UNDERSTANDING MODEL

UNITED NATIONS

Eloquence - The LitSoc of J128

CONTACT US : eloquencej128@gmail.com
INSTAGRAM : https://instagram.com/eloquencej128?utm_medium=copy_link

PRANAV SRIVASTAVA UPASANA ARORA ISHA SINGH

YOUTH CONFERENCE HEAD LITERARY HEAD CHIEF EDITOR

1|Page
 INDEX

➢ INTRODUCTION
➢ TIPS TO RESEARCH
➢ HOW TO DELIVER SPEECHES?
➢ HOW TO WRITE AND UTILISE CHITS
➢ ARGUMENTATION

• MAKING AN ARGUMENT
• ORAL ARGUMENT
• REFUTING AN ARGUMENT
• LEGAL ARGUMENTS

➢ HOW TO LOBBY WELL AND UTILISE UN-MODERATED CAUCUSES

➢ RAISING POINT OF ORDER
➢ HOW TO TACKLE CRISIS STIMULATION

2|Page
 What is Happening Here?
How many times have you read something online and understood each and every word?
Scientific research says that on an average, the more educated we become, the more we
try to hide our mistakes and lack of knowledge.
Well, I laughed at that the first time I read this. However, the next time I read an article
this little piece of information kept hovering at the back of my head as I read the text.
Wait, what does hover mean? Do you know? Good, so what happened was that I noticed
this tendency of mine to just skip a difficult word and think, “One word in a thousand,
how does it matter?”. Till that time, it was all fine. Then came the time when I had to
speak that out in front of others. And proudly, I stood up and just recited what I had read
online, and thought, “There! Beat that!”. The results were quite unexpected. Nobody
seemed to agree with me or understand what I was saying, and I kept seeing looks of
confusion on their faces. They seemed so similar to my expressions sitting in a difficult
class with a subject I do not particularly like. This seems to be happening more often than
not in Model UNs these days. After putting some thought into it, I arrived at an
observation. I just asked myself,
“What is happening here?” Then I asked my delegates, and other Executive Board
members, and I kept at it, until finally, this observation came. When we give delegates a
background guide, or they research from the internet, what are they really doing? The
answer is pretty simple, so I won’t blame you if you think, “What a stupid question to ask!”
or “That’s not even worth two seconds of thought!”. What they are doing is reading.

Now I ask you to imagine a group of people sitting together and discussing an agenda. I
asked myself, “What is happening here?”. Yes, I am stubborn that ways, and I believe that
the simplest of questions can sometimes lead to wonderful answers. So, a group of people
in a room, trying to put their heads together, and discuss an issue – what are they doing? I
started forming a mental list and comparing it with how we are used to researching. They
are sitting down. Ah well, that’s common in both the processes. But sadly, that’s where the
similarities end. The next obvious thing they are doing is talking to each other. Sidharth
Das Do we do that when we research? Obviously not! Because that would just be weird,
right? Talking to no one while reading an article. Okay, so one thing that is not common so
far. Next, they are listening to what the other person is saying. Right? Does that happen
when we research? Not really, there is no other person on the other end, so there is not
point utilising our ears, is there? Two things not common. Then I thought a little harder,
what else is happening?

3|Page
 Some people are noting down points from what the other person is saying, just like we do in
a class when the teacher is speaking. Not going into the massive benefits of taking notes, I
sense that this also happens to very few people or at select moments when we are preparing
for a conference.
Should I put it in the list of things that are not common? I think I will.

Three things so far that are not common in preparation and performance in an MUN. Can
you remember these three? I am sure you are capable of understanding slightly more difficult
questions, these seemed too easy.
Taking an example and going deeper into the first observation – they are talking. “How are
they talking?” Well, it is mostly through someone expressing an idea, someone else asking
a question, and maybe a third person giving an opinion, then back to the first who is
answering the question and either agreeing or disagreeing with that opinion given by the
second person.

Right? This is where it hit me! The moment I go deeper into each of these things that are
happening inside an MUN, the more I realise it is so different from how we prepare before it.

