This recap was provided by David Sarkisyan, President of the General Assembly at the Inter-University Model United Nations 2013 in Yerevan, Armenia.

David Sarkisyan (third from right) and the directors of the UNGA Plenary pose for a photo. (Photo Courtesy of UN Armenia)

The marvelous story of the Inter-University Model United Nations 2013 (Yerevan) began in late August this year at the UN Department of Public Information. The highly successful I-U MUN 2013 that received wide media coverage in Armenia and appreciation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was “a meal that had been cooked for more than three months”. And I would like to share that story with you.

I-U MUN 2013 became an unprecedented phenomenon for Armenia mainly for two reasons: it was to be the first Inter-University Model UN organized here under the high patronage of UNDPI and it was to be the first General Assembly simulated. The goal was ambitious and so was the team. By the way, the organizing crew was selected from the UNDPI interns and employees, who had had a vast MUN experience in local and international simulations, and led by the Information Officer of the same division – Armineh Haladjian. The delegates-participants came from three leading national universities and were carefully selected (being mostly greatly experienced in the field of MUNs and other simulations). When it came to choosing the topic we did not hesitate much and grabbed the most actual and troublesome issue possible that was on the agenda of world politics – the Syrian issue. The urgency of the problem was even doubled for Armenia because of our large diaspora in Syria, the wave of immigration and just everybody’s feeling for his or her relatives living there, as well as the whole nation in trouble.

Delegates caucus during the UNGA. (Photo courtesy of UN Armenia)

Having decided on the topic we have set the format of the two-day MUN. The first day was dedicated to the parallel sessions of the three main committees of the General Assembly and on the second day we gathered for the plenary session of the GA itself in the luxurious hall of the UN House Yerevan generously provided to us for that occasion. Speaking about the format I cannot avoid mentioning the two principles that were at the core of the I-U MUN: cooperation and competitiveness. Each state was represented by a team of three delegates selected from each of the three universities to participate separately in the sessions of the three committees. In the GA plenary the three delegates were defending interests of their respective countries jointly as a country delegation. This required a lot of team work and cooperation during both the preparatory period and the conference itself. Besides that a special award for the best position paper was introduced to further encourage the fruitful team work. At the same time aside from the competition between the individual participants the universities were competing with one another too. The MUN participants themselves elected the second-best and best delegates of each committee and of the General Assembly. At the end, based on the cumulative scores received, that were set for the above-mentioned nominations, and the winning university of the conference was announced.

Perhaps another important factor in the preparation was the wide use of social media and namely the activity in Facebook groups created for this purpose, where delegates shared information, negotiated and lobbied on-line. But what is of no less importance about those groups is that they help the relationship to last and contribute greatly to the development of Armenian MUN networking.

Delegates pose for a photo in the UNGA plenary. (Photo courtesy of UN Armenia)

However, I-U MUN 2013 would not have been what it was without its intense and really great preparation period. A whole MUN-school course was organized for the delegates prior to the conference. It included trainings on UN role and activity in international relations, issue-related seminars, trainings on Model UN itself (adapted to the format of I-U MUN 2013) and last but not the least speeches delivered by the top UN officials followed by Q&A sessions. All these activities were performed by UN staff members with the highest qualifications, the leading professors in the field of Arabic studies, high-ranking officials, as well as experienced MUN trainers.

All in all, I would like to mention that it was the best MUN out of numerous simulations I had in my life. I am not speaking only about the quality of debate or resolution adopted but also about the friends that I got, skills that I learned and all the beautiful feelings I experienced during this wonderful adventure called Inter-University Model United Nations 2013.

When I was attending my first Security Council crisis simulation, the worst thing I could imagine was to represent an observer state, without any real power to affect the direction the committee is taking. Needless to say, when I received the email with details about country assignments, I was assigned an observer country. Although my first response was very much disappointing, I soon realized that it may not be that bad at all.

