Browsed by
Author: J B

General Assembly

General Assembly

Riya Jain

Al Jazeera


Delegates submitted their directives to the chair and prepared for the ensuing
debate. All the committees were in the general assembly, with the chairs of each
committee representing it. The debate commenced as the hall slowly quieted
down after finishing their research and discussion regarding the debate and the
directives. The chair asked the house to kindly come to order.

The directives submitted by the cultural committee were going to be debated.
Representatives of the culture committee took the floor and presented their
argument. The main point of their directive was to facilitate communication with
extraterrestrials.  There were points of information to this argument, for example
the delegate of Sri Lanka challenged them by asking them how they planned to
communicate with extraterrestrials. The Delegation of Italy was going to present
his argument for or against the directive but was called from the floor for not
wearing a jacket. Thus, the delegate of Indonesia was allowed to take the floor
first. The delegate presented various arguments against the directive. She also
took three points of information. An amendment to this directive was proposed by
the UNC. They faced three points of information. A motion to extend the points of
information was denied. A voting procedure for or against the amendment was
carried out. A majority against the amendment led to failure of amendment. After
the presentation and points of information for the second amendment a voting
procedure was carried out for it. A majority of votes for the amendment led to it
being passed.

Now the council moved into voting for or against the directive as a whole. The
directive passed because of an overwhelming majority..
Now the council moved to debate of the second directive submitted by the
delegation of Indonesia with regard to unidentified flying objects, and search of
extraterrestrial life. The delegations of UNCSTE, the United Kingdom and Libya
presented their points of information for this directive. There was a motion for
extending the points of information which was approved for two more points of
information. There was another motion to further extend the points of information
which was denied after an objection.
An amendment to one of the clauses of the directive was presented by the
UNCSTE. There were several points of information to this amendment, of which
three were entertained. For example, the delegate of India inquired whether the
delegation of UNCSTE not believe that the whole world should be prepared.
Voting procedures were carried out for or against the amendment, which resulted
in the amendment being passed.

Delegates then moved to speak for or against the directive as a whole. The
Emergency Council of Cultural Perspective spoke against the directive proposed
by the delegation of Indonesia, and faced three points of information by

Switzerland, El Salvador, and Senegal. There was a motion to carry out voting
procedures for or against the directive as a whole, and the directive was not

There was now a debate on the third and the last directive submitted by the
UNCSTD, who presented their directive and then took points of information by
Italy, which was null because the delegation of Italy had failed to read the
directive fully. Due to time constraints, only one amendment and only one
speaker for or against the directive was entertained. Voting procedures were
carried now to vote for or against the third directive, which passed by a majority.
This was followed by a round of applause. Then the delegates voted for the
resolution as a whole, which consisted of the the first and third directives. This
resolution passed and this proved that the first and the third directives concurred
to form a whole resolution.
This signalled the end of the session, at which point the confessions submitted
anonymously by the delegates were read out.



Esme McGuire



The Chair declared two minutes of non-formal debate by request, and arguing broke out. A petition was passed around through the delegates to remove the delegate of Sri Lanka from the debate. 87% of the delegates signed the form, but the Chair did not remove the delegate.

Soon, the two minutes was up and everyone returned to their seats.

When it came to voting, a tie was the result, and the Chair split the House. The amendment failed in the end. Although clapping was said to not be in order, this was promptly ignored and many delegates clapped and clicked their fingers.

The delegate of Brazil fell asleep while the delegate of India and Israel were debating. This was brought to light by the delegate of Venezuela.

During an interview with Gugulethu Kembo, the delegate of Russia, with the delegates of India, South Africa and Canada, they announced that they had been the ones who had started what they called a rebellion, although it had failed. They also revealed, with much laughter, that their Plan B, if all else failed and they got into some trouble, they would blame the delegate of Canada.

A video was also recorded by one of the delegates.

UFO Crisis Called to Attention at ZIMUN Conference

UFO Crisis Called to Attention at ZIMUN Conference


Al Jazeera

Emergency Assembly


The UN assembly has now entered an emergency crisis. It was announced 8:50 am today on Sunday the 11th of March 2018 that an unidentified aircraft has landed in one of the sandwich islands near Antartica. Currently little is known about the air craft, and an emergency assembly has been called including 50 delegations and organisations who are currently addressing the situation.

