Report on Intra-XMUN 2020
By Anisham Aadya
The fourth edition of the Intra-XMUN took place on 10th of October, 2020. The conference was spread over a period of seven hours and forty minutes, comprising five committees- United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), All India Political Parties Meet (AIPPM), United Nations Security Council (UNSC), United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and National Security Council (NSC). While some committees were an intricate replica of the United Nations structure, others were innovatively modelled and carefully moulded to fit the formal facet and traditional procedure of the proceedings of the United Nations, adhering to regional
casualties. It is noteworthy that for the first time, this intra-school event was taken up on a virtual realm, following the cancellation of the annual inter-school event. The participants explicated a notable degree of candour and seemed to be well-adjusted to their work. It is noteworthy that even in a home environment, delegates were formally and appropriately dressed and their arguments on various occasions reflected their integrity of research with seemingly no interference with the new platform. Conference call, however, entailed fairly constant interruptions for delegates to turn their cameras on in the beginning.
The United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) was a technical committee. Its aim was to discuss and debate global priorities for Economic Development and recovery in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.The committee chairperson commenced with an informal session meant for ‘breaking the ice’ between delegates for amicable resolution. Once all the delegates had joined the conference, formal attendance was followed by an open floor to raise either a motion or a documentation, to be voted by seven delegates. The inter-delegatory ‘chit-passing’ rules demanded that the chit either be passed via the Executive Board, through the vice-chairperson, or to transmit the information via a Logistics Member, a service which was temporarily suspended as of 08:58 am. The chits were, by default, in the form of private messages in the chatbox. The chairperson announced that the committee will be establishing a General Speaker’s List. The delegate of Switzerland had the floor and opened with establishing that the limited time of the committee should not be put to bay on blame games. Economic
development and the contribution of the ‘income aspect’ to it was expounded upon. Economic growth is subject to the Gross Domestic Product, Per Capita Income, Gross National Product, average income, living standard, employment, consumption etc. of, and the amount of goods produced and services rendered in a country. In the end, 23 seconds of a 90 second time-slot was yielded to two points of information, at which point the delegate of USA pointed out that while economic development was crucial to any country, a parallel growth in Gross National Product and the employment rate was improbable, so are countries really able to increase their GDP in sync with their employment rate? Since the advent of the coronavirus disease of 2019, economic activities have plummeted, businesses shut down- resulting in a net deflated rate as with a decrease in disposable income, demand for goods and services has gone down accompanied by a similar debacle in supply levels. Changes in fiscal policies on a global scale were acknowledged, and nations duly thanked for the effort made by them. It was suggested to seek to prioritise health and economic development. The representative of the Russian
Federation then went on to question what taxation policies entail for the public, and industries and private corporations with an increase in the level of production and proposed a contraction in the revenue payed by middle-class households before the time yielded to him elapsed. The committee went on and about their agenda smoothly and tirelessly and devoted the time it had to one of the most integral national and global concern, which the general public often fails to concede to in a time and age where one has spicy entertainment at their disposal.
The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) was set upon combatting racism, racial discrimination and other related intolerance with specific emphasis on the ‘Black Lives Matter movement’, which was further reinstated by the delegate of India, which clearly passed. The delegate of Poland raised a motion to establish a General Speaker’s list, which was advanced upon. The speakers list established to represent the following chronology- Cameroon, Brazil, Mexico, India, Japan, Afghanistan, Germany, United States of America, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Poland. The delegate of Cameroon expounded upon racialism with emphasis on ableism in Africa and sub-african countries, in which a genetic condition causes discrimination in forms like no right to education, unemployment and homelessness. In fact, racial ableism is the widespread root cause of sky-high unemployment rates in Cameroon. The discrimination takes ugly turns in the form of separate school for children of different races, and boy tag. The representative of Brazil stressed upon affinitive action policies and pointed out the fact that unlike american countries, Brazil discloses their affinitive action policies. Mexico touched upon the advent of racialism and ‘white theory’ by white colonisers who appointed themselves to be custodians of foreign land and believed an increase in the melanin levels of the body was directly proportional to lack of civility- a baseless theory used to justify one of the most dehumanising and horrendous practices in the history of mankind- slavery and slave trade. The legacy of racial discrimination in light of colonialism and slavery point out one crucial lesson to be learnt- to treat people like human beings irrespective of colour and generally any ground for discrimination. The delegate of India suggested no recognition of diversity leads to racialism and quoted examples from the Black Lives Matter movement in the States and atrocities on albinos. The 21st of March is celebrated as ‘Racial Day’ and the 13th day of June as ‘Ableism
Day’.
All India Political Parties Meet (AIPPM) reviewed and deliberated the implications of the ‘Farm Bill 2020’. At 10:07 am, chief minister Nitish Kumar mentioned in his speech, addressing Mr. Narendra Singh Tomar, that procurement of agricultural crops from farmers will continue, followed by addressing the provision for payment for farmers and three-level dispute settlement in the Farm Bill 2020. Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal began by addressing the intra and inter-state trade of farm produce in light of licenced middlemen, prices set by auctions, sale to big retailers and expressed concern about direct trade which exposes small farmers to corporates which have more bargaining power. Minister of Law and Justice of India, Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad argued that MSP was not affected by the Farm Bill 2020. Farming contracts are formed so farmers can approach big companies and if not, the APMC. Looking for profit, farmers would ask for more prices than MSP. Mr. Rahul Gandhi took the dialogue forward by providing assurance to the farmers and boldly pointing out that farmers are not fools. Mr.Gandhi acknowleged a problem in the Farm Bill 2020. In reference to the first bill the APMC is reviewing, the role of corporations in the sale of the produce of farmers was addressed because farmers can not depend on corporate goodwill, and there is no mention of MSP.
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) was discussing the current situation in Jammu and Kashmir with special emphasis on the Indo-China Border dispute in Ladakh. The committee was having an unmoderated caucus as of 10:21 am. At 10:50 am a moderated caucus was proposed to address the causes of the Indo-China border conflict. The delegate of the Russian Federation commenced the session by suggesting the avoidance of a possible ‘miscommunication’ in India. Foreign intervention was also referred to. It was implied that the actions of certain powers who lie oceans beyond this conflict continue to fuel the rift between the two countries. A P5 member has veto power. Hybridisation of all lines instead of drawing up new lines was suggested. It was propounded to come to a consensus where there is equal sharing and steps are taken to reduce the escalation of military activity- such as the ones the nations have witnessed in the past few months. The speech was concluded by resorting to the presumption of economic normalcy.
The National Security Council spent their time debating upon the Uri Surgical Strike (freeze date: 19th of September 2016). According to the Secretary of Finance, the financial situation of Pakistan is much worse than that of India. Replying to the NSC Foreign Secretary, the Secretary of Finance proclaimed that India is financially equipped to an optimal level to go to war with Pakistan. The Defence Secretary revealed that India can not use Pakistani arms and launching fighter jets which can not pin-point small buildings or helicopters which can be viewed as a ‘flying target’ pose moderate risk. The Chief of Defense Staff rooted for attacking helicopters, covering for troops and not advocating the use of the helicopter for the first attack. After all, weapons do not pose short and risks and are not as conspicuous as aerial bombing.
Comments