Important Announcement
PubHTML5 Scheduled Server Maintenance on (GMT) Sunday, June 26th, 2:00 am - 8:00 am.
PubHTML5 site will be inoperative during the times indicated!

Home Explore IO MUN Newsletter

IO MUN Newsletter

Published by optimasprimeraghav, 2020-06-16 04:20:37

Description: IO MUN Newsletter
The official newsletter of the Indian Online MUN June 2020 Edition.


Read the Text Version


IO MUN | JUNE. 2020 From the office of International Press It was in-deed a pleasure to be a part of the very first edition of the Indian Online Model United Nations conference. This virtual simulation hosted three committees whose learning was consummate and commendable. Playing an important role in this learning endeavour was quite a privilege. The Executive Board of International Press extends our gratitude and also congratulate the team of Secretariat, Organizing Committee, Members of International Press for their unconditional support at all times. This edition of newsletter is titled, ‘Statecraft’, and it encompasses a variety of articles which are an amalgamation of information representing true facts, un-biased, creative and research aspects. ‘Experience is just a number, it definitely adds up-to something, but, wonders can be achieved even by first-timers’, as the team of International Press had many first-timers, pulling this newsletter was quite a task but, their indulgence and cooperation; the task became loving and enriching for the whole team. Crown jewel to any Model UN is the Press Conference, and in this Model UN, the International Media Summit was a real crown jewel. We would like to extend our heart-felt thanks to the Advisers and the Secretariat for making the summit possible. Regards, Nikhila Valle, the Editor-in-Chief, Raghav Panjiray, the Chief of International Press Disclaimer: All the images do not indent any copyright infringements or theft of intellectual property.They are used under the pretext of a Model UN simulation.

CONSITITUTENT ASSEMBLY | JUNE. 2020 Simon Minister of Home Affairs Says… Abdul Rahmaan Ansar, representing The Hindu News gets in conversation with the Minister of Home Affairs. Q1: How do you refer to matters such as communalism A: I disagree with his opinion that might be his personal and formation of Hindu Rashtra, in such a time when the view but he should insight it as a Prime Minister, this is constitution is being drafted? what lead to many conflicts and misunderstandings within A: I as a responsible Home Minister never entertain such the Constituent Assembly. issues as long as the constitution is not completely drafted Q4: What about the Hyderabad issue, during the formation and enacted. But by then what ever issues arise in concern of Indian Union. Do you believe resorting to police action of equality, justice and empowerment I do refer to it with (Operation Polo) was the only solution to merge at most priority and get the solution be derived at the Hyderabad State into Indian Union? earliest. As far as we speak about the establishment of A: The State of Hyderabad was one of those states who Ram Rajya it was totally wrong when the Prime Minister refused to merge into the Indian Union even after many (PM) of India Panduit Jawaharlal Nehru Propagate for a diplomatic talks with the Nizam of Hyderabad King Hindu Rashtra in spit of knowing that India had a culture Usman Ali khan. But realising the fact that asked Pakistan of unity in it and a diversity which is set as an example to for help in case India force them to merge into the the world. Therefore, India should be a democratic nation Independent India, we decided to forcibly have Hyderabad and continue with Parliamentary form of government. into the nation. And keeping in mind that Hyderabad was   in the heart of our nation geographically it couldn’t be Q2: What is your view on Gandhi Ji’s opinion of making separated at all. Shaikh Abdullah the next Prime Minister of India, to symbolise secularism? Q5: Gandhi Ji was quite strongly opposed to a few leaders A: I totally agree with him in the context of portraying the and members of Constituent Assembly, what do you think secularism, but then we know that many others had done a causes this difference in opinion? lot in their own capacity, and since we are on the way to A: According to my view he was differing in the mind set get the constitution ready for our nation then why not of Nehru to establish Ram Rajya and more over he wanted Gandhi Ji wait till then and accept the results that will to change the prime minister, adding on to it that lead to come through a process established under the his aggression and he decided to frame the constitution by constitutional provisions. Otherwise I don’t disagree in himself. This is what made others to keep a different case Shaikh Abdullah use to be the PM according to the opinion on him. And as far as I am concerned, I am procedure provided by the constitution and willingly disappointed when he asked me to resign, and keeping a elected by the people. Thus, I don’t support him for to very controversial remark on me of not being up to the declare Shaikh Abdullah the next PM of India.  mark and not fulfilling the commitments for which I was given the authority of Home ministry. Q3: How do you justify the comment of Nehru ji to have Dictatorship (Ram Rajya) in the nation rather than Parliamentary form of government?  

CONSITITUTENT ASSEMBLY | JUNE. 2020 Birds of Passage Sai Sri Kanda, representing the Amrita Bazaar Patrika in the Constituent Assembly writes a Creative Piece. “Belongingness is unheard of, to me; fleeting through life, like birds of passage. The Lord who has brought from dust to my feet  ‫ِإﻧﱠﺎ ﻟِﻠّ ِﻪ َو ِإﻧﱠـﺎ ِإﻟَ ْﻴ ِﻪ َرا ِﺟﻌﻮ َن‬ is calling me home, to lay resting, in heavenly peace. He who has granted me forgiveness for my sins “Surely we belong to Allah and to is granting me liberty from this world’s cruel ways. Him shall we return.”   I walk a lonely road, with only Allah to guide me. For only he can provide a home to someone with no identity, no home or family. I cannot call myself a Pakistani for I walk the streets of India’s Kashmir Nor can I call myself a Hindustani, for this country has not a single morsel of rice for me.   Every day, with the strength Allah gives me I grapple for a breath of secular air. I walk every step like a mile, With my Faith and Lord as a burden. For every time my name is uttered, I only hear the fear and not familiarity.   I have been abandoned by my Motherland, Like millions of my brothers and sisters Some who are with the Almighty And some who share my burden here on Earth. To belong is not something I know of; fleeting through life, like birds of passage. ~ Aliya Fatima, 15”