Obviously one would face difficulty in their first few conferences, when the requirements of
performance are more than 75% different than that of preparation. Summing this little story up,
how can we improve our performance? How do we recreate something like the experience of a
conference while sitting at home and researching. Try to think about this.
We’ll explore this in subsequent articles on separate parts of the process, but the more you
think about these things, the more you will be able to learn from those articles.

4|Page
 TIPS TO RESEARCH

1. READ ABOUT THE COUNTRY ALLOTTED

In order to represent a certain country, it is necessary to understand its polity, economy, military,
culture, history, bilateral relations with other countries, and ideological position on certain issues.

2. COMPREHEND THE FOREIGN POLICY OF YOUR COUNTRY

A country's foreign policy is a set of goals about how the country will work with other countries
economically, politically, socially and militarily, i.e. Policy of nurturing and promoting one's
national interest while interacting with other countries.

Merely reading Wikipedia pages on your country’s foreign policy is not enough. Concrete
analysis needs to be drawn from it, and is necessary for the delegate to assert its interests at all-
time

HOW TO ANALYSE YOUR FOREIGN POLICY

A. Understand your countries stand on any given agenda, or the sub topic of that
agenda

B. Keep in mind, that foreign policy is not a blanket statement but can differ from
topic to topic.

For example: If you country is India you might be in disagreement with Pakistan on the issue
of terrorism and Kashmir, however when we take the

5|Page
 topic of trade, India would be welcoming of trade relationship and does have positive
trade relations with Pakistan.
C. Hence, your stand on a particular topic is based on your country’s ideology, polity,
needs, requirements, past/current events and actions that have shaped your countries
stand.

D. For countries with a neutral stand: There are times, when certain nations maintain
a neutral/ambiguous positions in certain situations.
Hence, in such a case, your intention should be to read about
1. Your country' own polices, laws, ideology of your nation in relation to
agenda(Burkina Faso’s laws/policies on Treatment of IDP’S),
2. The stand of organisations, which your country is part of/ the ideology of the
block which you country supports.
(Burkina Faso is a part of the African Union, hence shares a similar perspective with
other co-African Union countries on major stances)

TIP: Visit the national/foreign ministry websites of the nation you are representing,
to collect statements by your ministers/ leaders, which might relate to the agenda.

3. RESEARCH ON THE AGENDA

Start with reading the background guide thoroughly.

A. Understand the agenda, and explore its varied aspects in the world.

B. Divide the agenda into sub-parts, and research on them individually. Breaking down
of the agenda, enables a simpler and focuses understanding of the agenda and makes
research easier.
One can also use these sub-divided topics, as basis for moderated caucus
discussions/topics.

6|Page
 (EX: if your topic is Trade, you can divide your research on the basis of continent
wise trade options/ country wise trade facilities, committees/organisations dealing
with trade, and hence, ascertain your countries stand based on each of these sub-
topics)

C. Characterising the agenda into sub-topics and preparing speeches and

statements on them.
D. Understand and analyse the policies adopted by different blocs of countries (example:
NATO, EU etc.) and major countries involved in the agenda. Including their position,
ideology and adopted past actions.

E. Preparing a list of possible solutions and actions can be adopted on the issue as per
your country’s policies.

F. Assemble proof/evidence for any important piece of information/ allegation you are
going to use in committee and keeping your research updated using various news
sources, especially news websites given in the proof/evidence section.

TIP: While you research from all these sources, make notes side by side which
would help you a) Remember and recall, and b) would build greater understanding
of the topics.

• Lastly, we would request all the delegates to put sincere efforts in preparation and
research for the simulation and work hard to make it a fruitful learning
experience for all. Feel free to contact if you have any queries or doubts.

NOTE: All the above mentioned information, is subjective and shall not be used as fact
establishment. Only for personal refferance.

7|Page
 SUGGESTIONS
A. Keeping in mind, the strength of large committees (Such as UNGA,WHO,
UNODC), and the recognition possibilities, which may arise: ensure to use
your research well, when recognised.
B. For the other times, if deemed necessary, keep forth chits expressing
your stands/research analysis in the committee.

C. Keep a note of the policies/conventions/protocols (pertaining to your

committee/ agenda) signed and ratified by your nation.

D. Credible sources of information: (Information which can be established as

facts):
Reuters/UN website/UN bodies/ Country’s national Website/ UN affiliated
personnel reports like: Special Envoy Reports, etc.

