
Day's Summary
21 October 2017
By Jeremy Chin and Samithi Sok
By Jeremy Chin and Samithi Sok
Following last night’s opening ceremony, today is the day that the work truly begins. Beginning at 8:30AM at the ISPP campus, students attending MUN shrug off their normal selves and become delegates, chair, admin, and press, each becoming an essential cog in the MUN machine.
Today, students will all strive to mimic the United Nations as closely as possible--this includes even the manner of speech for all attendees, one where the person speaking sounds roughly like a robot’s crude simulacrum of real human speech. All three hundred students were split up into ten assemblies, each discussing a different topic of global import. The students took on the persona of a delegate from a country of their choice to debate and discuss alongside their fellow students to pass resolutions that will, preferably, solve global issues.
Alongside the senior assemblies, this event also has two Junior General Assemblies, allowing students from ninth grade and below to also participate in the event.
Below is a summary of the resolutions discussed in each of the assemblies:
General Assembly 1-4
Unlike the more specific assemblies aimed towards a singular goal or overarching issue, such as the Human Rights Council or the Environment Assembly, the General Assembly (GA) discusses a variety of different topics like peace and security, for example.
Because the General Assemblies are much broader, more students were assigned to the GAs than to the others. As a result, each room was filled with student delegates. There was little room for even a reporter to slyly take notes in the corner. Nevertheless, this did not dampen the enthusiasm in the students. As each delegate stepped up to the podium to argue out their points, each student possessed a singular energy for debating that seemed limitless. Every student became their persona completely, fully embodying their new characters and debating as if they were truly a representative of that country.
One thing is for certain, if politics doesn’t pan out, they’ve definitely got a shot in theatre.
GA 1 approved the following resolutions on: the question of healthcare; the regulation of small arms and light weapons proliferation (essentially, gun control); the use of private military and security companies.
The healthcare resolution aimed to improve healthcare for countries across the world, especially those that critically lack facilities such as hospitals or clinics. With small arms and light weapons, the goal was to impose more stringent restrictions in an attempt to better regulate the proliferation of firearms. Finally, the private military and security companies resolution took aim at the privatisation of war and the impunity that these companies operate on.
GA 2 approved the following resolutions on: the question of finite resources; funding for education; the regulation of the online currency, Bitcoin.
The resolution on finite resources sought to reduce consumption of natural resources and to place greater focus on sustainable energy and development for the future. The resolution regarding education spending called for more support for future education projects as well as support for the Global Partnership for Education (GPE). As for Bitcoin, the resolution took aim at the online currency for its lack of regulation and its potential safety issues.
GA 3 approved the following resolutions on: the question of suitable working conditions and workers’ rights; the gender wage gap; combatting hate organisations.
The resolution on suitable working conditions and workers’ rights focused on creating suitable working conditions and improving worker’s rights. The resolution regarding the gender wage gap sought to eliminate discrimination against women and to promote equal opportunities for both sexes. To combat hate organisations, the resolution put forth penalties against groups that promote discrimination, as well as more aggressive action towards the prevention of terrorism, promotion of social awareness and increased aid for displaced peoples or refugees.
GA 4 approved the following resolutions on: the question of compensation for atomic radiation damages; government transparency; repatriation of colonial artefacts.
The resolution on compensation for atomic radiation damages aimed to provide aid to aid survivors of radiation damage, as well as encouraging better safety regulations and more cooperation regarding international health and safety regulations. Government transparency was the topic of the second resolution, wherein requests for increased social awareness on corruption, creation of anti-corruption units and cooperation with NGOs. Finally, the resolution of repatriation of colonial artefacts sought to return cultural artefacts stolen from their countries of origin, as well as to take further steps to combat smuggling and trafficking.
Environment Assembly
I believe that the Environmental Council’s debate was extremely fruitful. In this debate, they were discussing on how people might have to change their diet from meat to insects.
“Meat takes up a lot of resources, such as water, and it causes deforestation because there is not enough space for cows to eat grass, so farmers cut down trees to give more space. But without the trees, it has caused a huge impact on global warming.” Said the maker of the resolution, Delegate of Brazil.