CONSITITUTENT ASSEMBLY | JUNE. 2020 Headlines- The Press Conference Q1. Mr KamaSt, ayioSu rsiaKid:an“Hdain,dfuriosmm itshseecAulmarr, iitta dBoeaszna'tar PaQt5r.ikMar inNethhreu,Cyoonu sctilatuimeendt Athastseymoublwya,ndt iIsncduiassteo sbtehea give a layout of rules…unlike Sharia rLeapwrse”s.entatives' answe“rHs itnoduthReasqhutreas”twioinths “aRsakmedRaijnyat”hwe iPthreosnse sCuoprnefmeerernulceer 1. Do you stand by this statement? as a Dictator. 2. If yes, are you aware that Hinduism follows a doctrine 1. Define both the terms. called “Rules of Manu” that lay down rigid rules 2. Who according to you should be this Dictator? regarding the Varna/Caste system and religious rituals? A5. The Representative claimed that “Hindu Rashtra” is an A1. Yes, the Representative stood by his statement but ideology of Theocratic Hindu Nation and “Ram Rajya” in a refused to admit that Hinduism follows the Rules of Manu. Dictatorship led by a Supreme Hindu Leader. He saw He claimed that Hinduism is Atheism. He stated that the himself as a competent, fit and able to become this Caste system is not rigid or hierarchal. Supreme Leader. Q2. Mr Krishnamacharya, you mentioned that you support Q6. The proposed constitution establishes that Clause 9 - autonomy for every state. Right to Constitutional Remedies is a   Civil right. 1. In that case, maintaining unity among states under a However, Clauses such as Clause 1 and 2 apply to all Parliamentary Government, as you suggested, becomes 1. Does this mean that if I am a non-citizen resident of difficult. What must be done then? India, I cannot seek constitutional remedies if my 2. Does this stance include Jammu and Kashmir? rights are violated? A2. The Representative did not provide a satisfactory A6. The committee stated that any violation of a answer but agreed that this stance does include Jammu fundamental right is an offence, but when questioned about And Kashmir. the non-citizen resident being denied the fundamental right Q3. Mr Gandhi, you suggested complete Muslim rule in to constitutional remedies, there was no clarification. India like the Mughal times. Q7. The Constitution states under Right to Life and Fair 1. Does this indicate that you think Hindus are treatment- “Every person shall have the right to health incompetent rulers for India? care treatment and no person shall be denied healthcare 2. If yes, what do you suggest as an alternative? treatment at state-sponsored hospitals.” and under Right A3. Yes, he claimed that the Assembly is dominated by against Exploitation- “The State shall provide free and Hindus and alternatively, he shall take control temporarily compulsory education to all children below 14 years of along with Muslim Leaders. age.” How does the delegate propose the generation of the Q4. Mr Abdullah, you stated that you would like armed necessary funds to ensure these rights? police and tourism in Kashmir. How will you prevent A7. The representatives elaborated on the necessity of police brutality then? “taking care of the country” Mr Patel stated India would A4. He claimed that only a special border force at the obtain these funds from countries like USA, China, USSR Border will have arms, but did not comment on the safety and the United Nations for assistance to obtain them. aspect.  

CONSITITUTENT ASSEMBLY | JUNE. 2020   Q8. Delegate, the proposed constitution grants equality to all under ‘Right to Equality’ and ‘Right to Life and Fair Treatment’ including people of all sexes. 1. Does this include all sexual orientations? 2. Section 377 under the British Penal Code criminalizes LGBTQIA community. Don’t you think this is in direct conflict with your proposed constitution? 3. Won't we need to deinstitutionalize Section 377 of Indian Penal Code(IPC), based on British Penal(BPC) first? A8. Two responses were received by the press- 1. The first response was by Mr Shyama Prasad who stated that The Constitution is the law, it shall supersede all other laws and the IPC will be declared “null and void”, to which the Reporter clarified that if the IPC is null and void, then most rights and violations mentioned in the constitution will be redundant as they are based on the IPC. 2. Secondly, Sardar Patel believed that the IPC must not be declared “null and void”, to which the Reporter explained that in that case, equality is not provided to all. Q9. The proposed constitution mentions that the right to freedom can be ‘reasonably’ restricted to curb ‘anti-national’ sentiments. However, it does not issue any definition of which form of actions will be considered ‘anti-national’. Define anti-national. A9. Mr Rajagopalachari stated that any “Anti-India statements”, “hate speeches against the nation” that are “not in the best interest of the Country” and statements that provoke communal hatred/ violence are anti-national. Mr Patel claimed IPC articles 153(a),(b), (502),(500) have stated the restrictions to the freedom of speech. Q10. The Constitution under the Right to Knowledge states that “All citizens of India can request for information regarding the processes of the government from state or central government departments and offices.” Define “Processes.” There is no clarity as to where the line can be drawn between providing transparency and compromising government efficiency. Please elaborate. A10.”Processes” was defined as the happening and day-to-day activities of the Parliament by Mr Patel. The Assembly also stressed the importance of having an accountable government and agreed that any activities relating to National Security or Defence will not come under this act. However, this was not clarified in the constitution.

CONSITITUTENT ASSEMBLY | JUNE. 2020 Not So Religious After All Sai Sri Kanda, from the Amrita Bazaar Patrika in the Constituent Assembly, analyses the Assembly’s views on Religion Politics. Statement: \" Having India Become a Hindu Rashtra is ideal for India's future. \" Scenario: The reporter wants to clarify how the committee feels about the claims made by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru about making India into a “Hindu Rashtra” and implementing a “Ram Rajya” in India. Options: 1. Yes 2. No Votes: YES Jawaharlal Nehru, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, HV Kamath, KM Munshi, TT Krishnamachari. NO Gopalaswami Ayyangar, Sardar Vallabhai Patel, Muhd. Saadulla, Abul Kalam Aazad, BR Ambedkar, Sheikh Abdullah, Frank Antony. Analysis: Since Dr Nehru mentioned having an “Akhand Hindu Rashtra” in his opening speech, there has been controversy in the committee as to whether this is a feasible idea. Members like HV Kamat have taken a strong stance, claiming that the very identity of being Indian lies in the fact that Indians are associated with Hinduism since ancient times. They claimed that post-partition, all the Muslims have travelled to Pakistan, hence Pakistan is an Islamic country and India is a Hindu one. This was opposed strongly by the majority of the Assembly, stating that a purely secular approach is better. They argued that in a secular nation, everyone has equal rights despite religion and that will not leave room for any form of discrimination. The “Ram Rajya” Ideas was met by strong opposition from the masses in the form of Pro-Islamic movements and Riots. Conclusion: The way to conclude this study would be that the majority of the Assembly agrees that Secularism is the way to go, keeping in mind the greater good of the Country.