8|Page
 HOW TO DELIVER
SPEECHES?
The key to writing effective speeches is to not just put your point across but also involve your creative
side. This would help you to make your presence be felt in the committee in whatever way that you
wish to. There are no particular 'right' formats or procedures for writing a speech and so, we intend to
help you in writing one by sharing our experiences.

In our previous MUNs we have observed that some delegates prepare their speech
for GSL before the conference and it is usually about the introduction to the agenda
from their country’s perspective. It is somehow fruitful if you get a chance to speak
as soon as the committee commences. However it naturally becomes ineffective if
your Dirst attempt at speaking in the GSL doesn’t happen on the Dirst day. All delegates
should therefore try to modify their speeches as soon as new points are raised in the
committee so that the debate can progress accordingly.

Usually delegates consume more than 15 seconds of their speech in saying

“Thank you for the recognition. With the prior permission of the Executive
Board, the delegate so and so would like to ” which is not that necessary.
You can straight way go to your point. There are time constraints. In case you feel
you are violating diplomatic courtesy then you can just say “Thank you” and move to
your point.

We have also observed that there are a few delegates who just introduce their
foreign policy in the speech but fail to elaborate on the why factor of their policies.
They will say they don’t agree with a particular point, but why they don’t agree with
it, is something that they fail to put across. For instance, a country may claim that
they will not grant citizenship to the refugees but at the same time, they will not
justify their reasons for such an action. Also, there are times when delegates fail to
understand that they are representing a country and have to follow the country’s
perspective. The delegates may feel sometimes that their country does not have a
strong stance regarding the agenda and therefore, they do not follow their foreign
policy adequately. It then seems like a classroom discussion where people are
debating on the agenda without role playing a diplomat. In such a situation, it is
anything but natural to feel your own opinion about the agenda overpowering the
stance of your country allotted. However, with

9|Page
persistent brainstorming and Dlexibility of thought patterns, solutions can easily be found.

Sometimes, delegates get carried away in explaining their foreign policy that it is
not in accordance to the agenda. While we do realise it is important for you to
know your country’s foreign policy, it is equally important for you to distinguish
what is required in the agenda.

Due to paucity of time, we have seen delegates jumping from one point to another
without explaining the Dirst point adequately. As a result they end up raising an issue
which some other delegate has already done and because they did not adequately
explain it, the point is considered a repetition. So delegates should either try to add
a point to the already raised issue or be as different as possible. We would
appreciate one point which has been analysed from multiple perspectives than one
point which is not analysed adequately and sounds repetitive.

There are a few delegates who just read a text from some source itself including
the background-guide. If the source in-itself analyses a particular point then it is
Dine. But usually they are facts and delegates don’t actually build upon them which
is what is expected of them.

A lot of delegates have doubts such as what they are supposed to write or how
should they should structure their speech. This is completely up to the delegate.
The maximum we can do is to tell you according to our delegate experiences
about how speeches are structured and content chosen for them accordingly. These
are:

Premise – Analysis – Example

Problem – Solution – BeneDits Past – Present – Future Scenario What – So what –

Now what

Note: There can be more structures. These are some of them which the
members of the Executive Board have seen.
All that the delegate should bear in mind is that his speech is in sync with
committee proceedings rather than proceeding along an isolated tangent that
does not engage with or draw upon what is happening in committee.

Delegates should keep in mind that the committee requires substantial and
effective debating and not polished oratory skills. A delegate must not feel
uncomfortable to speak in the committee because s/he may never know

10 | P a g e
what substantive point spoken by them may be marked by the Executive Board. Moreover, delegates are
requested to keep their speeches simple and clear for everyone’s understanding.

How to write and

utilise chits

‘Chits’ constitute a significant role in any Model United Nations Conference. Chits not only
enable you to interact with other delegates in an informal manner but they also constitute a
substantial weight in the mark sheet of executive board.

1. How to utilise Chits-

• To send significant substantive points to the executive board.
• To send procedure related doubts to executive boards.
• To ask questions to fellow delegates. To lobby with co-delegates in the
committee.

