UN Environmental program (UNED) 1st committee

By Eteoklis Nikolaou

The necessity of taking measures against climate change was underlined by the delegates. The vast majority of the delegates agreed that the existing measures are insufficient. As the Russian Federation's delegate claimed, it is our responsibility to act, adding that Russia is the ‘champion’ among countries fighting against climate change. A different perspective was expressed by the Belgian delegate, who suggested that the existing resolution system should be reformed and a new general body should be created. Furthermore, he added that the European Union is the only international organization which has acted and we expect more organizations to follow this example. A similar opinion was presented by the Italian delegate, who agreed with Belgium and noted that it is time to create international rules, as there is not an international organization which can take as yet take the necessary measures. The lack of limitations and the improvement of the existing institutions were underlined by the US and the UK delegates, who sought to oppose the suggestion made by the Russian and the North Korean delegates for the creation of an international environmental court. By the end of the committee there had been no clear decision whether a new international court should be created or not .

United Nations Development Program (UNDP) - Friday and Saturday Morning

Unique on the KCL campus in being fully convened and in session at 18:15 on Friday evening, by the conclusion of discussions that evening the first topic, “The Impact of the Financial Crisis on the Achievement of the Millennium Development Goals” had been chosen for discussion on Saturday. Three working papers were debated on Saturday morning, and the paper which enjoyed the most signatories, with 28 of 70 delegates, advocated the freezing of foreign debt repayments. Scruples were perhaps inevitably raised by the American delegation, which suggested that the World Bank had already made provisions for the freezing of debt repayments. The Russian delegate managed to cause a ripple of laughs when he commented that “the Russian delegation would like to congratulate the authors of this working paper... of which we are one,”. Early in the afternoon a draft resolution with eight sponsors was proposed by the USA, which recommended a new framework for aid distribution. It fell, however, at the first hurdle, and failed even to enter into discussion.

By Alex Webb

Disarmament and International Security Committee (DISEC) - Friday and Saturday morning

DISEC has thus far been characterized by enthusiastic engagement from the majority of delegates, with a high proportion keen to express their opinions at all times. The Friday evening session was livened by a fiery debate catalyzed by Haiti, whose advocacy of a regional small arms task force was branded “completely ridiculous” by the Russian delegate, who felt fewer controls were more practicable. When Iran expressed their support for Russia's point of view, it was immediately condemned by Israel as typical of Iran's foreign policy. The chairs intend working papers to be discussed this afternoon.

By Alex Webb

Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) Friday and Saturday

The first two sessions at ECOSOC seem to have teed up the debate nicely for the weekend. On the Friday evening a broad debate about how to distribute aid encapsulated issues such as who should receive aid in Somalia - the government, the people, or the neighbouring states to which refugees flee. This did, however, create something of a minefield for some of the delegates for whom English was not the first language, with slips such as "Giving AIDS to vulnerable citizens" rife. After the motion to adjourn to the global village was passed by a large majority at the end of Friday's session, the Namibian delegate objected vociferously, albeit with tongue stuck firmly in cheek, that "people are dying, man!".

This morning's session covered working papers on Somalia, with a core group lead by Australia and India urging training of police forces and greater communication between relevant parties. Despite the wide support for the paper, reservations were expressed by nations such as Venezuela and Niger over encroachment on Somalia's sovereignty, advocating greater inclusion of the Somalian government in the measures proposed.

European Union Council

There were multiple topics discussed in the forum which raised the challenges and renovations which ratification of the Lisbon Treaty has produced.

Delegates from Luxembourg and France both defended the treaty vehemently however there were evident gaps in delegate knowledge of the new protocol and institutional developments which occurred.

Delegates from Belgium were particularly spirited in their defence of the new Treaty, which they argued extended democracy through enlarging the European Parliament’s powers. On occasion complex arguments drawn from Political Science were used to clarify the new Majoritarian voting system installed.

In the light of recent security threats, delegates were concerned about cross-border policing and the perceived weakness in the European wide attempts to co-ordinated intelligence. All delegates urged greater transparency between governments.

By Calum Young

AFRICAN UNION

The forum and discussion were led by the delegate from South Africa. The Washington Consensus and the rise of neo-liberalism in the West were touted as bringing partial benefits to the region. However, the absence of a trade-agreement between delegates from Mauritania and Mali had the affect of paralysing sensible discourse for the duration of the opening exchanges. Both delegates left frustrated.

Of paramount importance to all concerned were the recent Pirating attacks off the coast of Somalia. The delegate from Mozambique spoke lucidly about the challenges faced as a result of the failing government in Mogadishu, she argued for increased aid to the region and greater solidarity amongst AU countries in dealing with this difficult issue.

The challenges faced within the Democratic Republic of Congo were also noted. The Union herd harrowing accounts of mass rape and evidence of genocide, majority condemnation of the armed militia – the Janjaweed – was evident.