CONSITITUTENT ASSEMBLY | JUNE. 2020 “Hinduism is Atheism.” Sai Sri Kanda, representing the Amrita Bazaar Patrika in the Constituent Assembly elaborates on the statements made in Committee. Post Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru’s controversial statement in the General Speakers’ List (GSL), enumerating on the importance of implementing a “Ram Rajya” in India and making it into a “Hindu Rashtra”, things spiralled down for him, Mr HV Kamat and with no doubt, for the entire Constituent Assembly. During a lobbying session, Mr Kamat stated during the session and the reporter quotes, “Hinduism is secular, it doesn't give a layout of rules…Hindu Rashtra = Secular Rashtra”. Little did he know, Secularism is defined as “the principle of separation of the state from religious institutions” according to the Oxford Dictionary. And stating the obvious, Hinduism is an ancient Religious Institution. He went on to make more factually incorrect claims, particularly about Hinduism and Secularism. He continued to maintain this stance throughout all the Committee Sessions for Day One. When questioned by the Amrita Bazaar Patrika (ABP) Reporter regarding his claim in the Lobbying session, he admitted to making that statement. The ABP reporter explained to him that Hinduism follows the “Laws of Manu”, the most authoritative of the books of the Hindu code in India, that lay down rigid rules regarding the Varna/Caste system and regarding religious rituals and acustoms. The next statement made by him dropped multiple jaws in the Committee, both of delegates, the Chairs and the International Press (IP) Heads. “Hinduism is Atheism”, he said. He proceeded to say that incorrect people, such as the Reporter herself, believe that Hinduism is polytheistic, whereas it is a form of Atheism. The Committee was dumbfounded for a few seconds, before becoming filled with hushed laughter. The Reporter told him about Hinduism being polytheistic and explained how Bhrama, Vishnu and Shiva, collectively form the Hindu Holy Trinity or the “Trimurti”. He refused to change his stance, and eventually, the Reporter could do nothing but digress. Needless to say, this fallacy contributed heavily to the entertainment factor during the Assembly proceedings. Though Mr Kamat refused to admit that Hinduism is not Atheism, the committee got the much-needed dose of laughter after a day of serious, heated debate. The ABP is eagerly looking forward to Mr Kamat’s future statements, as the rest of the Assembly is.

CONSITITUTENT ASSEMBLY | JUNE. 2020 Of Mahars and Maharajas.... Sai Sri Kanda, representing Amrita Bazaar Patrika in the Constituent Assembly writes a Diary Entry. This an excerpt from the diary of Dr BR Ambedkar, written on the eve of November 4th, 1948 when the Constituent Assembly met. This an excerpt from the diary of Dr BR Ambedkar, written on the eve of November 4th, 1948 when the Constituent Assembly met.“… Unlike a drop of water which loses its identity when it joins the ocean, man does not lose his being in the society in which he lives. Rather, one’s being is a reflection of the society he calls his own. The people and aura of a nation contribute volumes towards the identity of each citizen. Beliefs, language and societal norms greatly shape the identity of the individual subjected to them; whether it is in regards to religion, caste or culture. In an attempt to understand the need for social reform in a personal sense, I have had to call down memories from long ago. For a man of my age, remembering his childhood is like entering a daydream, a haze of incidents long gone. Though unpleasant, a few incidents are crystal clear. We were at the station, amidst clouds of dust and roaring trains. The station-master asked us who we were, and without giving it a second thought I informed him that we were Mahars and asked for a bullock cart to reach Koregaon. His expression grew cold and he left immediately. It was as though he was repulsed upon seeing a wild animal. Even though we were young, this was not a unique occurrence to me or my brother. But it was equally hurtful and degrading as the previous incident and the one before that. Eventually, we hired a cart at double the appropriate price despite the driver refusing to drive it for fear of being \"polluted\". As though we were streams flowing to the same river. As though the prejudices imposed upon us could be spread by touch or sight. So, I drove the cart as he walked beside it, like a careful owner of an untamed horse. On the way, we made multiple stops to try and fetch water to no avail. We were ravenous and thirsty, we desperately needed water. We went to bed tired, on an empty stomach, because we couldn’t get water and we couldn’t get water because we were untouchables.  Social injustice and prejudice are the biggest threat to the instability of a nation. I am open and alive to the nuances of Religion and Caste, as I am alive to the idea of social reform. The oppressive features of Hindu society must be tackled with careful consideration, to ensure the upliftment of the downtrodden. Religion is only fit for society as long as it is a matter of principles and morals, and not of rules. Instilling Caste equality is fundamental in the development of a nation. Tomorrow, I will enter the Constitutional Hall once again. It has been a great struggle, to face, understand and eradicate Caste inequality in a system so ancient and rigid as India’s- but not an impossible one. We must not be content with a mere political democracy but aim to have a social democracy. I have faith, in the assembly, in myself and the knowledgeable and virtuous man that with much deliberation, a good and equalizing constitution will be drafted and social equality too, will be achieved. We will leave behind a life of contradictions and begin moving gradually into one of complete equality. We have seen an India of injustice and discrimination. Of belittlement and greed. Of Mahars and maharajas.But, from tomorrow we will wake up to be citizens of a diverse and beautiful country. Of justice, liberty, tranquillity and equality. …”