2. How to write Chits-

• Chits have no format when it comes to substance. Hence, you can structure the same
in any way you desire.
• You must mention from whom the chit is coming (your country’s name), to
whom the chit is directed and if you want the executive board to read the chit then
mention ‘via EB’ on top of your chit.
• Regarding the content of your chit - it can be anything. Ranging from
substantive inputs to procedural doubts to lobbying with fellow delegates.
• It is advisable that chits should be in bullet points and should contain crisp, concise
facts.
• Avoid writing long chits and if you have to write long chits then make sure
your handwriting is legible and you underline/highlight important points.
• Do away with unnecessary/fancy/ emotional/ highly dramatic introductions and/or
conclusions - come straight to the point.

11 | P a g e
 3. Significance of Chits-
• Helps to communicate with fellow delegates and executive board members
regarding any substantive point or a procedural query that they may have,
• In case you have not been recognised in a moderated caucus then you can
send in your points to the executive board through a chit.
• If you have been unable to put all your points across for a particular speech due to
time constraint, they can be sent through a chit as a continuation of your speech
• Chits enjoy considerable weight in the evaluation of your performance.
Hence it is advisable to always back up your speeches with good quality chits.
• You can use chits to seek clarity on matters related to procedure, etc by writing a
chit directly to your executive board.

12 | P a g e
 ARGUMENTATION

MAKING AN ARGUMENT
I’ll divide argumentation into two portions, the first being Making and the second being
contesting an argument. I’ll leave the “what is an argument” nonsense and get right to it. Making
an argument is simple, to learn how to make one what I did was, watch actual argumentation
take place in actual debates.

I also, during my break at conferences observed other committees, always good to see debate
on different agendas, different facts and different analyses.

This is what I would do first.

Second, I research and find out my objective. This objective may be far- fetched. When I did a
committee as France in a Security Council, one of the issues we discussed was Crimea, so my
objectives was to ‘establish the Annexation of Crimea as illegal’- that’s how I worded it. It was
far-fetched, and I succeeded, in that, I convinced everyone that it is illegal through
argumentation but I failed in that I couldn’t establish it, i.e pass a resolution, because of the
obvious Russia veto. This was expected from the beginning, but that was always my goal when
discussing Crimea. I didn’t care, I was the Permanent Representative of France to the United
Nations Security Council; my country wants something I will do everything I can to get it done.

After forming your objective, your job is pretty much done.

You have your basic arguments in place since you came to your objective after
thinking and research.

13 | P a g e
 Now, we come to the framing of your argument – your line of argumentation (objective) is
sorted so now all you have to do is satisfy your objective through verbal arguments.

ORAL ARGUMENTATION
Important aspects of a speech;

1. Research
2. Analysis

These form your content.

Your content must be outstanding, above all else – above diplomatic courtesy, respect to
procedure etc.

The content I can see is the amount of content you display, don’t tell us research, don’t use
only logic and reasoning – have a nice balance of the two.

How I balance the two in, let’s say, a 90 second speech is; (Context of speech discussing
Vietnam War, I am Ghana)

1. Lay out what I want to prove/ disprove [5-10 seconds]

“We believe that there should be a comprehensive regime for the regulation of
nuclear weapons and an immediate de-escalation of the Vietnam War”
2. Lay out my arguments [60-70 seconds]
“We suggest these two solutions since the Vietnam war is turning out to be exactly
like the situation in August 1945, when the atomic bomb was dropped we believe this
for 3 reasons;

14 | P a g e
 1. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, appearing before a Senate subcommittee,
testifies that US bombing raids against North Vietnam have been ineffective and
that there needs to be an escalation of force. Further the morale of the enemy hasn’t
reduced - this is the exact same situation as in Japan.
2. They have already used napalm, any escalation of force from here would be
disastrous.
2.The United States Pentagon published a report with the title “usage of Tactical Nuclear
Weapons in South East Asia” specifically mentioning Vietnam. This indicates a direct
intention to use nuclear weapons.

Conclude [10-15 seconds]; Why are your arguments important? What is your
objective? “It’s abundantly
clear, as I have shown, that the United States having already used atomic weapons,
will be forced to use them so that they can win the war. They have discussed using
them as shown through the report. Both these conclusions are extremely dangerous
for the people of South East Asia and the world at large. The United States has used
these weapons before and may use them again.