While the first impression of most new delegates about the observer states is: powerless observers of the action of the committee; this is to a big extend wrong perception. Although observers don’t have voting rights and are thus deprived of considerably important element of the simulation, they have other similarly effective “tools” on their disposal. As I soon learn, observer state is indeed one of the most challenging positions in the committee, requiring lots of creativity and knowledge, however if you play your role well, you are in the pretty good position to win awards.

1. They are talking about you – BE ACTIVE!

When talking about observer states, we must realize that they are present in the committee with a reason and that is because they are of significant value and importance to the situation on the ground. In most cases the crisis the committee is dealing with is evolving either on the territory, in the region, or is in any other way substantially connected to the observer country. Realizing this, the most powerful “toll” of any observer country is direct action on the ground. Therefore delegates representing observer countries should be very active sending their notes to the crisis staff and handling things at their “homefront”.

2. Find an ally

Another important goal of any observer state is to find a reliable ally between countries with voting rights. Since as an observer state you are not allowed to write a resolution or submit amendments to the resolution, you will need somebody to do that for you. Usually the most suitable ally will be a medium-strong delegate, preferably a permanent five member, who you will be able to control and pass your proposals to be addressed at the committee, while he will still be strong enough to suitably represent your position. You should let him get some credit for representing your position, however make sure that the committee is well aware of the original author of the ideas.

3. “Do your homework”

Observer has to be very active in lobbying and diplomacy. You have to persuade other delegates with strong arguments, “silent diplomacy” and decisive action on the ground. That means that when you are representing observer state which is directly involved in the crisis, you have to do your homework and be very well prepared. You have to know the situation on the ground in detail, know the details of any international contracts or documents regarding the situation and understand how different actions and actors affect each other. While you cannot vote, you can persuade fellow delegates with facts and strong speeches.

Although skeptical at the beginning of my first crisis committee as an observer state, I finished the simulation strong, barely missing the best delegate award and finishing on the 2nd place. Needless to say the best delegate award was won by the second observer state in the committee. Therefore if you are assigned an observer state, don’t panic, prepare well, follow the tips I wrote about and you should be among serious candidates for the best delegate award!

This recap was provided by Andrew Wirt, Secretary-General of Georgia Tech Model United Nations (GTMUN) XVI.

Fifteen years since its inception in 1998, the Georgia Tech Model United Nations Conference (GTMUN) continued its tradition of excellence and professionalism in its sixteenth session October 14-15, 2013. Over eight hundred high school students participated in lively debate at GTMUN XVI, tackling issues ranging from bioterrorism to cyber warfare and aviation. And while delegates encountered the thirteen traditional and two crisis committees characteristic of the GTMUN conference, they also enjoyed the unique opportunity to advance the transformative vanguard of GTMUN XVI.

GTMUN XVI staff poses for a photo op.

2013 was a year of many firsts for the conference. For the first time in over a decade, the Burdell Cup– the conference’s premier award– found a new victor in the hands of Gulf Coast High School, who received five Outstanding Delegate awards and 7 Honorable Mentions. Incumbent and rival Port Charlotte High School competed with a strong showing of four Outstanding Delegate awards and six Honorable Mention designations, while Georgia’s Centennial High School garnered five Honorable Mentions.

Placards are set up in one of GTMUN’s fifteen committees.

Elsewhere, the success of GTMUN XVI resonated through exemplary guest debate and discussion. At opening ceremonies, GTMUN hosted a panel of the role of Atlanta and its students in the international community. The Honorable Paul Gleeson and Deputy Consul General Thomas Wülfing reinforced the support of students from the international community, representing the governments of Ireland and Germany, respectively. It was a message further fortified in commentary from Global Citizenship Fellow Ms. Betsy Root (UNICEF-USA), Chief of Protocol for the Mayor’s Office of International Affairs Mr. Noah Downer, and Atlanta City Councilman Mr. Kwanza Hall. Chair of Georgia Tech’s Sam Nunn School of International Affairs Mr. Joseph Bankoff moderated the lively discourse. At closing ceremonies, a similar sentiment resounded in Canadian Consul General Steve Brereton’s address to students regarding their role in the global community.

Secretary-General Andrew Wirt (left) assists staff with typing resolutions.