“But how do you expect people to change their diet so suddenly if people have been eating meat in the early ages? Changing someone’s diet seems incredibly realistic. And insects, I don’t believe that anyone would eat those, and even if they’re unlimited, meat is cleaner.” The delegate of Uruguay seemed quite uncertain of the idea of people not eating meat anymore.
The discussion was growing tense, with everyone disagreeing with someone else. The debate was increased with facts, details, and opinions.
“I believe that…”
“But I think that…”
The white room growed with suspense as everyone was finding answers and opinions. Viewpoints were thrown everywhere. Plaques were raised and many spoke. The debate was filled with thoughts and answers.
Junior General Assembly 1 and 2
In Junior General Assembly 1, the room was buzzing about civil liberties, migrants, and education. Their plaques and macbooks were all over the table, and each owner was either taking notes or explaining each one’s resolution. With each plaque, it said what country each girl or boy was for.
Different people all had their own subjects and many had different opinions on their country and what they were for and against.
“I’m the delegate of Angola,” said an interviewee. “I’m for civil liberties and I believe that everyone should have civil rights.”
Some were more detailed than others, but all gave enough info for the layman to understand.
“I’m for Migrants and Security, Civil Liberties, and Funding Education to LICs (Low Income Countries).” Someone, who seemed to be the delegate of Canada, said. “I want to find a solution to uneducated. In order for this to happen, I will need all my resolutions to pass.”
Many stated facts that each country has did for the statement they were for or against.
“Greece is trying to seek organizations like the UN to fund protection and health care. They are also trying to have safe transports to refugees.”
“Togo has been requesting different countries to help raise the amount of money for children’s education.”
Many discussions were taken to improve their resolutions.
“What does it mean by…”
“I feel that…”
The room was definitely working hard.
The Junior General Assembly 2 was filled with students in 11 different schools on their computers explaining to each other about their own policy statements and resolutions. They all buzzed like bees, all in their formal clothes, and typed loudly.
Different people with plaques stated different things about their country.
“The Czech Republic has set a goal to produce 20% of sustainable energy by 2020!”
“Almost 100% of Netherlands energy used to be from greenhouse gases, such as methane and carbon dioxide, but they’ve been trying at 2013 with 40 groups such as trade unions, employers, and environmental organization have made an Energy Agreement with the Netherlands.”
With so many opinions and facts flying around in the classroom, anyone could have guessed that the students had done a lot of research. Everyone was either working on sustainable energy, finite sources, or chemical weapons.
This year’s MUN was going to be about as good as last year’s, or probably better.
Economic and Social Council
Clearly, the debate happening at Economic and Social Council was enjoyable to watch. The brave speaker of Vietnam stood to the whole class of student’s gaze.
“Vietnam has a financial problem and a technical problem to develop sustainable energy.”
The debate had officially started. The whole class was hushed as the man spoke of the sustainable energy of Vietnam. With the expansive of vocabulary and the interesting clauses, everyone could speak. MUN wasn’t only about debating and using words instead of force, but it was also about bonding with other schools and improving your confidence.
People gave amendments, suggestions, and opinions, which flooded the room. Everyone, with vast efforts, debated against and backed up others.
“In clause 6, I think that we should not only use sustainable energy and completely not use finite sources, but I believe that we should use both to sustain this world.”
The debate was filled with critical thinking and points of view. Everyone is different, and so are their thoughts.
Human Rights Council
The debate of the Human Rights Council was thoroughly interesting to watch. As the Delegate of Germany clarified her powerful resolution, many thought bubbles were floating on top of each person’s head.
“Everyone should have a right. Everyone is human, and everyone should have a right to practice their religion. I think that everyone can make a free opinion, but if that opinion is judgemental, it should not be accepted. People should not judge others, no matter how strong or weak they are.” Said the delegate of Germany.
Many raised their plaques to say something. They explained with enthusiasm and detail to help everyone understand, and with some “charmspeak”, manage to persuade many into agreeing. There were loads of reasoning and thinking, many tried their hardest to form answers, flaws, and questions.