I usually use the pan example when writing a speech;

1. That pan is hot.

2. I know it is hot since, when I pour water on it, there’s steam.
3. Since it is hot, we shouldn’t touch it.

Easy to remember, try it.

15 | P a g e
 REFUTING AN
ARGUMENT
To refute an argument is to reject it, you can do this;

By contesting the logical and/or factual nature of the premise.

If someone says that, “Child labour as a concept originated in the east.” – I would counter this on a logical
and factual basis;

LOGIC

Child labour could not have originated in the East since it was the result of the industrial revolution. Pre-Industrial
Revolution children did not engage in child labour since they weren’t physically developed enough to carry out manual
labour. With the onset of the Industrial Revolution comes machines, and machines can easily be operated by children
since there is no physical demand on their bodies. Further, a company could pay a lower salary to a child than it would to
an adult.

Corroborate the logic with;

FACT

Various historians have pegged the revolution to have began in Europe in the 1780s, by the early 1800s there were over 2
million child labourers in the UK.

16 | P a g e
 LEGAL ARGUMENTS
Legal arguments are slightly different, in that arguing law for me depends on satisfaction of
criteria (what can be in many cases objective) and interpretational (subjective). Most laws or
provisions have criteria that need to be specified before they can be applied; for example for
something to be a part of Customary International Law it needs to satisfy State Practice and
Opinio Juris.

Satisfaction of criteria example -

“Syria is not a State since it doesn’t satisfy the requirements set forth under the
Montevideo Convention.

Syria doesn’t have a defined civilian population, due to the refugee situation and lack of any
effective government registry for accounting of population post the civil war. They don’t
have a defined civilian population either since most people are non-combatants, under CIHL,
and not civilians owing to the fact that it is a Non-international Armed Conflict.

Syria doesn’t also have a defined territory, since a defined territory requires exercise of
jurisdiction over the entirety of territory and not parts of and since that part keeps changing due
to the Islamic State and rebels - they don’t have a defined territory [Use effective control
requirements].

They neither have a capacity to enter into relations, since most embassies have left the
Syrian Arab Republic, the Head of State has had his diplomatic immunity revoked by a
number of countries and they’ve been voted out of major multi-national organisations.

17 | P a g e
 They neither have a government; It is ruled by a dictator whose elections were called into
question by most organisation. There has been no adherence to the constitutional amendments
of 2012 regarding elections and term of office and don’t have the capacity to hold new
elections. The representative parties of government considers the other half of the government
illegitimate, and both are correct: one regime took power by

through force, and the other is supported by UN designated terror groups. There is no
legal governing body.”

Interpretational example -

Article 59 of the ICJ Statute

The decision of the Court has no binding force except between the parties
and in respect of that particular case.

To me, this Article doesn’t make sense since;

1. Written submissions by parties part of proceedings include past ICJ judgements,

oral argumentation before the Court includes past judgements , the Court itself uses
past judgements when it gives its judgements (Article 38(d)) – the exception is for
it to be binding. This makes the judicial decision arbitrary since in a broad
spectrum Public International Law isn’t regional, nor is it situational.

2. In the Barcelona Traction Case, the Court created a distinction between the obiter
dicta (general observations of the Court, therefore non-binding as precedent) and
the ratio descidendi (application of law specific to the facts of the case, binding as
precedent), the moment it does this it accepts the Common Law notion of a
judgement (division of a judgement into two parts - binding as precedent and non-
binding as precedent). The ICJ in this case, divided the judgement into two parts,
18 | P a g e
 therefore implying that there was a part that is not binding as precedent along with
a part that is - and therefore violating Article 59 by having a part that is binding as
precedent.

3. In Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, Nigeria

objected to the use of a past judicial decision and the Court responded with asking
‘why there was a need to not follow it’ while also affirming Article 59. I think these
are two contradictory things, since if you say that, “Past judicial decisions need not
be followed, but, why should we not follow it.” And then proceed to give a binding
judgement to someone who is not supposed to be bound by

the law in the first place – you’ve contravened their rights (not be held accountable to
laws they are under no obligation to follow) and the Statute (decision of the Court has
no binding force except between the parties and in respect of that particular case).
Exactly what the Court did in the above mentioned case.