GTMUN XVI bore witness to innovations in awards and documentation of the delegates’ experiences. The conference maintained its technological prowess in developing an automated awards Java program, leading to a more unbiased and speedy awards process. The GTMUN XVI Secretariat further reached delegates through a reinvigorated Facebook and Twitter campaign. And the development of a new Press Corps leaves the conference and its delegates with countless memories to relive– memories of a successful conference– as the newest Secretariat works toward next year.

The world lost a highly decorated and influential figure today as Nelson Mandela succumbed to a longstanding illness at age 95. His legacy stretched across many nations, and in a number of ways, he embodied the ideals upon which Mode UN is built. His life was spent overcoming adversity, fighting for change, and upholding an ideal of optimism, and he died as one of the most widely respected symbols for peace and humanitarian progress ever recognized in our collective global history.

Nelson Mandela lived as a symbol for hope and change.

There are many controversial figures in international politics. The heroes of one nation are the terrorists of another, and many names carry a polarized familiarity that evokes pride and admiration to some, and fear and rage to others. It is in the nature of our cultural differences to disagree on who we will remember in fame, and who we will remember in infamy, but there are few would argue against the description of Nelson Mandela as deserving of his fame. He was a figure that touched the world in ways few would think possible, and one that we, as a global community of students, teachers, competitors, and delegates, can look to for poignant lessons of leadership and morality as we move toward change.

“A good leader can engage in debate frankly and thoroughly, knowing that at the end he and the other side must be closer, and thus emerge stronger.” When we debate one another, whether in simulation or real committees, we often forget that it is with the intention of moving closer to compromise. As students who strive to make a difference, we must hold that message at the forefront of our minds and remember that our ultimate goal is to come together through cooperative debate.

“It is better to lead from behind and put others in front, especially when you celebrate victory when nice things occur. You take the front line when there is danger. Then people will appreciate your leadership.” The question of what makes a good leader is one that is intimately tied to Model UN. We discuss it constantly as we learn to control blocs, question the strategies of “power delegates” and employ tricks to heighten our appeal as leaders. But there is no tip or trick that can substitute the qualities of a true leader. Nelson Mandela answered this question that we have discussed so extensively in fewer words than we have used to ask it. A true leader, in Model UN and the world, is not the leader that faces victory and success alone, but the one that lets their followers become their best, stepping in to support them in the face of adversity.

“There is no passion to be found in playing small-in settling for a life that is less than the one you are capable of living.” Today we are small. Each of us is one delegate among tens of thousands. But through our ambitions, and our refusal to ever accept less than our best, we become great. Model UN gives us the skills to face a world of global challenges, to navigate a polarized political environment, and to act as advocates for change. Having these skills, it is our responsibility to make a difference. Not all of us will become diplomats. It is quite possible that very few of us will even choose to enter the world of international politics. But that does not lessen our responsibility to apply what we have learned as delegates and advisors change the world for the better. We must remember that Model UN is a stepping stone, the path we take toward accomplishing great things and bringing change to the world.

Today we should remember and honor a great and influential man, but in the coming weeks, months, and years, we should look ahead to what we are going to do as living advocates for change and the world’s future leaders. Nelson Mandela’s time as a leader for peace has come to a close, but his legacy and the lessons he has taught us about leadership and change will never lose their potency.

This article was originally published by Prathm under the title “MUN Made Easy: 10 Things You Should Know Before Your First Conference”. Original article here

이 기사는 Prathm의 MUN Made Easy: 10 Things You Should Know Before Your First Conference을 번역 한 기사 입니다.

처음으로 모의유엔 회의에 참석하고, 난생 겪어보지 못한 새로운 경험을하고, 그리고 무엇을 어떻게 해야할지 모를떄, 이것은 아마 모두의 악몽일 것입니다. 다들 모의유엔이 쉽다고들 하고, 하면서 배울수있다고들 말합니다. 하지만, 만약 당신이 당신의 모의유엔 경력을 성공으로 시작하고 싶다면 첫번쨰 회의에 준비된 자세로 나타나야 합니다. 개인적으로 처음 모의유엔을 시작햇을떄는 저도 얼떨떨하고 뭐가 뭔지 몰랏고 그 첫번쨰 회의가 끝나갈쯤 무렵 아래와 같은 10가지를 숙지하고 회의에 참석할껄 하는 후회를 햇습니다.

