The General Assembly: Governments, we dont want!

The General Assembly sat down to discuss the fragile issue of anti-government movements and surprisingly when they were needed the most in a committee that is highly important to them, the delegates from Iraq and Afghanistan were a no-show. The agenda started out by China starting out by declaring its support for foreign intervention and supporting the Middle-East uprisings which raised quite a few eyebrows as China is a country where anti-authoritative movements were and are suppressed. Serbia and Austria asserted that there should be a transmission to newer forms of government as opposed to foreign intervention. Corruption, Inequality, security crisis, malnutrition, economic deprivation and legal protection were the causes outlined for anti-government movements. Russia rightly proclaimed that due to the multi-faceted culture of the Middle East, opposition within the various sects of people would hamper the formation of a government.

With U.S and NATO support free citizens are able to withstand the wrath and the tyranny of dictators and power mongers.

Futuristic Crisis Committee: Oil is everything!

The futuristic crisis committee (FCC), was in fact all to do with OPEC and the abolishment of the USD in favor of another currency. The OPECs decision to buy/sell oil in every other currency except for the USD was welcomed by countries like Russia and Nigeria and was condemned by Kuwait, Canada and U.S. The US dollar has bought about an era of longstanding peace and even today commands a certain respect and therefore U.S rightly argued that OPEC not trading in the USD is catastrophic to other commodities. The countries against the USD, Russia and Nigeria proposed to use a basket of currencies and Iraq stated that there was no guarantee that the new currencies would prove successful. The motion of the volatility of oil prices & countries respective stances was immediately rejected by Canada because of the huge monetary loss it would pose, as the NAFTA agreement allows Canada to sell to the US on a fixed rate. Australia however, wont be affected much by these reforms because of their internal resources. Saudi Arabia and India amused us all by their absence in the proceedings.

Libya firmly proclaimed that there was no need for foreign intervention and that the arrival of NATO forces only propagated the violence. The U.S though replied by saying that one of the basic ideas of the UN is to maintain peaceful security and to stop the misuse of privileges. Frankly the U.S is right in saying that with its nearly infinite resources it can help some of the countries who really need the help that the U.S brings.

Page |2

Interpol: What is extraordinary rendition???

the term terrorism, and that itself has several definitions.

Non-Alignment Movement: Security Council just a walk in the park?

The starting point of the Non-Alignment movement was not pretty but eventually the committee turned out some useful points. India led the way into demanding a permanent seat on the Security Council but was lashed out by other countries like Libya and Madagascar which said that It is meaningless to give a permanent seat to India which cannot handle its own domestic matters. Wonder how the U.S might respond to that since it had promised India a seat in the Security Council. The U.S delegate rightly said that the day India becomes a more responsible country, is the day it will get a permanent membership of the Security Council. Cuba for the sole reason that India helped them out in the war decided that help in a war qualifies a country for the membership of the most important organ of the United Nations. the second round reforms on Veto power were the hot topic as Vietnam argued, but the other delegates shot this down as then the UN would be taking a step backwards to the League of Nations if everyone would be given Veto power. Libya, U.S.A and Senegal agree that some peculiar countries should have veto power whereas Philippines disagrees and says everyone has equal rights, but if everyone has equal rights then how can anyone ever agree on one particular thing? In

The session of the Interpol commenced with the formal setting of the agenda -the extraordinary rendition of people accused of terrorism. Delegates from various countries like Netherlands and Australia set out to re-define extraordinary rendition stating to revise the existing laws and that the concept of extraordinary rendition is itself a breach of human rights. The delegate from Saudi Arabia was raising questions on the authenticity of the Interpol without having certain proof and therefore was asked to apologize to the chair. USA, in spite of being accused of fighting terrorism with terrorism, stated its foreign policies regarding extraordinary rendition lucidly, emphasizing on the point that human rights are not violated. The chairperson spoke to the committee regarding the fact that Interpol has the power to come up with a definition of extraordinary rendition and this arises the need to come up with a consensus on whether extraordinary rendition is legal or not. The chairman expressed utmost care and content for the council, even going as far as making the drowsy delegates walk around the committee hall once they reassembled after the break. With the regenerated energy the committee moved on to the moderate caucus for coming up with a definition of the term extraordinary rendition. The delegate of Israel pointed out that the existing definition is incomprehensible because the major factor vital to the explanation of the term requires a clear description of

Page |3

Conference on disarmament sparks off monotony

The conference on disarmament was perhaps the most monotonous of all the committees but when it took off things started to get somewhat interesting. U.S.A who incidentally hold 48% of the worlds arms were in support for disarmament. The U.S talked about how it had been the leader in disarmament and how it was rightly so in persuading countries like South Korea to start with the disarmament plans which was seconded by South Korea as well. It looked like people are really on the race to establish permanent peace as China also called for total abandonment of the arms race. Many countries like Iraq even went as far as to share their arms plans on a global scale. The U.S stated that In spite of having a majority decision there should be a consensus based on the fact that these agreements should not be made by creating a vacuum in the exports and the imports of firearms, upon which U.S asked for a clear definition of a secure state . U.S cleared the air by stating that a secure state would be one which does not have internal strife, where the number of extremist elements would be negligible and one where the people would not have any contention against the government. India, while asserting the need to realize the social menace that revolves around the arms trade like poverty and drug abuse, said that a complete cut off of arms trade was not possible because of these impending social issues. Overall the consensus was reached by the assembly on issues pertaining to transparency of stockpile of weapons, control of illicit arms trade, creation of a neutral body for the check of imports and exports of weapons for individual states.

Entertainment: Bringing out the gossip queen in you!

Conference on Disarmament Mr. Long legs, a.k.a the Delegate of Spain requests to sit at the side The Delegate of Russia, dances more and speaks less Mr. Long legs went from formal to barely even dressing up, from coat to a tie in his pocket

Interpol The best dancer by far was the delegate of Mexico. People here sure know how to shake a leg! The delegate was UAE and the delegate of China was conversing on every possible point. Hope its all in the interest of academics!

The Interpol had a constant stream of visitors; the most famous of them was the Chair of NAM coming in to meet the chair. Keep at it fellas!

Page |4