[Not to be condescending, but if this was tough to understand, don’t worry, I’ve researched on
this – so I used it as an example. I’m sure if there’s an issue where you’re well researched and
I’m not, your arguments will go over my head. Forget the substance, the part that you need to
focus on is that I looked at the law and came to my conclusion through research and logic.]

Therefore, after concluding that I disagree, substantively and logically, with Article 59, my
objective would be to ‘delete Article 59 from the Statute of the ICJ’. This is far-fetched, but I,
along with all of you am a member of the United Nations and have the power and authority to
make that suggestion.

19 | P a g e
 How to Lobby Well & Utilise Un-
Moderated Caucuses
While mentioning an ideal Model UN performance, we talk of several things- sound
argumentation, good presentation of facts, an awareness of foreign policy and then and only
then do we get to lobbying. Canvasing your stand to make it appealing to other delegates seems
demeaning to say the least and downright horrific in its extremes. I, however would argue that
lobbying perhaps is the most potent tool delegates can employ to their advantage. I would
further claim that lobbying is not just a device used when the debate is un-moderated (although
we will mention those later), it can also be skilfully employed during formal debate. This is
done by employing the basics of rhetoric into your speeches to make them more appealing.

Before I delve into the specifics of how to do that, I must mention that while rhetoric is important-
you will note that this acts as a supplement and not a substitute for the facts, under no
circumstances should you ever confuse this distinction. First, you must establish credibility
among your peers, i.e. they should , at least at some level- be able to trust your argument- even if
they disagree. This does not mean that you should resort bullying or intimidation. This in fact
means that you should actively be seeking to help the delegates around you. You should be a
patient listener, and not just listen to contradict. This would ensure that you build a rapport with
the delegates and ensure that you have the votes when you need it at resolution time. Second you
must drive home one consistent theme in your solutions. Generally what happens with delegates
is that we try to solve too many things too quickly and result in solving nothing. A simple cure for
this can be ensuring that all of the solutions you give have one broad underlying theme. This
theme can be in consonance with your foreign policy, your debate strategy or can be a driving part
of the mandate of the committee that you’re participating in. Doing this will actually clarify your
stance, and that is much easier to explain in un-moderated caucuses.

Finally keep in mind that the points you make are well substantiated- because refuting an
argument is easy while doing so with a fact is virtually impossible. Once you’ve done this- you
now stand on a very firm ground with the delegates and that would mean that you need not
scramble at the end to lobby effectively. This finally brings us to what needs to be done during
those unmods. There are a couple of things that you can do:

 Do not shout or scream, you might think you are getting them to their side while all you’d be
doing would be driving them away.

2. Never seek to negotiate a partnership with someone who is demonstrably on different

ideological plain that you are- you would only waste your time, instead go for the undecided
section and the neutral delegates- they are your best hopes.

 Keep a placard with you at all times so that you are easily recognised.

20 | P a g e
 4. And finally go with a certain objective that needs to be achieved during the session- this will
help you from meandering. I hope this helps you to lobby well in the conference.

21 | P a g e
 RAISING POINTS OF ORDER
A point of Order is when you correct a factual inaccuracy.
Therefore when you raise a point of order against a delegate, you ask the Executive Board to
determine which fact is accurate. By doing this, the Executive Board has to reaffirm a fact that
has been deemed to be accurate.

In Order The incorrect fact has been pointed out and corrected.

Not in Order The incorrect fact has either not been pointed out or has not been corrected, or both.

Out of Order Not within our powers to rule, i.e, it is subject to interpretation.

Everything in blue is a Point of Order raised by a delegate.

1. If the fact in question is an absolute/ defined truth

a. The delegate stated that “The capital of India is Islamabad.” However

the capital of India is actually New Delhi.

b. The delegate stated that “The current Secretary General of the United
Nations is Barack Obama.” This is untrue, the current Secretary General
is Ban ki Moon.

I did two things, point out the factual inaccuracy and correct the incorrect fact. Both of these

will be ruled “In Order.”