CONSITITUTENT ASSEMBLY | JUNE. 2020 Swastika Fans Unite? Sai Sri Kanda, representing the Amrita Bazaar Patrika in the Constituent Assembly writes a Humour Story. I guess that all dictators are fans of the Swastika- Our Nehru with dreams for his “Hindu Rashtra”, following the footsteps of Time Magazine’s Man of the Year, 1938- Adolf Hitler. During the Committee session, after  Hitler  Nehru suggested a Hindu Dictatorship, Gandhi made a rather unwelcome appearance. He claimed to have lost faith in Nehru and Patel, and wanted to create a Country ruled by Muslims, and take India back to the “glory of the Mughals.” An enraged, or I should say fearful Nehru commented in the Chat Box saying “tring… tring…*calls Godse*”. The Reporter from Amrita Bazaar Patrika (ABP) decided to give a “tribute” to Gandhi. He has to be called ‘Mahatma’ at some point, right? The sooner the better, decided the Assembly.    However, an unafraid Gandhi maintained his stance that the Constituent Assembly dominated by Hindus is incompetent. Representatives like Shyama Prasad Yadav, Sardar Patel and Nehru took cheap shots at Gandhi, claiming that he had “ two young women escort him” and commented on his alleged promiscuity and many illegitimate children. The Chairpersons also joined in on the Banter, and Gandhi still stuck to his ‘Ahimsa’ ideology. Violence isn’t good, duh. But nothing was preventing Gandhi from killing with his words, except his sense of humour. Or should I say the lack thereof? Gandhi attempted to keep the discussion formal. Maybe he should’ve asked his many younger and cooler children for some comebacks? Representatives also claimed that Gandhi was old and fragile, and it’s not good for his health to be in the Assembly. Can you blame them though? I mean, look at the man!

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 Price and Prejudice Yashaswini Tanna, reports from the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) on the goings on of committee. The committee of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) convened to discuss the Rohingya refugee crisis. What began with the General Speakers’ List (GSL) speeches of the delegates, and moderated caucuses discussing the background of the Rohingya refugee crisis. Member nations established their stances very strongly, most of them condemning the Burmese actions towards the Rohingya community. A poll was conducted by the reporter to understand what the committee opinion is, with respect to the Rohingyas returning to the Rakhine region of Myanmar, in the current global situation. The results saw approximately 30% abstentions, and around 40% choosing to negate the move.   Following, a joint statement was made by the Delegates of Myanmar and Germany, enlisting how Myanmar will be calling upon all the Rohingyas to return to the country on the promise of citizenship. This document was discussed through an extensive moderated caucus, which saw several points of information that sought clarification on all points of contention. The committee witnessed a bunch of negotiations happening through unmoderated caucuses and working breaks, followed by a thorough press conference, during which several clarifications were raised to the delegates by the International Press. The session was adjourned soon after.   The next day in committee saw a continuation to the GSL speeches, where several country stances were changed, to align with their foreign policies. A joint statement by India and Sweden was shared with committee, through a press release, but with several points of order being raised, it was soon scrapped, deeming it null and void. The delegates also made quite the controversial speeches, before a crisis update was presented to the ;the ensuing melee saw a host of tweets from country Heads and the Reuters, alongside several other updates pivotal to Bangladesh and Germany, creating a flurry of chaos. Additionally, a detailed press conference was conducted, with several revelations making it to the surface, before the UNHRC closed committee.

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 Robusta with Reuters - Yashaswini Tanna, reporting for the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), in dialogue with the Delegate of Thailand. The International Press engaged in an interview with the Delegate of Thailand, concerning the agenda, in essence discussing the Rohingya refugee crisis. IP: What is Thailand’s take on the status quo/ current situation of the Rohingya refugees? Delegate: “We sure do empathise with them, but we cannot accept them. We already have about 102,000 refugees in Thailand, from a lot of places. We are tending to almost 5000 Rohingya refugee families at this point. But we are considerate enough to provide them with food and water supplies when they land on our shores. That being said, we cannot accommodate further, because the ones we have already are involved in a bunch of trafficking scandals, and we’re already dealing with that. We think that those who want to go back, should go back to Myanmar, provided voluntarily. IP: In your opinion, should the Rohingya community accept the ‘warm welcome back’ from Myanmar? Delegate: “Since Thailand and Myanmar share a border, and we have good relations with each other, Thailand does trust Myanmar, but not wholly. But we do trust them. We hope they (refugees) go back to their homes, but not forced, only completely voluntarily. The government of Myanmar should do something to integrate them and ease the situation for them. For starters, they should be given citizenship because they’ve lived there for so long. Also, I feel that certain regions in Myanmar should be made exclusive for the Rohingya community, and they should be provided infrastructures such as schools and hospitals and proper sanitation and nutrition. So as the representative of Thailand, I think that my country absolutely supports the Rohingyas being called back to their land, but definitely think that there should be proper measures taken for their security as well. IP: how does your country view the Rohingya refugee community? Delegate: “We do treat them with empathy, but we cannot accommodate more of them like I said. And further, we do perceive them as “illegal” (yes we do) and as a threat to national security, but that is only because we cannot provide them with any more room for asylum-seeking. The ones that are already settled on our land, we do give them opportunities for growth and development, and fair and equal opportunities at that. But those that have broken our laws, we have made sure to deal with them the right way, which includes conducting arrests and trials if necessary. IP: Would you mind shedding some light on Thailand's asylum provisions for the Rohingya refugees? Delegate: “So, there is a document by a very reputed source, which took interviews of certain Rohingya refugees which were present in Bangladesh and also Thailand. And this is exactly what is said, “It was 2010 and I remember physically struck with the stench of the path that felt paved with sewage, the atmosphere of fear among the refugees inside and the smell of claustrophobic crush of mud huts and tents packed so tightly together, they looked like they were built on top of each other; the conditions at that camp with about 100,000 Rohingyas was the worst I had seen anywhere, and not much has changed since.” This is him talking about Bangladesh. And when they came to Thailand, they said, “the people still lead a hard life there, but the conditions are not as inhuman. Their camps are organised, relatively spacious, and clean.” So, we don’t take in more refugees, but we treat them well. We’ve taken care of their food, education, employment, and we’ve provided them citizenship and we’ve also gotten in touch with the migration offices, to help the disadvantaged of the lot to be recognised, and help them more with a lot of betterment in standards of education, and availability of safe and healthy sanitation, nutrition and standard of living. So, we do provide them with good asylum conditions. We take on only how much we can fend for, and if laws are broken, we report, deport, and detain where and when necessary.