Chair Salmaan Ferrand has announced the following to the assembly; 

“An unidentified flying object has landed in the neutral zone “Marie Byrd Land”. No country has claimed the aircraft to be theirs, however the design of the spacecraft leads experts and governments to the assumption that it is an extraterrestrial aircraft… All attempts to approach the area have been unsuccessful, with reports of scientific crews in the nearby ice-core sampling stations feeling an unexplained sense of dread; and they have made a unilateral decision to turn back and cordon off a 10 kilometre area around the object.” 

6 organisations have been called in alert of the crisis including the UNCSTD, the UNOOSA, NATO, The African Union, The South American Defence Council, and The Emergency Council of Cultural Perspective. 

Delegates have been instructed to create directives to address the situation. With various opinions on how to target the situation. Unfortunately further information can not be disclosed at this time. Updates will continue on the conference in coordination with the authorities of chairs Reena Said, Salmaan Ferrand, Panashe Mongezi, and David Ulicny.

Ecosoc day 2

Ecosoc day 2

Michell Svesve

India Times


The mood in the room today was very tense and serious as the delegates were busy trying to get their resolutions to the approval panel for approval. People were very busy and on their toes moving from one part of the room to the other trying to get their work in together. The chairs were very serious today. They wanted the delegates ready and done for debating for they were already behind time.

An hour after the opening ceremony all resolutions for both topics had been approved and it was time to get debating. The delegates started with the first topic that is the ‘exploitation of migrant workers in the Middle East’. The debate went well very much. There were conflicts and emotional moments here and there. The delegates of Israel, Canada, Russia and the United States were the most active during the debate. A lot of good points were brought up during the debates, Whether or not to deploy migrant workers back to their host countries and whether the illegal migrants do not deserve the same treatment as the legal migrant workers in the host countries.

After two and a half hours of gruesome debating most of the delegates voted for the resolution that had been proposed.The committee had a guest speaker,Mr Phillips, come to speak to them about the second topic that is ‘instability in oil producing nations’. He brought very good points about how there is a clash between multinational oil companies and the government or  the local companies causing conflicts within those countries. He also that the supply of oil is at its peak and sooner or later oil supply is going to start declining therefore he highly discouraged decentralisation of the economy especially if it’s a country highly dependent on oil because there won’t be enough of it very soon.

Session 2


After Mr Phillips’ address the delegates commenced their second debate. The resolution was passed by the Brazil as the main submitter and  New zealand , Germany, Ghana and Russia as cosubmitters of the resolution.After Brazil’s speech the floor was opened at many questions to the delegates fired away.

The resolution focused more on encouraging countries dependent on oil to start focusing on the use of solar , hydro -electric and wind power as alternatives to using oil. The question that most of the delegates asked was whether or not the delegate of Brazil realised that these were multi billion dollar projects that required a lot of money and starting them would be very costly for many countries like Ghana.

The two admins in the room were always on their feet running one end of the corner to the next as they passing notes during the debate. Things were firing up in the room. The delegate of New Zealand received its first note and it was coming from Finland. Most of the notes were passed between the co -submitters as they tried to get their resolution approved.

The debate went on for a solid hour . The chairs  introduced a new game before the debate where the delegates could make confessions and submit them anonymously or review themselves. The delegate of Canada tried to have the resolution much more appealing but realised that most of the delegates had doubts on it too.

Most of the delegates voted against the resolution as it was not solid and the solutions proposed were not convincing enough that they would work.


Human Rights Council Update

Human Rights Council Update


Al Jazeera


During the afternoon conference today, the delegates of Spain put forth their resolution towards child marriage in Africa. With minor modifications the resolution has been passed with an overwhelming majority. 

The only objector of the resolution was the delegate of Malaysia. The delegate has stated previously, that the government does not believe child marriage is an issue at all, and thus the delegates decision to object has been well noted by the conference. 

During this concession the delegate had multiple objections from the main supporters of the resolution, France, Spain, Germany and Sweden.