2. If the fact in question is correct

The delegate stated that, “the capital of India is New Delhi.” However the capital of
India is actually Islamabad.

This will be ruled “Not in Order.”

3. If the fact in question can’t be decided by the Executive Board

a. The delegate said, “There exists an International Armed Conflict in Syria.”

However there is no International Armed Conflict, there is a

22 | P a g e
 NonInternational Armed Conflict affirmed by the Office of the Prosecutor
of the ICTY.

Understand that, both Armed Conflicts have criteria that need to be fulfilled we can’t decide
whether the criteria are fulfilled or not, that is subject to the interpretation of the delegates.
Further, there is no authority declaring that there exists an Armed Conflict in any State the
greatest authority we can get, is a Security Council Resolution. So even if it was :
The delegate said, “There exists an International Armed Conflict in Syria.” However there is no
International Armed Conflict, there is a NonInternational Armed Conflict affirmed by UNSC
Resolution xyz.
And we were sitting inside a United Nations body, having the obligation to follow a Security
Council Resolution (Art 25, UN Charter), it would still be up to the interpretation of delegates
whether the situation has changed since the date of the passage of the Resolution.

b. The delegate said, “R2P exists as Customary International Law.” However

R2P does not exist as CIL since it does not satisfy the requirements under
Article 38.1.b of the ICJ Statute.

Again, Article 38.1.b of the ICJ Statute has two requirements, and the Executive Board
cannot say as factwhether the requirements are satisfied or not.
Both of these Points will be ruled “Out of Order” (Not within our powers to rule)

4. If the fact in question is not clearly found within the content of an Article.

The delegate said, “Article 51 recognises the right of self defence against NonState
Actors.” However Article 51, nowhere mentions Non- State Actors.

Three things,
a. It can be interpreted to include NonState Actors since it is open ended and only
specifies “armed attack against a member of the UN” and not by whom the Armed
Attack is conducted.

23 | P a g e
 b. It can be interpreted to include NonState Actors since UNSC Resolution 1373
recognised the right of the USA to exercise the right of selfdefence through Article
51 against NonState Actors.
c. It can be interpreted to include NonState Actors since Article 51 doesn’t expressly say
“Article 51 does not include NonState Actors” (Certain Expenses Case of the
International Court of Justice). SO until and unless the Article rejects the idea of
NonState Actors under its ambit, it is considered to include it since it is left open ended.

This point will be ruled “Out of Order.”

5. If it is not a fact in question at all.

Usage of “must”, “should”, “We/I believe” etc. It becomes an opinion, and not a fact, and
you cannot correct an opinion.

This point will be ruled “Out of Order”

6. Logical Fallacies.

Contradictions and logical fallacies cannot be corrected via a Point of Order.

a. The delegate said, “We should attack Russia to make peace with it.” But it is not
possible to make peace and attack at the same point in time.
b. The delegate said, “If we starve Ukraine its people will be happy.”
But people cannot be happy if they are starving.

These are sound arguments, but no fact was stated and hence no fact can be corrected, it is again
the opinion, understandably illogical, of the delegate.

This Point will be ruled “Out of Order”.

7. Incomplete facts.
The delegate said, “UNSC Resolution xyz talks about ceasefire.” However, it also
talks about humanitarian corridors.

Here, the fact was understandably incomplete yet not incorrect. This Point will

be ruled “Out of Order”.

24 | P a g e
 8. Nonexistence of fact.
The delegate said, “There is a country named xyz.” However there exists no
terrorist organisation called xyz.

This ruling is more interesting, the burden of proof here is on the person who named the
country so up till the point that the person does the Point of Order is ruled in favour of the
delegate who raises the Point of Order.

However, this is often misused by delegates to keep raising Points of Order like these, some
Executive Boards will down mark you if you consistently raise Points of Order contesting the
existence of something and it is in many cases found that the fact is true and does exist.

9. Points in Order

a. The delegate said, “Since the troops are not wearing their State’s
insignia/emblems they are not under any obligation during an Armed conflict.”

However, the troops are under an obligation even if they aren't wearing insignia of the State,
Article 37 of the Geneva Convention Additional Protocol 1, relating to Perfidy or deception.

b. The delegate said, “The Exclusive Economic Zones of the UK and Norway do
not overlap.” However, this is untrue since the Exclusive Economic Zones extend
to 200 nautical miles from the coast of the state and UK and Norway’s maritime
distance is less than that.