The debate was filled with fun and ideas, filling everyone’s heads up with knowledge.
Security Council
The Security Council consists of five permanent members, as well as ten more non-permanent members that are elected on a two-year basis. The Security Council is tasked with establishing peacekeeping operations, establishment of international sanctions and the authorisation of military actions.
Of the delegates on the Security Council, it was clear that each took themselves very seriously. Issues discussed by the Security Council at MUN are on-going situations, such as the situation on the Horn of Africa and the Korean Peninsula, and, as a result, the discussions were quite touchy. Nevertheless, the delegates stuck through as they were working on issues that would, most likely, prove to be issues that would help to decide the future of mankind.
Today, students will all strive to mimic the United Nations as closely as possible--this includes even the manner of speech for all attendees, one where the person speaking sounds roughly like a robot’s crude simulacrum of real human speech. All three hundred students were split up into ten assemblies, each discussing a different topic of global import. The students took on the persona of a delegate from a country of their choice to debate and discuss alongside their fellow students to pass resolutions that will, preferably, solve global issues.
Alongside the senior assemblies, this event also has two Junior General Assemblies, allowing students from ninth grade and below to also participate in the event.
Below is a summary of the resolutions discussed in each of the assemblies:
General Assembly 1-4
Unlike the more specific assemblies aimed towards a singular goal or overarching issue, such as the Human Rights Council or the Environment Assembly, the General Assembly (GA) discusses a variety of different topics like peace and security, for example.
Because the General Assemblies are much broader, more students were assigned to the GAs than to the others. As a result, each room was filled with student delegates. There was little room for even a reporter to slyly take notes in the corner. Nevertheless, this did not dampen the enthusiasm in the students. As each delegate stepped up to the podium to argue out their points, each student possessed a singular energy for debating that seemed limitless. Every student became their persona completely, fully embodying their new characters and debating as if they were truly a representative of that country.
One thing is for certain, if politics doesn’t pan out, they’ve definitely got a shot in theatre.
GA 1 approved the following resolutions on: the question of healthcare; the regulation of small arms and light weapons proliferation (essentially, gun control); the use of private military and security companies.
The healthcare resolution aimed to improve healthcare for countries across the world, especially those that critically lack facilities such as hospitals or clinics. With small arms and light weapons, the goal was to impose more stringent restrictions in an attempt to better regulate the proliferation of firearms. Finally, the private military and security companies resolution took aim at the privatisation of war and the impunity that these companies operate on.
GA 2 approved the following resolutions on: the question of finite resources; funding for education; the regulation of the online currency, Bitcoin.
The resolution on finite resources sought to reduce consumption of natural resources and to place greater focus on sustainable energy and development for the future. The resolution regarding education spending called for more support for future education projects as well as support for the Global Partnership for Education (GPE). As for Bitcoin, the resolution took aim at the online currency for its lack of regulation and its potential safety issues.
GA 3 approved the following resolutions on: the question of suitable working conditions and workers’ rights; the gender wage gap; combatting hate organisations.
The resolution on suitable working conditions and workers’ rights focused on creating suitable working conditions and improving worker’s rights. The resolution regarding the gender wage gap sought to eliminate discrimination against women and to promote equal opportunities for both sexes. To combat hate organisations, the resolution put forth penalties against groups that promote discrimination, as well as more aggressive action towards the prevention of terrorism, promotion of social awareness and increased aid for displaced peoples or refugees.
GA 4 approved the following resolutions on: the question of compensation for atomic radiation damages; government transparency; repatriation of colonial artefacts.
The resolution on compensation for atomic radiation damages aimed to provide aid to aid survivors of radiation damage, as well as encouraging better safety regulations and more cooperation regarding international health and safety regulations. Government transparency was the topic of the second resolution, wherein requests for increased social awareness on corruption, creation of anti-corruption units and cooperation with NGOs. Finally, the resolution of repatriation of colonial artefacts sought to return cultural artefacts stolen from their countries of origin, as well as to take further steps to combat smuggling and trafficking.