One example was the amendment suggested for Clause four by the delegate of Malaysia. Clause 4 although well received by the majority of the council was suggested to be scrapped from the resolution as a whole by Malaysia. The amendment was not well received by multiple members of the council.Outrage was spread throughout the room, but the delegates debated strongly in all points both for and against the amendment, and Al Jazeera comments the council for this assembly for their performance.

Congratulations to Spain and co-submitters, on the passing of resolution 04. More to come in for the final debate to commence this afternoon.

Environmental commission Day 3

Environmental commission Day 3

Shaah Kamuruko
New York Times

The second discussion about using biodegradable materials beginas and the delegate of Sweden reads out the resolution, she urges the rest of the delegates in the room to make positive and constructive criticism to the resolution because it lacks flaws. The delegate of France comments Sweden for the well thought out resolution. Indonesia does the same but has criticism regarding clause 6 sub clause c asking if it makes sense to promote the use of the LEDC’s, Sweden then quickly denies this fact. The delegate of WWF calls the resolution “confusing” but still thinks that the resolution is “okay”.
The delegate of sweden stops the debate to ask the room to “generally speak louder because the people in the back cannot hear and will not be able to contribute to the discussion”. Sweden writes a note to kuwait and kuwait is clearly seen scrunching it up and throwing it to the grounds. As the delegate of WWF speaks many other delegates begin to laugh for no apparent reason considering what he was saying made sense.

Security Council Update

Security Council Update

Ashley Makuwa

Reuters Newspaper


The Security Council is characterized by strong and delegates determined to pass resolutions, prove their points and overall come up with new solutions. The delegates began by addressing Nuclear Conflict, and how to limit the nuclear threats. One of the issues discussed was that of transparency, and how it may help assist with reduction of nuclear weapons in the countries who hold the most nuclear power. The delegate of The Netherlands brought to light the fact that transparency could lead to insecurity through vulnerability, and through this vulnerability nuclear weaponry could be built up and increased to increase protection from more powerful nations.

A clause proposed by Poland gave way to a lot of debate and back and forth between multiple delegates including Cote D’ivoire, Poland, Russia and Equatorial Guinea. The delegate of Poland’s clause included the implementation of  sanctions on Russia due to their recent violent actions in Crimea. The delegate of China and Equatorial Guinea emphasized the point that by reducing Russia and the United States missiles, would leave Britain and France to oversee it which China pointed out in a later interview that it is “infringement on sovereignty”. After the “Powerful 5” veto, the delegate China also let on that they were considering threatening war due to this outrage.

Prior to the conference, an interview was done with the delegates of Equatorial Guinea, and Peru in which they said that it was a fruitful debate, and that the resolution “tackles the situation very efficiently” as said by the delegate of Equatorial Guinea. When asked what the biggest challenges were during the session, both delegates responded with the P5 vetoes. Although in some cases the distribution of power may be unfair, they graciously accepted the result and moved on from the situation to work on passing other amendments and clauses.


Question and Answer with the Greatest Chair: Salmaan Ferrand

Question and Answer with the Greatest Chair: Salmaan Ferrand

Shalom Masango

Wall Street Journal


Q: How  does the debate in the Security Council goes?

A: “The Security Council debates each operative clauses so that they clause in on each point then be compiled as one resolution and debated as a whole.”


Q: How many resolutions were made and were approved?

A: “We are currently debating on the first of the two clauses. So far they have done 8 operative clauses and are yet to debate on 4 more. One of them, drafted by Equatorial Guinea was scrapped as it was unanimously scraped. There was one operative clause that was vetoed by France, which made the Permanent 5 members stay in the room and debate whilst the 10 non-permanent went outside.”


Q: Which country presented their operative clauses first?

A: “Equatorial Guinea was the first country to present and it has contributed the most operative clauses in reducing the threat of nuclear weapons.”


Q:What’s your opinion of the first operated clauses that were presented?

A: “They are a bit formulated and are making pressing issues that do need to be defended in the nuclear reduction. Some delegates looked at the Kashmir conflict which started in 1947 between india and Pakistan, which could spire into chaos in the present day.”


Q: Are there “enemies” in the SC who don’t see eye to eye?

A: “There haven’t been major blocks formed in the past two days. There is no permanent enemy to enemy situation. You get individual countries who have individual conflicts based on specific operative clauses.”


Q:What was the mood of the room?