By Calum Young

UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME (UNODC)

Concerns were initially raised over Afghanistan’s role in the international drug trade. As the world’s largest supplier of raw Opium, delegates from both Switzerland and Italy concurred that more needed to be done to stem the flow of illicit material from the area currently under British and American Intervention. Delegates from Britain and America rejected this analysis, rather they implored a realpolitik reading of the situation on the ground and emphasised the need for a long-term approach.

On the trans-migration of organised crime incisive points were raised by both American and Russian delegates. Both made the case compellingly that whilst tougher security at airports and ports were cumbersome, the United Nations collective security rested on stopping international cartels and traffickers. Striking a more Libertarian note, the delegate from Venezuela rejected claims from the U.S government that it had harboured known organised criminals. In response the representatives of the Caracas based government set-out numerous contentious points which asked for a re-evaluation of International Justice.

By Calum Young

ORGANIZATION OF ISLAMIC CONFERENCE'S ISLAMIC SUMMIT (OIC)

The Islamic conference started on a note of consensus. All delegates agreed that practices of Islamophobia and religious intolerance were morally abhorrent. However, greater debate emerged on the subjects of its threat, dimension and counter-measures. There was a clear dichotomy between, nations with a liberal stance, notably Libya who downplayed the threat, and those from more conservative regimes who saw the challenge as omnipresent. The Saudia Arabian delegate spoke convincingly on Western misinterpretation of Islamic doctrine and the semantic dissonance between the ‘West and the rest’.

The discussion of Sharia law’s place in the world was similarly intense. The delegate from Egypt questioned the manipulated variants of this civil code. Whilst questions of interpretation and definition were also raised, concerns over Wahhabism and other extremist variants were taken into account by all participants.

By Calum Young

Optimism for future tempered by present shortcomings

Delegates' have been delegated. Keynote speakers have spoken. LIMUN is open. An over-arching theme of the keynote speeches seemed to be a concern about the current limitations of international bodies – the UN and International Criminal Court in particular – whilst maintaining a fierce optimism that such issues can be resolved in the future, and placing the ball firmly in the delegates court as the “leaders of tomorrow”, a nomenclature which was growing a little tired by the end of the ceremony.

Whilst Michael Rossi, the founding President of LIMUN, provided some historical context to the conference, and Dr Robert Fry from the Canadian High Commission, highlighted the major role Canada is likely to play in world affairs this year, it was Dr David Hallam from the Department for International Development and Dr Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court, who provided the more enlightening commentary on issues facing the United Nations community.

Dr Hallam was eager to highlight the United Kingdom's support for the UN in principal, for the potential it has given its “unique legitimacy and... convening powers”, but nonetheless asserted that “the UN is not all it could be...[that] it can and must be better”. He questioned how fit for purpose it was, given that it was founded in an era characterized by decolonization and the Cold War. The major shortcoming of the UN was that it was “unwieldy, poorly co-ordinated and inefficient”, he stated, and reaffirmed the UK's challenge to the UN to make 25% efficiency savings over the next five years, in line with targets set for UK governmental departments.

Dr Moreno-Ocampo demonstrated similar limitations in his own organization. He explained lucidly and entertainingly the workings of the International Criminal Court, but underlined the failure of a number of pertinent nations either to sign or to ratify the 1998 Rome Statute. The three leading areas in the ratification have been Europe, South America and non-Arab Africa, but his jurisdiction nonetheless does not cover controversial regions such as Burma, Nepal, Zimbabwe, Iraq, Sri Lanka and the Sudan, nor have major players such as Russia, China and the USA ratified it. The ICC's stated aim “to uphold the rule of law and protect [member states'] citizens” is therefore extremely restricted. This became particularly clear during the questions, when references to particularly contentious players and heads of state became irrelevant, as they constantly fell outside of his authority. He reaffirmed the fact that he did not play a political role, but was restricted to his capacity as a prosecutor. Another limitation that arose was the nature of the crimes he can prosecute – he cited the example of Hugo Chavez, who has not committed any crime serious enough for ICC prosecution: genocide, for instance.

The future influence international justice is likely to have over international affairs was one of Moreno-Ocampo's major contentions, with one court ruling having an effect both on future cases, but also on how militaries and governments conduct themselves. However, responsibility for ensuring that international bodies are effective and have wide-reaching authority was again passed to the delegates to debate in the coming days.

Alizeh Kohari, the Secretary-General of LIMUN, summarized the sentiments expressed in the keynote speeches concisely as she declared the conference open, expressing her hope that, “No matter how tense the past may have been, the future can still be perfect.”