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 The Erudite Discussion Sushruth reporting for the BBC World News, concludes the happenings in the committee on Day One. The first day of the committee was very much erudite with every The elephant in the room, The Delegate of Myanmar, has Delegate contributing copious amounts of information during the gracefully answered the questions by mentioning that they are discussion. currently working on repatriation of the refugees. The   Delegate has also underlined the cultural diversity of The background of The Rohingya Crisis was primary point of Myanmar, and how they   accommodated 135 ethnic discussion and deliberation. The Delegate of Pakistan raised communities and intolerance of terrorism by Arakan concerns over the Myanmar government’s ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA). The Delegate, however, Rohingya community. It was also noted during the discussion that has refused to accept the fact that Rohingya have their roots in 288 villages were obliterated as a part of military’s edict. The Myanmar; The Delegate has instead stated that the Rohingya Delegate of Germany, with plenty of aplomb, presented the are illegal immigrants who entered Myanmar during the primary cause of the crisis, The Citizenship Act of 1982. The British rule. Delegate also stated that the Rohingya have never possessed   documents to prove that they belong to the country and hitherto There were also several enlightening discussions, one of them not illegal immigrants. Discussions about the Rohingya refugees resulting in   A Joint Action Plan, a possible solution to in Bangladesh were also prevalent. The Delegate of Bangladesh repatriate the refugees back to Myanmar voluntarily. The plan has stated that they have been doing their part by providing was deliberated upon and amended as per the sensibilities of asylum to the Rohingya refuge in Cox Bazar and that over the respective Delegates. Overall, the day one of the 500,000 people sought refuge in Bangladesh in June, 2017. There committee proceedings was all about discussions and less of a are more than 800,000 refugees in Cox’s Bazaar currently. The debate. Delegate has also revealed that more camps would be established as the two largest camp settlements quickly reached capacity and many refugees are attempting to set up camp in the surrounding areas. Overcrowded camps is not the only poor condition the refugees are facing,  nearly a quarter of all Rohingya refugee children living in camps suffer from inanition.  Grimy surrounding, unsafe water for girls and women and the inability for young people to seek secured asylum and emotional support are all negatively affecting the displaced Rohingya people. The Delegate of Japan has iterated that a sum of $40,00,000 was announced in aid for the Rohingya refugees. The Delegate of Poland has questioned Myanmar government’s inability to protect the Rohingya from malice and hostility.

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 Beating around the Bush Sushruth, reporting for the BBC World News opines on the direction United Nations Human Rights Council(UNHRC) took. The committee started with a The Delegate of Japan, The Delegate of Poland and The Delegate of Norway have condemned the attacks on the Rohingya and asked the Government Of Myanmar (GoM) for cessation of violence. The proceedings of the committee were treading smoothly until The Delegate of Myanmar abstained from directly answering the questions and chose to reiterate the same farcical and delusional statements. Firstly, The Delegate of Myanmar was requested by the International Press to comment on the statement that the term “Rohingya” is derived from the Arabic word Rahm which has its origins with the arrival of Arab traders on shores of Ramree Island (situated in Burma) in the 18th century (Ullah, 2011), Ethnic Rohingyas have lived in Rakhine (the most western part of Myanmar) for centuries, even before Islam arrived in the region at the end of the 8th Century stance proving that Rohingya have been living in Burma prior to advent of Islam in the country. The Delegate of Myanmar has stated that the Rohingya, during the British colonial rule, have migrated from one place to another constantly and The Delegate has mentioned about a law after independence which stated that people residing in Myanmar before 1948 are considered citizens. The Delegate has also added that due to the precarious occupations of Rohingya, they couldn’t settle down at one place and their actual history cannot be traced back to Burma, hence, they are considered illegal immigrants. The Delegate of Myanmar’s statements are clearly refuted as prior to 1962, the Rohingya possessed government-issued identity cards, and also had British-issued ration cards which confirmed that they are citizens of Burma. In 1962, authorities forcibly took these identity cards on the pretext of checking to deny their legal identity. Secondly, The Delegate of Myanmar was also requested by the International Press to comment on the allegations that the GoM has played a pivotal role in arson of villages subsuming the Rohingya in order to destroy the evidence that they own the lands, thus, completely clearing the evidence that Rohingya have originated in Burma. The Delegate has denied such allegations and further reiterated that the Rohingya weren’t a part of the country since a long period of time and they are considered illegal immigrants. The allegations are not just allegations however, using the satellite images, it was proved that the villages were actually scorched. It can be inferred that The Delegate is flagrantly denying the truth and refuting with the satellite images, which is completely absurd. Thirdly, The Delegate of Myanmar was questioned by the International Press about the violence prevalent in the villages and why civilians were forced to flee the country. Responding to the statements, The Delegate has mentioned that there exists violence due to the militant group, Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA). The Delegate has also added that Myanmar would not tolerate violence and aims to end militant groups causing trouble. However, many witnesses have confessed that civilians were raped and killed in order to flee the country and they have been discriminated since aeons due to the fact that they are the Rohingya. They have also added that the GoM has conducted attack on people in the guise of attacking militant groups. This clearly reflects how blatantly The Delegate of Myanmar is trying to cloud the atrocities they have committed. Lastly, The Delegate of Myanmar was questioned by the International Press if The GoM was trying to coerce refugees to flee as they were Islamophobic. The Delegate has replied that The GoM was not Islamophobic and Myanmar is a culturally and ethnically rich country which has accommodated 135 ethnic groups. However, it was reported that Buddhists feared that Rohingya (Islam) will take over their country. The Rohingya were also labelled as “969” (the evil) and fell prey to hate-speech. Leader of ‘969’, Ashin Wirathu claimed that Muslims behave well only when they are weak, else, they become jackals and prey on others. The Buddhists of Myanmar claimed that the Rohingya are economically developed, and their culture is under siege than the Rohingya. The Rohingya are confronted with a deeply-entrenched Islam phobia with Rakhine in Myanmar. Myanmar is surrounded by some Islamic countries, such as Bangladesh, Malaysia, and Indonesia. The Buddhists feared if any Islamic country attacks Myanmar, the Rohingya will fight against Myanmar. As a result, they are culturally discriminated, economically exploited, and politically sidelined by the GoM. This clearly displays that The Delegate of Myanmar was evasive to directly answer the questions and beat around the bush deeming the Rohingya as illegal immigrants.