A: “It’s a small room therefore l am trying to keep it as formal as possible so that people do not go out of hand.”


Q:What were the most frequently used terms or phrases used in the room,


A:“Let’s scrap this item” (in context to the operative clause being debated)

    “Does this operative clause holds water?”

Q: Did you have to pick on a particular country because they were being an amoeba and not contributing in the debate?

A: Yes, but I warned them prior to picking them. I passed a note to the delegate of Ethiopia and said:


Chair: ‘You look tired, would you like some coffee?

Delegate of Ethiopia: Aw you are so nice

Chair: If l pick on you, will l still have the same effect?’


The delegate of Kazakhstan was lost at the beginning of the debate, however picked up as she started to contribute during the debate.”


Day 3: Security Council 

Day 3: Security Council 

Thandeka Mangwiro 
                                                     New York Times 

The debate has begun with the delegates being sent out besides the delegates of China, Russia, United Kingdom and France. The vetoing the clause Russia has been thinned. The clause was discriminatory because lowering the USA and Russia’s weaponry would leave France and Britain more powerful having them over see it sake, its not a good idea because its was giving more power to nations by taking away the power of others. During the short break I carried out an interview with the delegates of Kuwait and China. The delegate of Kuwait has been doing MUN for about 3 years and really loves debating, when the delegate found out they were in the security council they were influenced by it but then they started to enjoy the debates and found it ‘so interesting especially with the use of vetoing, which is very democratic’. In the Interview with the delegate of China they said “As the delegate of china I believed we used diplomacy as well as negotiations to reach a solution that is beneficial to all parties although some are contradictory and don’t aid the countries ideals”. Off the record sources tell me that delegates should watch out for the delegate of United Kingdom and France.That was a fruitful debate and resolutions and clauses have been approved and disapproved. 

Michelle Svesve

The India Times


Zimun was officially opened on Friday the 9th of March 2018. The delegates started the day by  attending the opening ceremony where they had Kirsty Coventry as their guest speaker and were privileged enough to have the ambassadors of Germany, Sweden and  United kingdom present.The delegates are coming from different parts of Zimbabwe some having travelled from as far as Marondera to participate in the debates. The International School of Luanda from Angola also graced the conference by joining in the conference. Most of the delegates are representing their schools. Schools present are Harare International School, Chisipite, Hellenic, Peterhouse Boys and Peterhouse  Girls, Prince Edward, St Georges, St Johns and Arundel.

After the ceremony the delegates headed to their rooms where they began making final touches to their resolutions for submission to the approval panel. Most of the resolutions put forward in the ECOSOC committee were approved hence debates began as soon as all the delegates were settled. The delegates started debating on the topic ’Exploitation of migrant workers in the middle east’. The main submitter of this resolution was New Zealand and she gave a very good speech on how to solve the issue of migrant workers being exploited in the middle east.the debate went very well and majority of the delegates voted for the resolution therefore it was passed.

Later the ECOSOC committee had a guest speaker come and  address them in accordance with the issue of ‘Instability in oil producing countries’.Mr Philips spoke gave good pointers on how to solve the issue and he hinted on possible future outcomes in terms of the dependence on oil. He brought to light the fact that the supply of oil is at its peak and sooner or later oil supply is going to start declining therefore he highly encouraged decentralisation of the economy of its more focused on oil.

After Mr Phillips’ address the delegates commenced their second debate. The resolution was passed by the Brazil as the main submitter and  New zealand , Germany, Ghana and Russia as cosubmitters of the resolution.After Brazil’s speech the floor was opened at many questions to the delegates fired away.

The resolution focused more on encouraging countries dependent on oil to start focusing on the use of solar , hydro -electric and wind power as alternatives to using oil. The question that most of the delegates asked was whether or not the delegate of Brazil realised that these were multi billion dollar projects that required a lot of money and starting them would be very costly for many countries like Ghana.

The debate went on for a solid hour.The delegate of Canada tried to have the resolution much more appealing but realised that most of the delegates had doubts on it too.Most of the delegates voted against the resolution as it was not solid and the solutions proposed were not convincing enough.


The wrap up of the day was the confession game that the delegates played throughout the rest of the day. The confessions are yet to be read. That’s something to look forward to.