By Alex Webb

In search of a fairytale

Nine years back, a sultry Tuesday morning in September forcibly became the hallmark of a new generation, similar to the way the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo became a hallmark for a previous generation a hundred odd years before. Fast-forward. Almost half a century after the debut of the charismatic John F Kennedy, the cameras click and the lights flash as the first black man in the history of the United States is sworn into office, and the great-grandson of slaves gracefully moves to occupy a house once built by them. And as President Obama steps onto the podium, and into the role of a lifetime, the prevalent balance of power in the international system and the fate of US hegemony rests in the hands of one man who comes bearing a four-letter words called ‘Hope’, a philanthropic beacon for millions of wanderers in search of a new world order. Fighting against him: the rise of China, the new regional super-hubs forming in India and Brazil, and fermenting alliances within the EU, all signal the end of an era, and the beginning of a dark, intangible future.

But ruts are easy to fall into. Awarding Obama the Nobel Peace Prize was, for humanity, presumably the result of a deep crisis of faith; burial grounds in Baghdad, Kabul and Gaza are a haunting indication that the human civilization is well in the midst of civil turmoil. History, fortunately or unfortunately, is not a fairytale. This may well be because it shame-facedly chooses to repeat itself. The battle between Washington and the Taliban, as predicted to the hilt in Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations, bears the same traces of the antagonism between Washington and Moscow during the Cold War years, Britain and the Axis Powers during the First World War, and Napoleon and his European counterparts after the French Revolution. War is very much an intrinsic part of human life. To detract the concept of anarchy from the structure of the international society would be to mitigate the realist foundations laid down by Thucydides, Machiavelli and Hobbes. The Cold War years epitomized a clash of ideology and sentiment which brought the world to the brink of nuclear war in 1962 with the Cuban Missile Crisis. Even after Gorbachev and the collapse of the Soviet Union, turbulent hotspots still dot the globe with alarming propensity. The 2008 Mumbai attacks brought sharp focus onto the subcontinent and the nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan. Elsewhere North Korea and Iran dangerously dance with the potent threat of nuclear proliferation, Washington’s worst nightmare. Elsewhere, crises manifest themselves in different guises. The new millennium brings with it the issues of climate change, human rights violations, the drug trade, and international terrorism, all perpetuated by an increasingly globalized international community. The outbreak of H1N1 is a small example of the increased need for heightened global governance and the requirement for stringent attention to the interplay between states for the wellbeing of their citizens – 2 billion people stretching from Buenos Aries to Melbourne were estimated to be potentially affected by the global pandemic.

More importantly, with the advent of the new millennium has arrived of age a new voting generation, the grandchildren of the veterans who witnessed the Blitzkrieg, Guernica and the Holocaust, and the great-grandchildren of those who saw the dissolution of the mighty empires, the emergence of a new arms race, and the forging of a body they called the League of Nations. Since then there have been strides in all fields, and yet failings in others. Apartheid has been dismantled in South Africa, but Tibetans still clamor for justice in their battle for sovereignty against China. The 640km long separation wall that zigzags through Jerusalem and Palestinian territory, running through stony fields and olive terraces is easily a modern day descendent of the Berlin Wall that truculently scarred the face of Germany during the height of the Cold War years, and triggered such international crises such as the Berlin Blockade, the subsequent airlift, and the cementing of the Iron Curtain. Some would argue that Republican dogma has made Guantanamo but a lucid ghost of Nazi concentration camps. What was once a swastika on a public banner in a Polish village is now a cartoon caricature in a Danish newspaper: sensibilities are as vulnerable as ever to the capricious follies of history’s pen. Interestingly, the media has developed into perhaps the most powerful, lethal weapon on the planet. Leaked intelligence reports, scandals made public, all make Nixon’s Watergate seem like child’s play. Fahrenheit 9/11, An Inconvenient Truth etc were designed to sway the masses. These were countered by slogans of “Drill baby drill” which cost the Republican Party a third term in the White House. Never before have Sky, CNN, Fox, BBC and Al-Jazeera been frontlines of communicative warfare like this; as a result the generation of today is more privy to international conflict than would have been imaginable a hundred years ago. Call it the YouTube generation. Call it the Copenhagen generation. Call it what you will. A generation in search of solutions and commitments, and leadership truly worthy of our support. For students of history, Churchill, Kennedy and Mandela are the stuff that legends are made of. Skimming though the ink-sodden pages of world affairs, however, one finds little solace in the rest of the characters. The millions of dollars pumped from the US treasury into hunting down Baitullah Mehsud is a resounding indication that the rules of the game are as political as ever. Asymmetrical warfare now dictates the strategies employed by anarchist counsels the world over. In an ideal world one would see the coming together of Hugo Chavez and Hilary Clinton to discuss topics of mutual interest, with co-relation breeding cooperation. Unfortunately forging a fairytale out of the rubble will require looking beyond the follies of mistrust and subterfuge. Looking at Washington, we ask ourselves, is this the making of a hero, of change, of revolution? History so far has been unkind. But then again it is the juxtaposition of conflict and compromise that truly defines history today as the grey area between right and wrong, the hangman’s chamber and the hero’s promenade.

By Fahd Humayun