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 Wartime Werewolf Bite Yashaswini Tanna, from the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) opines on the uncanny. During a moderated caucus discussing the background of the Rohingya crisis, the Delegate of China happened to call out Myanmar on its treatment of the Rohingyas, and was quoted saying “this is a grave violation of human rights and is an ultimate humanitarian crisis,” referring to the genocide that Myanmar is allegedly subjecting the community to . The delegate also mentioned how this endeavour was in essence Vey conveniently, China has denied all these ‘accusations’ on “the military’s large-scale campaign of ethnic cleansing,” while account of their communist nature, but documents leaked from drawing reference from several accounts and claims narrated by covert government files say otherwise. civilians and victims, a deed that is so wrong, on so many factual and logical levels, there’s no doubt it hails from China. It is rather amusing that a country that always chose to brush past In a very intentionally unreasonable way, the delegate strongly every victim/survivor’s account, calling them unverifiable and condemned the Burmese actions, and said that humanitarian aid unreliable, have audaciously resorted to quoting sources of that exact should be provided to the Rohingya community, and at the same nature, to down-talk Myanmar, a country China has always shared a time, declined to provide assistance by housing refuges in their tumultuous past with. own land. Myanmar has maintained that there have been several instances of Furthermore, what seems to be surprising, in the true essence of terror that have struck their country, and also chose to link this it, is that China has been continually called out by the global characteristic with the Rohingya community, while in reality, several community, for the inhuman atrocities that they have been instances of violence in the recent past of Myanmar have been putting the Uighur Muslim residents of their country though. At incited by China-backed militia group, namely the Ta’ang National the mercy of the military forces, quite literally, the Uighur Liberation Army, rebelling against Myanmar, in an attempt to usurp community is tortured and traumatised day in and day out, and autonomy from the government’s hands. Uncanny, much? this has come to light only as late as winter of 2019. Several Cut to reality, China, however, has always rendered their staunch victim accounts and interviews with survivors who have fled the support to the Burmese government, in their attempts of cracking country, tell us about the kind and degree of human rights down on the Rohingya settlements, which have driven away almost a violations that are resorted to, in the Chinese ‘re-education million of the community into Bangladesh, over a short span of time. camps’ that have commonly been identified as concentration This was an intelligence-backed move, as they feared the rise of camps of the new age. fringe elements, that might take over the borders, creating a nexus of war-inciting actions, thus losing China their supremacy fight, in the Burmese region. For the delegate to have come forward with criticisms on these very actions that their country stands in support of, is rather unsettling. Does it act as reflection on the delegate’s competency (or the lack of it) in representing their country at international forums? Or is it simply an act of mindlessness? Can we rule out the possibility of it been a dance with the dragons?

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 Mending Wall Yashaswini Tanna, from the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), delves into the Joint Action Plan proposed in committee. The agenda set to discuss the Rohingya refugee crisis, several member representatives strongly condemned the actions of the Union of Myanmar, on their approach towards the Rohingya community. The country of Myanmar has been extremely hostile towards the Rohingya community and had so far denied them citizenship on grounds of their 1982 citizenship act, which requires a mandatory submission of certain documents by an individual, to be considered for citizenship. However, Myanmar has conceded to put into play a Joint Plan of Action with the assistance of Germany, which was highlighted through a press release which was further put up for discussion via a moderated caucus. In essence the document outlined that the Union of Myanmar has altered its decision regarding the Rohingya community, and has agreed to grant citizenship to the Rohingya muslims in their land. The two tier decision is to be implemented in the following way: 1. Granting natural citizenship to the current Rohingya residents of Myanmar, provided they are able to hand in documentation to prove that three or more generations of their families have lived in the country. 2. Incentivising the return of the Rohingya refugees scattered across the globe, by providing a National Verification Card (NVC), with an ensuing review of proofs, to thus grant them citizenship. This would have been taken as a landslide decision, had it aligned with the intended logical trail. The problems that arise, however, are multidimensional. The country of Myanmar has not provided enough documentation to the Rohingya community over several decades now, and the limited provision of paperwork leaves the current citizens with not much to show, in light of the citizenship act of 1982, of the Union of Myanmar. These documents weren’t provided to the Rohingya community all these years, on grounds that they were not mentioned in the British census of all residing communities, thus ruling out their chances at being recognised. Moreover, the second part of this document is in essence what the Union of Myanmar initially wanted to pursue anyway. The NVCs reduce the status of the Rohingyas to mere foreign nationals, and strips them of their rights to electoral participation and geopolitical freedom. The proposed thorough review of proofs will negate the granting of citizenship either way, because of the aforementioned lack of documentation. However, if the country plans to go lenient on the document check, that again will have its own implications on the national security of Myanmar, and the country has already consistently maintained that their sovereignty has been in danger, with terrorism sparks in their country, when in regard to the Rohingya community. In addition, there is no certainty to determine the origins of the Rohingya community, which is essential to formulate the road ahead. To top it all off, socio-economic integration of the Rohingyas when admitted, will be a challenge of its own herculean stature, given that economic and financial conditions globally aren’t conducive to excess spending, given the current pandemic situation. Germany is expected to have continued negative growth rate with significant fall in the Foreign Direct Investments (FDI)s and Foreign Institutional Investments (FIIs), for the next two financial calendar years. Myanmar too has an estimated growth rate of around 4% charted for the next few quarters, coupled with a steadily falling Human Development Index of 0.584, ranking them 145th out of 189 countries. This makes it infeasible to undertake any form of infrastructural reconstruction and development, which the Union of Myanmar is promising nonetheless, to the Rohingya community. There stands a gaping hole of question in abundance that may take precedence over the provision of citizenship to the Rohingya community, as proposed in the Joint Action Plan by Germany and Myanmar. However, one has to acknowledge that there is no quick solution to the refugee crisis in question, and only time will tell where this turnaround decision will lead.