These are some of the interesting Points of Order I have come across, both of these Points have
been affirmed by Courts and Commissions, but regardless the first is the existence of an
obligation which is easy to establish, there always exists an obligation to do/not do something
it depends upon the strength of the obligation.
The second, is an absolute fact; distance, disguised in law. General Comments:

25 | P a g e
 1. When raising a Point of Order, always substantiate with proof, without proof it
won’t be ruled in your favour.
2. Don’t misuse Points of Order intentionally to disrupt the performance of another
delegate, it is highly disrespectful and looked down upon.
3. Don’t raise Points of Order which have no real importance, i.e;
4. The delegate said, “Article 1 subclause b” However it is actually 1 subclause
c.’It is probable the delegate himself/herself know that they made a mistake in
the flow of their speech.
5. Use Points of Order to refute the fundamental argument someone is making to
create an actual impact, if Russia defends its troops in Crimea by saying nothing
unlawful has been done by Russian troops, raise the Point of order regarding
deception that will defeat the fundamental argument that nothing unlawful is
being done.

These are some of the Points of Order I have come across, and I just wanted to share with you
my opinion on how to go about Points of Orders.

26 | P a g e
 How to Tackle Crisis
Simulations
A Crisis is something that has become something of a showstopper in committees at MUNs
today. I honestly don’t understand why such a big deal is made of them, but apparently it’s the
end of the world. In some cases quite literally.
This text is just me explaining how I think about a crisis as a delegate and how I try to make one
as a Chair. Usually by day 2, overly excited delegates start asking their EB for a crisis. I’ve been
asked that question too many times now and somehow I never really have an answer. I usually
haven’t planned the timing of my crisis. I wish the world notified me a few hours before one
strikes. No I wouldn’t avert it; I’d just have made a killing in the stock market. Anyway jokes
aside, an EB does not plan the timing of their crisis. Ever. No EB wants to disrupt a committee
that is debating healthily and developing their ideas collectively and positively. In an ideal
scenario, an EB wouldn’t introduce one at all. However at times the EB does find it necessary to
plug in a pair of jumper cables and spark the debate back to life, which is where a crisis comes in.
I speak for myself and a lot of other EBs I have observed when I say that we intend to introduce a
crisis that is as realistic as possible. Both realistic as well as subtle. That is something a lot of
delegates tend to miss out on. No EB working professionally would want to spark of another
World War in an update. Crisis updates are where EBs can get creative and hence even a realistic
crisis will have subtle intricacies which any EB hopes delegates will catch on to. As a delegate,
try to get into the head of your Executive Board. Any update will have a couple of key lines that
the EB wants you to catch onto. Try and find them. There will be an obvious path to the crisis.
While the path will sound fairly simple and straightforward, most delegates will see it too while
the EB has anyway kept that in mind while formulating the update. Look for alternative paths.
Look for avenues of discussion that haven’t been touched upon in the normal course of debate.
Very often, EBs insert these subtle intricacies in the language of the update as well. Yes, they
can be extremely sadistic at times. What I would emphasize on most is, give yourself time to
think. Do not jump into debate right after an update is introduced. You do not need to be the first
speaker once an update is introduced. Read the update in your head multiple times, jot down the
thoughts that pop into your head and try and develop these ideas. Listen carefully. Your fellow
delegates might initiate a brilliant train of thought in your head. Listen to the angles that they are
trying to approach the situation with and try and build upon the interesting ones. I repeat: the best
thing you can do when an update is introduced is to give yourself time. One final suggestion to
you will be, don’t let the update sway you from your position. Sometimes the EB will try to
introduce an update that tests your understanding of your country’s foreign policy. Do not second
guess what you’ve read and understood. Stick to your guns (maybe even literally). The EB might
try to convolute your understanding of your country’s policy through their crisis but you need to
learn to trust your research and withstand the doubt that has been incepted in your head. That’s all
folks. I hope this helps you in the competitions to come. For any queries you can contact us on
eloquencej128@gmail.com
27 | P a g e