1.   UN이 뭔지 알아야합니다. 그렇습니다 여러분들이 아는 전세계의 문제를 해결하는 국제연합 United Nations입니다. 하지만 어떻게 문제를 해결할까요? 첫번째 회의에 갈떄 당신은 UN이 국제사회의 통치기구이고 각 나라들이 따라야하는 법을 만드는 기관이라는것 정도로 알고있을겁니다. 하지만 현실에서는 UN은 아무런 구속력을 가지지 못하고 나라들이 강제적으로 모든 결의안에 따라야 하는것은 아닙니다. UN은 많은 각 나라의 대표들이 자기나라의 이익을 대표하고 그 나라와 전세계의 발전을 위해 협상하는 여러개의 위원회들로 이루어져 있습니다.

뉴욕에 위치한 UN본부

2.   모의유엔이 뭔지 알아야합니다. 다행이도 당신은 이미 MUN이 뭔지쯤에 대한 생각은 가지고 있습니다. UN의 시뮬레이션이라고 말이죠. 하지만 MUN은 그이상입니다. 간단하게 말하자면 MUN은 외교력을 겨루는 대회입니다. 대부분의 경우에 참가자들은 나라를 배정받고 그 나라에 좋은쪽의 결의안을 통과시키기 위해 그나라의 입장을 대변합니다. 협상, 연설, 문서/결의안 작성 그리고 외교적 역량을 가장 잘 보여준 참가자들은 상을 받습니다. 결론은 모의유엔은 유엔의 미미한 시뮬레이션이라기 보다는 위의 능력들을 기르는데 목적을 두고 존재합니다.

3.   다른 위원회들을 숙지하고 있어야합니다. UN에는 크게 3 부류의 위원회가 있습니다.

• 정기총회 GA (General Assemblies): DISEC(Disarmament and International Security Committee, 군축안보위원회), ECOFIN(Economic and Finance Committee, 경제재무이사회), SOCHUM (Social, Cultural, and Humanitarian), SPECPOL(Special Political and Decolonization), Administrative and Budgetary, Legal 이렇게 여섯개의 위원회가 모여서 정기총회를 구성합니다. 가장 큰 위원회이고 구속력이 없는 결의안들을 통과시킵니다.
•  특수 위원회: 특수 위원회들은 항상 UN을 시뮬레이션하는건 아니지만 UN을 시뮬레이션 할 시에는 14개의 ECOSOC 위원회중 하나를 모방합니다. 이러한 위원회는 또한 다른 타입의 위원회를 따라하기도 하는데 그 예로는 미국 국회와 올림픽 위원회가 있습니다. 주로 특수 위원회는 정기총회보다 규모가 작습니다.
• 위기 위원회: 이러한 위원회들은 각 나라 대표들이 위기 상황에 적응하도록 하는데 목적을 두고 고안되엇습니다. 위기 위원회는 과거 안전보장이사회에서부터 미래의 반란군 모임등과 같이 그 어떤것도 될수있습니다. 참가자들은 의장의 재량에 따라 위원회의 진행방향을 완전히 바꿀수 있는 위기상황을 항상 제공받습니다. 위기위원회는 모의유엔 회의중에서는 규모가 가장 작습니다.

4.   의사규칙을 알아야합니다. 참가자들이 “저”와 “저의”같은 1인칭 표현을 사용하지 않기 떄문에 처음 모의유엔 회의에 가는것은 혼란스러울수도 있습니다. 그 대신 참가자들은 의회의사 규칙을 따라갈것입니다. 당신이 한나라를 대표하기 때문에 그 나라의 입장을 그 나라를 대표해 표현하는게 중요합니다.  예를들면, “미국은 자원의 보존을 강력히 지지합니다”라고 표현해야합니다. 의회의사규칙은 아래와 같은 과정을 포함합니다;