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 My Place or Yours? Yashaswini Tanna, of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), opines on the statistics collected from committee. Question: Should the Rohingya refugees return to Myanmar, in the current global situation? Situation: The reporter wanted to assess the proportion of the committee that agrees to the return of the rohingya refugees to Myanmar, given that most of them condemned the nation in question, for its treatment of the community. Options: 1. Yes, they should go back home. 2. No, they should not go back to Myanmar. 3. Abstention. I don’t want to say anything about this. Votes: 1. The delegates that voted Yes: Delegates of Singapore, Russia, Myanmar, Canada, India, Norway, Bangladesh. 2. The delegates that voted No: Delegates of Poland, Netherlands, France, Sweden, Japan, Mexico, Columbia, Sri Lanka, Pakistan. 3. The delegates that chose to abstain: Delegates of India, Germany, China, South Sudan, Nepal, Thailand. Analysis: The reporter was not very surprised to see the votes for option one, as Russia, Singapore and India had made it evident time and again that they would love to see the Rohingya refugees go back to their homes in Myanmar. The Delegate of Norway, however was silent for the better part of committee, and did not engage in any debates or discussions. The Delegate of Myanmar made it a point to safeguard their nation’s status on the matter at all given times in committee. However, it was definitely a shock to see the Delegate of Bangladesh vote ‘yes’ on this question, because they have consciously rooted for the Rohingyas to be given the choice in this matter, leaning more towards accusing Myanmar of forcing the refugees home. It was not very surprising to see the votes for option two either, as it was rather foreseeable and predictable, with the representatives of Poland, Netherlands, Sweden and Mexico making strong statements that the refugees should not go back to the environment that broke them. However, what was surprising to see, was the Pakistan’s vote on this matter. The said country has always believed and also made it clear in committee, that the Rohingya refugees should dwell in Bangladesh, and also went to the extent of professing a certain infrastructural relief aid to the same. Sri Lanka, Japan and France, however, did not contribute with substantive opinions in their debate, while they did, in their votes. The abstentions were of particularly shocking nature, as the Delegates of India, Germany, China and Thailand were harbouring strong opinions in committee, about the Rohingyas being displaced, and three out of the aforementioned four, were of the belief that the Rohingya refugees should go back to their homeland. The Delegate of Germany also drafted a Joint Action Plan with Myanmar to get the Rohingyas home, safely, with incentivised benefits included as well. While the Delegate of Thailand did consider that the refugees should be sent back home only if willing, they also thought that the Myanmar government should take necessary steps to integrate the community in. The Delegate of China strongly condemned the actions of the Burmese government towards the Rohingya community, and made it a point to call these actions “a military campaign effort at ethnic cleansing.” It was uncanny of them to have abstained from voting, after such a strong opinion as prelude. Conclusion: It all boils down to an act of humanity, versus a farse of humanity; we do not identify with a situation, unless it is closer to home, than to the heart.

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 Cupid Tears or Stupid Fears? Yashaswini Tanna, from the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), on the Rohingyas and China. “Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions? Senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food? Hurt by the same weapons? Warmed and cooled by the same winter, and summer?” - Shylock, The Merchant of Venice, 1596. The Delegate of China had strongly asserted previously in Several leaked Chinese government documents have surfaced in committee, that they think of Myanmar’s actions as “a military’s the recent past, garnering attention of the global community, large-scale campaign of ethnic cleansing,” with regard to the including the United nations. Several video proofs also have alleged genocide of the Rohingya community. When questioned been leaked, showing military torturing the people. Many about its uncanny resemblance to the Uighur Muslims’ detention interviews with fled victims and survivors are readily available in Xinjiang, during the press conference, the delegate chose to to the people, for reference, but the Chinese government has abstain from answering. rejected all the allegations and has maintained strongly that the However, in light of new events, the Delegate of China chose to country is merely attempting to strengthen the spirit of address the issue on a significantly less aggressive and dramatic communism and re-educating the Uighur community of the note. The delegate however mentioned that China shall be offering values and importance of being Chinese. itself as a mediator to the situation, and advocated strong non- So, will a country that violates the rights of its own people, adherence to the principle of non-interference, granting reason that really value the rights of people who belong to no land? it is for the greater good of the community in question (the While several countries including Bangladesh and Germany, Rohingyas). This has been an acute change of stance, as the raised this point to the Delegate of Mexico, the only substantive country now supports the repatriation and the issue of National reply that was yielded to them, was that of Mexican example. Verification Cards (NVCs) to the Rohingya refugees, a 180-degree The country’s representative mentioned that they see scope of spin from the previous stance. Earlier on, they had abstained from humanity birthing in the heart of the Chinese government voting on a poll asking the delegates if they deem towards he wronged, and that they would teach them, by it fit for the Rohingya refugees to be going back to Myanmar. Cut Mexican example, the lesson of kindness and humanity. to the present, there is still a certain ambiguity regarding their Mexico has been dealing with a plethora of human rights stance on the same. violations of its own, and several Mexican asylum seekers The Delegate of Mexico sated in committee today, that the fleeing the situations of terror are in fact being held to wait at the Rohingyas should be allowed into Chinese borders, where they United States’ borders. can be provided asylum care and all basic necessities of survival, It should also be kept in mind, that China may be averse to ex post Burmese repatriation proposals via Joint Action Plan (with alliances with western countries. When addressed as a point of Germany). information, the Delegate of Mexico said that the answer is Should this be a recommendation, in a humanitarian committee, humanitarian collaboration. with several countries alleging that China is one of the greatest human rights offenders in the recent times, in question of the Uighur Muslims?

UN SECURITY COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 A diversion or a misconception? Amrutha Kotichintala, reporting for UN News, for the United Nations Security Council, comments on the scandalous claims made by China The newfound crisis of the committee stated that four As predicted, China was questioned regarding the people have been detained by the Chinese police based on detainment of the diplomats as the Vienna convention of the grounds of spying on the Wuhan Virology Lab where the diplomatic relations states that a diplomat is not liable three of them happen to be foreign nationals holding for any form of detention or arrests. To which the diplomatic passports of UK, USA and Canada. The Delegate of The United Kingdom states that he is very Delegate of China stated that this particular treaty has not ashamed that the People’s Republic of China would take been ratified in China, when in fact it has been ratified in such diverse measures to divert the attention of the China. Retaliating to this The Delegate of China said that committee from the ongoing dispute. The delegate urges the treaty never mentioned the types of crimes that would the other delegates in the committee to understand the be worthy of detention or arrests which is intriguing as the Chinese play in such cases. The delegate also claims that treaty states that the only form of punishment that can be China’s blatant accusations provide shreds of evidence for given to a diplomat is expulsion. the same. The delegate announces that the ploys done by China will not be accomplished. The delegate goes The Delegate of China also stated, to everyone’s surprise, forward to say that the UK has nothing to do with any that it would like to conduct a trial for the diplomats or if kind of spies. As expected, the delegate of China claimed it matters can be taken to the International Court of Justice to have evidence that the diplomats arrested were indeed where it can be tried at an international level. Despite the spies and demanded an apology from the UK. To which immense scrutiny, the Delegate of China stands by the the delegate of UK, retaliated saying the claims made by government’s decision to conduct a trial and claims that the Delegate China was a mere statement by a state- the diplomats would be released only after a trial. owned press agency and demanded evidence to back up the Chinese government’s claims.