Environment Assembly
I believe that the Environmental Council’s debate was extremely fruitful. In this debate, they were discussing on how people might have to change their diet from meat to insects.
“Meat takes up a lot of resources, such as water, and it causes deforestation because there is not enough space for cows to eat grass, so farmers cut down trees to give more space. But without the trees, it has caused a huge impact on global warming.” Said the maker of the resolution, Delegate of Brazil.
“But how do you expect people to change their diet so suddenly if people have been eating meat in the early ages? Changing someone’s diet seems incredibly realistic. And insects, I don’t believe that anyone would eat those, and even if they’re unlimited, meat is cleaner.” The delegate of Uruguay seemed quite uncertain of the idea of people not eating meat anymore.
The discussion was growing tense, with everyone disagreeing with someone else. The debate was increased with facts, details, and opinions.
“I believe that…”
“But I think that…”
The white room growed with suspense as everyone was finding answers and opinions. Viewpoints were thrown everywhere. Plaques were raised and many spoke. The debate was filled with thoughts and answers.
Junior General Assembly 1 and 2
In Junior General Assembly 1, the room was buzzing about civil liberties, migrants, and education. Their plaques and macbooks were all over the table, and each owner was either taking notes or explaining each one’s resolution. With each plaque, it said what country each girl or boy was for.
Different people all had their own subjects and many had different opinions on their country and what they were for and against.
“I’m the delegate of Angola,” said an interviewee. “I’m for civil liberties and I believe that everyone should have civil rights.”
Some were more detailed than others, but all gave enough info for the layman to understand.
“I’m for Migrants and Security, Civil Liberties, and Funding Education to LICs (Low Income Countries).” Someone, who seemed to be the delegate of Canada, said. “I want to find a solution to uneducated. In order for this to happen, I will need all my resolutions to pass.”
Many stated facts that each country has did for the statement they were for or against.
“Greece is trying to seek organizations like the UN to fund protection and health care. They are also trying to have safe transports to refugees.”
“Togo has been requesting different countries to help raise the amount of money for children’s education.”
Many discussions were taken to improve their resolutions.
“What does it mean by…”
“I feel that…”
The room was definitely working hard.
The Junior General Assembly 2 was filled with students in 11 different schools on their computers explaining to each other about their own policy statements and resolutions. They all buzzed like bees, all in their formal clothes, and typed loudly.
Different people with plaques stated different things about their country.
“The Czech Republic has set a goal to produce 20% of sustainable energy by 2020!”
“Almost 100% of Netherlands energy used to be from greenhouse gases, such as methane and carbon dioxide, but they’ve been trying at 2013 with 40 groups such as trade unions, employers, and environmental organization have made an Energy Agreement with the Netherlands.”
With so many opinions and facts flying around in the classroom, anyone could have guessed that the students had done a lot of research. Everyone was either working on sustainable energy, finite sources, or chemical weapons.
This year’s MUN was going to be about as good as last year’s, or probably better.
Economic and Social Council
Clearly, the debate happening at Economic and Social Council was enjoyable to watch. The brave speaker of Vietnam stood to the whole class of student’s gaze.
“Vietnam has a financial problem and a technical problem to develop sustainable energy.”
The debate had officially started. The whole class was hushed as the man spoke of the sustainable energy of Vietnam. With the expansive of vocabulary and the interesting clauses, everyone could speak. MUN wasn’t only about debating and using words instead of force, but it was also about bonding with other schools and improving your confidence.
People gave amendments, suggestions, and opinions, which flooded the room. Everyone, with vast efforts, debated against and backed up others.
“In clause 6, I think that we should not only use sustainable energy and completely not use finite sources, but I believe that we should use both to sustain this world.”
The debate was filled with critical thinking and points of view. Everyone is different, and so are their thoughts.
Human Rights Council
The debate of the Human Rights Council was thoroughly interesting to watch. As the Delegate of Germany clarified her powerful resolution, many thought bubbles were floating on top of each person’s head.