• Point of Inquiry: 위원회의 어떤 한부분이 이해가 가지 않을때 질문하기 위해 사용됩니다.
• Point of Personal Privilege: 다른 대표의 말을 잘들을수 없는 상황같이 불편함을 겪고 있을떄 의장에게 예의를 갖춰 표현할수있습니다.
• Point of Order: 의장의 진행중 의사규칙에 위배되는 실수가 생겻을떄 사용됩니다.
• Motions: Motion들은 주로 위원회 진행이 새로운 과정에 접어들게 할떄 사용됩니다. 예를들면, 위원회가 Moderated Caucus나 투표로 넘어갈때 모션이 사용됩니다. 위원회 토론을 열거나 연기할떄도 사용됩니다.

5.   위원회의 진행 단계를 알아야합니다. 위원회 진행은 크게 4가지로 나뉩니다.

• Speakers List: Speakers List는 세션을 시작하고 주로 토론을 활성화 시키기보다는 의견 교류의 목적으로 사용됩니다. 이 과정에서, 참가자들은 아젠다에 관한 그 나라의 입장을 정해야 합니다.
•  Moderated Caucuses: Moderated Caucuses는 대부분의 경우에 Speakers List 바로 뒤에 이어지는 과정이고 좀 더 역동적인 토론을 조장합니다. 참가자들은 자기 자리에서 주어진 주제에 대한 발표를 하고 발표시간은 Speakers List보단 짧습니다. 이 과정에서 당신은 당신이 대표하는 나라의 정책과 솔루션이 왜 좋은지 주장해야합니다.
• Un-moderated Caucuses (Unmods): Unmods는 위원회 내에서 같은 방향성을 추구하는 블럭을 형성하고 working paper를 작성하는데 이용됩니다. 주로 Unmods는 여러번의 Moderated를 통해 의견들이 확실히 전달된 후에 열립니다. 이 과정에서 당신은 같은 블럭에서 협력할 다른 참가자들을 설득하거나, 결의안 초안 병합을 놓고 협상을하거나, working paper를 작성해야합니다. Unmoderated  Caucus때는 위원회 실을 자유롭게 돌아다닐수 있다는 특징이 있습니다.
•  Voting: Voting과정은 Motion에 의해 열리게 되며 일반적으로 위원회 진행과정의 마지막 부분에 위치합니다. Working paper는 위원회에 제출되면 결의안 초안이 되며 voting을 통해 통과가 되면 결의안이 됩니다.

6.   Working paper를 어떻게 작성하는지 알아야 합니다. working paper는 signatories, sponsors, pre-ambulatory clauses, and operative clause로 구성됩니다. Working paper는 위원회 아젠다에 대한 해결책을 담고있어야 합니다. ( link)

7.   리서치하는 법을 알아야합니다. 당신의 배경지식 가이드는 리서치의 전부가 아닙니다. 아젠다, 그 나라의 정책, 그리고 당신이 그 나라를 어떻게 대변할지를 공부하는것은 매우 중요합니다. 이 링크 (binder)를 통해 무엇을 리서치하고 어떻게 효과적으로 리서치 하는지 알아보세요.

8.   포지션 페이퍼 쓰는법을 알아야합니다. 대부분의 회의는 첫번쨰 세션에 앞서 당신에게 포지션 페이퍼라는 것을 쓰도록 할것입니다. 포지션 페이퍼는 3 파트로 나뉩니다; 주제 배경지식, 과거 해결책들, 그리고 그 나라의 정책. 더 자세한 설명은 이 곳들에서 (here, here) 찾아볼수있습니다.

9.   국가의 자주권이 뭔지 알아야합니다. 이 단어는 위원회 진행 내내 언급될 것입니다 만약 당신이 이 단어가 뭘 뜻하는지 이해하고있지 않다면 회의를 이해하는데 어려움을 겪을 것입니다. 자주권이란, 핵심만 말해서, 한 나라가 원하는 대로 통치할수있는 능력과 외부 개입을 거부할수있는 권한을 말합니다. UN은, 대부분의 경우에, 한 나라의 자주권을 침해 할수없고 그 나라의 의지에 위배되는 행동을 강요할수없습니다.