UN SECURITY COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 China: Invasion or Routine Exercise? Amrutha Kotichintala, reporting for UN News, for the United Nations Security Council, collects statistics from the committee Question: Delegate, Is the presence of larger group of Chinese troops in Tibet exacerbating the tension between the countries? Scenario: The reporter wants to clarify the stance the members of the committee if they view Chinese actions as aggressive and expansionist regarding the deployment of the Chinese troops in Tibet. Options: ·  Yes ·  No ·  Abstain  Votes: Delegates who voted yes: The Delegate of Nepal, Delegate of the United Kingdom, Delegate of India, Delegate of USA, Delegate of Canada, Delegate of Japan, Delegate of Russian Federation. Delegates who voted no: Delegate of China, Delegate of Israel, Delegate of Saudi Arabia Delegates who abstained from voting: Delegate of Belgium.  Analysis: Chinese belief that the territory belongs to them is being contradicted by its extreme militarism being displayed in the region. They say it is not an escalation in poll. However, Indian troop activity, by comparison is minimal, indicating India’s reluctance to engage in military conflict. Most nations, including US and UK, which have made claims of being neutral in the conflict also believe that this signals aggression and is likely a feature of expansionism. If Tibet indeed belongs to China, the reason given by China for its troops, how is its legitimacy as the ruler not being acknowledged to an extent that heavily armed troops are being engaged. The poll clearly indicates that most nations, including seemingly neutral parties view China as an aggressor pursuing its expansionist objectives against a nation that was determined to maintain cordiality post-independence. Conclusion: The poll’s verdict is quite decisive, with less than half a dozen nations interpreting Chinese actions as a routine exercise

UN SECURITY COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 Consistencies and Inconsistencies Amrutha Kotichintala, reporting for UN News, for the United Nations Security council, delegates' responses of the Press Conference. Q1. What role is the US going to play in the resolution of Q5:  How can the Delegate China cite the MacCartney the conflict at hand? The US has also pledged that it Macdonald line as a basis for territorial claim over Aksai would protect the world of communism, but how are you Chin when the Xing government never responded to Sir willing to risk your country which is the most populous Claude Macdonald, the man who sent the note with country to follow into the communist sphere of influences  revised boundaries? Answer: The delegate replied by saying that if there is Answer: The delegate of China answered by saying that going to be a conflict the United States would stay neutral. currently China practically feels that MacCartney line The delegate also refrained from commenting about the would be a good place to establish border and that it has second part of the question. also been recognised by the Indian government.  Q2:  Delegate you said that china occupied the western Q6:  The settlement between China and India merely sector, doesn't this prove that it was India’s region before? Indicates that neither parties are willing to engage in Answer:To this question, the delegate answered by saying conflict. Why is the UK so afraid of the peace in Asia? that China gained control of this sector after the war and Answer:  The delegate answered by saying that he went on to say that China has all the rightful claims on the suspected a possible alliance and has also seen the region.  terrorist attack on china and feels that whoever supports Q3:  The Delegate of the UK, whose side are you on in the alliance would make them vulnerable and the delegate this dispute since china is an ideological opponent and also mentioned that the agreement was very unsatisfactory India, which is a former colony? and suggested that there should be a better negotiation.  Answer: The delegate of the UK said that he believes the Q7: How has the president approved the settlement UK to be neutral on the dispute that is going on. The between India and China, given how much it would har his Delegate of went on to say that the UK propounds the popular support if he is viewed as weak? Also, what has theory of trying to solve the dispute with peaceful led China to shift its stance so quickly and look for negotiations, the delegate also mentioned that if the UK diplomatic solutions after being firmly against it? has to take sides it would be against the country that starts Answer: The delegate said that this alliance initially has a the war.  remote chance of an outbreak in the form of a riot, Q4: To the Delegate of China, why is china so adamant on however, went on to assure that it will increase the claiming Aksai Chin, a virtually uninhabitable land? president’s popularity and it would not deem him weak. Answer: The delegate claimed that Aksai Chin has been The delegate answered by saying that the negotiations under China and has been handled by China since a long were done to prevent the escalations of conflicts and India time, and said that “just because it is an un-habitable land and China would now concentrate on more important doesn’t mean we will give up the land”. When further things such as establishing a good relationship. questioned regarding the intentions of the Chinese government with the land, the Delegate refrained from answering.

UN SECURITY COUNCIL | JUNE. 2020 Foreign policy, What? Amrutha Kotichintala, reporting for UN News, for the United Nations Security Council, comments on the curious case of the Delegate of China No one: Absolutely no one: The Delegate of China: eVerYONE IS a SPY The delegate of China, perhaps the most important person in the room today, had an undeniably interesting exchange with the press today. The situation is grave. The fate of hundreds of millions hangs in the balance if India and China enter into a full-fledged armed conflict. The stakes are high yet decisiveness seems low. China, when asked why it can stake a claim over Indian controlled territories, replied that they have governed them since 1963. However, tensions have been high since 1961. This seems quite odd. Even more perplexingly, when asked why China has been deploying troops in Tibet and why it was risking war, the reply was a deafening silence from the envoy. Raghav Panjiray International Press Head Nihkla Vallae Editor-inChief Sai Sri Kanda (Amritha Bazar Patrika), Yashaswini Tanna(Reuters), Abdul Ansar Rahmaan (The Hindu), Sushruth Tiruveedhula (BBC World), Amrutha Kotichintala (UN News) Reporting-Bureau Our collaborations STATECRAFT TEAM INTERNATIONAL PRESS Indian Online Model United Nations 2020

Like this book? You can publish your book online for free in a few minutes!
Create your own flipbook