“Everyone should have a right. Everyone is human, and everyone should have a right to practice their religion. I think that everyone can make a free opinion, but if that opinion is judgemental, it should not be accepted. People should not judge others, no matter how strong or weak they are.” Said the delegate of Germany.
Many raised their plaques to say something. They explained with enthusiasm and detail to help everyone understand, and with some “charmspeak”, manage to persuade many into agreeing. There were loads of reasoning and thinking, many tried their hardest to form answers, flaws, and questions.
The debate was filled with fun and ideas, filling everyone’s heads up with knowledge.
Security Council
The Security Council consists of five permanent members, as well as ten more non-permanent members that are elected on a two-year basis. The Security Council is tasked with establishing peacekeeping operations, establishment of international sanctions and the authorisation of military actions.
Of the delegates on the Security Council, it was clear that each took themselves very seriously. Issues discussed by the Security Council at MUN are on-going situations, such as the situation on the Horn of Africa and the Korean Peninsula, and, as a result, the discussions were quite touchy. Nevertheless, the delegates stuck through as they were working on issues that would, most likely, prove to be issues that would help to decide the future of mankind.
ISPPMUN 2017 Opening Ceremony
Oct 20 2017
By Samithi Sok
By Samithi Sok
Over three hundred students, spread out across eleven different schools, each dressed prim and proper for the occasion, filed into ISPP’s BlackBox Theatre this evening for the opening ceremony of the 6th Annual ISPP Model United Nations. Conversation and laughter ripple through the room. Trickling in slowly, students and staff alike make their way up the aisles, settling into their seats, eyes now and then glancing towards the empty podium on stage.
Murmurs and whispers dull to silence as the speakers for the night take their places at the podium. Among them are Mr. Edwin Van Olst, the director of ISPP MUN and organiser of the event; Mr. Murray Polglase, the principal of ISPP Secondary; Mr. Napoleon Navarro, senior policy advisor of the UNDP Cambodia; and Samuel Newman, this year’s Secretary General. Each speaker spoke on this year’s theme of Collaboration, Not Confrontation.
Mr. Van Olst, given a chance to flourish his historical knowledge, summed up the heart of this event in his speech. Exactly fifty-five years ago, the Cuban Missile Crisis was set to light the world in the flames of thermonuclear war. The confrontation between the Soviets and the Americans was poised to spark a Third World War. In the end, however, talks between the two superpowers resulted in the diffusal of the situation. It was collaboration, not confrontation that solved the Crisis.
Collaboration lies at the heart of Model United Nations. At this event, as it was for the past six years, students from different schools will meet to discuss world issues, such as climate change, global security and sustainable development.
This event offers students a chance to develop new friendships, to rekindle old ones, to develop interpersonal skills and critical thinking. All students are encouraged to make the most of this event’s unique opportunity to engage with global issues that will affect all of humanity for generations to come.
Murmurs and whispers dull to silence as the speakers for the night take their places at the podium. Among them are Mr. Edwin Van Olst, the director of ISPP MUN and organiser of the event; Mr. Murray Polglase, the principal of ISPP Secondary; Mr. Napoleon Navarro, senior policy advisor of the UNDP Cambodia; and Samuel Newman, this year’s Secretary General. Each speaker spoke on this year’s theme of Collaboration, Not Confrontation.
Mr. Van Olst, given a chance to flourish his historical knowledge, summed up the heart of this event in his speech. Exactly fifty-five years ago, the Cuban Missile Crisis was set to light the world in the flames of thermonuclear war. The confrontation between the Soviets and the Americans was poised to spark a Third World War. In the end, however, talks between the two superpowers resulted in the diffusal of the situation. It was collaboration, not confrontation that solved the Crisis.
Collaboration lies at the heart of Model United Nations. At this event, as it was for the past six years, students from different schools will meet to discuss world issues, such as climate change, global security and sustainable development.
This event offers students a chance to develop new friendships, to rekindle old ones, to develop interpersonal skills and critical thinking. All students are encouraged to make the most of this event’s unique opportunity to engage with global issues that will affect all of humanity for generations to come.