10.   즐길줄 알아야합니다. 많은 사람들이 처음 모의유엔에 가면 위축됩니다. 가끔씩 회의장에 파워델리겟(무슨 방법을 통해서라도, 올바르던 올바르지 못하던, 오로지 상타는 것에만 관심이 있는 참가자들)이 있을수도 있고, 당신 자신이 대중 앞에서 연설하는것을 두려워 할수도 있습니다. 그렇다고 당신이 모의유엔을 즐길수 없는것은 아닙니다. 당신의 첫번쨰 모의유엔을 통해 미래에 성공적인 대표단이 될수있는 역량을 키우고 미래에 성공할수있는 발판을 마련하는 경험과 정보를 얻는것만큼 갚진일은 없습니다.

이와 비슷한 팁에 대해 더 읽어보고 싶으면 우리 페이지의 “Resources” 섹션을 방문해 보세요.

사진 출처: United Nations

This article was originally published by Andrew under the title “Standing Out In Large Committees: 10 Tips to Succeed in GAs”. Original article here

이 기사는 Andrew가 작성한 “Standing Out In Large Committees: 10 Tips to Succeed in GAs”의 번역 기사 입니다.

누구에게나 그렇듯이 200명이 넘는 정기총회 GA 위원회에서 돋보이기란 쉽지 않은 일입니다. 심지어 숙달된 참가자들에게도 스피치를 하고, Un-moderated Caucus를 이끌고, 결의안 그룹을 리드하는 과정을 통해 GA에서 성공을 거두는것은 어려운 일입니다. 자 이쯤에서 이런 큰 사이즈의 위원회에서 성공하는 10가지의 시도와 테스트를 통해 검증된 팁을 드리도록 하죠.

1.   위원회에 일찍 갑니다.

첫번째 세션에 앞서 25분에서 30분정도 일찍 도착하도록 노력하는것은 정말 중요합니다. 의장에게 당신이 준비되고 성실한 참가자라고 보여줄수있는 정말 좋은 기회입니다.

2.   좋은 자리를 맡아야 합니다.

아마 GA에서 성공하는 방법중 가장 간과되는 부분은 자리를 잡는 일 일것입니다. 200여명이 넘는 위원회에서 좋은 자리를 잡으면 의장에 의해 몇번의 발언권을 더 주어지는 아주 값진 차이를 만들어 낼것입니다. 일반적으로, 3번쨰에서 5번째 줄의 복도쪽에 자리 잡는것이 발언권 수의 차이를 만들어내는 “sweet spot”입니다.

3.   최대한 많은 참가자들에게 자기 자신을 알리세요.

많은 사람들에게 자기를 알려서 뭐하겟냐고 하겟지만 많은 참가자들과 인사를 나누고 대화를 하는것은 엄청난 이점을 가져다 줄수있습니다. 정책에대한 생각을 나누고, 서로 공유하는 가치를 찾고, 가능한 해결책을 만들어서 결의안 그룹 형성을 쉽게할수 있습니다.

4.   의사규칙을 자신에게 유리하게 사용하세요

그렇지 않은 사람들에 비해 의사규칙을 자신에게 유리한 쪽으로 사용하는것은 엄청난 도움이 됩니다. Moderated Caucus를 특정한 길이로 설정하거나, caucus 처음 또는 마지막에 발언하거나, Un-moderated caucus를 제안해서 다른 caucus를 무효로 만드는 방법등을 통해 위원회 회의의 흐름을 자신에게 유리한 방향으로 바꿀수있습니다.

5.   발언시간을 현명하게 사용하세요

GA같은 큰 규모의 위원회에서는 자기가 원하는 만큼 발언할수 없을지도 모릅니다.  발언권을 얻기 위해 플래카드를 최대한 많이 들고 의장에게 인식되는것은 중요합니다. 그리고 발언시간이 제한되있기 때문에 발언에 앞서 무엇을 말할지 계획해야 합니다. 또한 발언을 할때 자기 나라를 자주 언급하는것도 도움이 됩니다. 이 방법을 통해 다른 나라 대표들은 당신을 당신의 나라 이미지와 매치시켜 기억하고 당신의 존재감은 확고해질것입니다.

플래카드를 많이 드는것은 발언권의 획득하는 좋은 방법입니다.

6.   의장과 좋은 관계를 유지하세요.

결국에 수상자를 결정하는 것은 당신의 의장단 입니다. 당연히 상을 타는것은 당신의 노력에 대한 대가가 되어야 하지만 의장과 좋은 관계를 형성하는것도 부수적인 도움이 될수 있습니다. 맨 처음 세션떄 정중하게 당신을 의장단에게 소개하고 그 이후의 세션에서도 항상 감사의 표현을 하십시오. 또한, 의장단들에게 위원회 진행 방향이 만족스러운지 물어보려고 노력하세요. 당신의 의장단은 당신이 위원회 토론의 질을 향상 시키려는 노력을 높게 살것입니다.

7.   외교적인 방법으로 Un-moderated caucus를 이끄십시오.

이런 큰 사이즈의 위원회에서는 Un-moderated caucus가 토론의 주된 형식인 이상 비공식 토론에 적극적으로 참여하는것은 매우 중요합니다. Unmods 그룹의 리더가 되기 위해 노력하세요. 이 과정에서 다른 구성원들도 자신들의 생각을 말할 기회가 공평하게 주어지도록 하고 그들의 아이디어가 잘 공유되도록 하는것도 명심해야합니다. 최대한 외교적인 방법을 이용하세요 그리고 심각한 마찰과 포인트와 목적이 없는 시간을 낭비하는 토론은 피하세요. 타협하는것이 MUN이란 게임의 핵심입니다. 그렇기에 최대한 많은 대표들이 unmods그룹에 참여하도록 유도하세요.

Unmods에서 존재감을 들어내고 당신의 의견이 잘 전달되도록 하세요.

8.   창의적인 정책 계획이 있어야합니다.

여러가지 정책 제안은 위원회에서 돋보이고 다른 대표들에게 인식되기 아주 좋은 방법입니다. 창의적인 포인트와 아이디어, 두문자어 그리고 문제 해결에 대한 독창적인 방법, 이 모든것이 당신의 정책 계획에 포함된다면 다른 대표들의 관심을 얻고 의장의 주목을 받게될것입니다.

9.   당신이 포함된 블럭에서 제출한 결의안의 대표가 되십시오.

결의안 초안을 제출할떄 위원회에 결의안을 소개하는 대표중 한명이 되기 위해 노력하세요. 당신의 결의안에 대해 많이 언급하고 당신이 주요 스폰서중 한명이엇다는 사실을 알리세요. 회의가 끝나갈떄쯤 다른 대표들이 당신의 결의안을 “*당신의 국가*가 제출한 결의안”이라고 칭하게 해야합니다. 그러면 의장은 제출된 결의안을 작성하는 과정을 당신이 이끌엇다는 것을 알게될것입니다.

10.   최대한 많은 국가의 정책을 알아야합니다.

당신이 맡은 국가의 정책에 대해 가장잘아야하는것은 당연한 것이지만 한단계 더 나아가 다른 나라의 정책까지 조사해 보는것은 매우 도움이 될것입니다. 다른 참가자들은 지식이 많은것 같은 대표 주변으로 모여들게 되있습니다. 많은 나라의 정책에 대해 앎으로서 당신은 그들을 도울수 있고 의장에게 리더쉽 능력을 어필할수 있게 됩니다.

Double delegation committees, whether in the General Assembly or Security Council, function differently than single delegation committees. Although the topic matters and procedure are similar, dual delegate committees also assess how effectively you work with your co-delegate. When I started competing with a co-delegate, I found it difficult to participate in a large committee and understand how to work with a partner in Model UN. Eventually, I learned a few helpful tips and strategies for succeeding as a double delegation:

1. Read up on both topics. Commonly, dual delegations divide their research. One delegate researches and writes the position paper on the first topic, while the other delegate does the same for the second topic. Although this method saves time, it leads to an uneven knowledge of the topics between you and your co-delegate, which can manifest itself during unmoderated caucus and impromptu speeches. To ensure that your country can actively participate on both topics in committee, try to be well-versed on both topics. Help your co-delegate on his/her topic by sending useful links, and review each other’s position papers.

Co-delegates should always try to make speeches together if the speaking time permits

2. Prepare and practice together. It’s important that committee isn’t the first time a dual delegation meets up. Co-delegates can prepare together by combining their articles, documents, and other information into one research binder and annotating its contents. In addition, double delegations should practice speeches and policies together. Meeting up before committee (and not just on the bus ride to the conference) helps smooth out the rough edges in your dual delegation’s performance.

3. Make speeches together. Giving great speeches as a double delegation shows teamwork. Plan out what both of you want to say beforehand, and alternate between who is speaking so the audience is more interested. Your double delegation’s first speech should ideally be drafted and practiced before entering committee. However, when speeches become more extemporaneous as committee progresses, don’t try to draft new speeches for you and your co-delegate. Instead, you can decide on 2-4 points to discuss and divide them between each other.

4. …unless time is an issue. For moderated caucuses and comments, the speaking time is usually 45 seconds or less, meaning that you only have time to get one or two points across effectively. In these cases, only one person from your double delegation should speak. One co-delegate can make a more persuasive comment or speech alone than both co-delegates trying to speak for around 15 seconds each.

5. Split up during unmoderated caucuses. Use your (human) resources efficiently! You and your co-delegate should rarely be standing side by side during unmod caucuses. Co-delegates can go to different caucus groups and later decide which one is best or whether to merge. Alternatively, one co-delegate can stay with a caucus group while the other can lobby and tell other countries to go to their group. As the committee begins forming resolutions, both of you should be doing separate tasks, such as resolution writing, lobbying, collecting signatories, etc. By splitting up, your double delegation can gain twice as much ground.

6. Play an equal role in committee. You want the committee to recognize your and your co-delegate as a team, so make sure both of you are active members in committee.

Communication between co-delegates is extremely vital (also, note the color coordination!)

7. Communicate with each other. This sounds obvious, but I personally believe that it’s a fundamental tip for double delegations. In my experiences in dual delegate committees, I’ve seen lack of communication lead to arguments and confusion between co-delegates. You will almost inevitable disagree with your co-delegate once or twice, but it should never inhibit your performance in committee. Both of you might be novices in a competitive, advanced committee. One of you might have a diplomatic approach in committee, while the other believes in aggressiveness. One co-delegate might be intent on gaveling, while the other delegate’s goal is just to have fun at the conference. Regardless of what difficulties your dual delegation faces, communication is key.

Bonus tip: Color coordinate! It’s both stylish and impressive.

Do you have any questions, additional tips, or opinions about double delegation strategy? If so, leave a comment!

In Part I, we went over some of the most commonly encountered personalities on the circuit and strategies for dealing with them. Now we turn our attention to the final two types of delegates, both of whom, while different as day and night in their strategies, are both masters of the MUN craft.

4. The Puppeteer

The Puppeteer, a unique fixture of the crisis committee, is the master (or mistress) of mayhem. Operating almost exclusively in secret directives sent to the chair and crisis staff, these delegates are the most dangerous of them all. The best Puppeteer will be able to control the entire committee without any of their fellow delegates noticing they’ve been strung up. The Puppeteer can be identified by the sky-high pile of notes hidden behind and beneath their placard, their furious scribbling on various pads of paper at all times, and the sly smile they cannot contain on their face when a crisis (presumably of their doing) is announced. The Puppeteer usually does not speak much in committee—if they’re doing their job right, they don’t have to. They will appropriate others’ assets, orchestrate assassinations, and utilize their portfolio powers to their fullest extent. In short, they are a force to be reckoned with.

Because of their secretive nature, the Puppeteer types are the most difficult to counteract in committee. However, there are measures you can take to ensure that you do not fall victim to one of the Puppeteer’s ploys. When assigned a role in a crisis committee, be sure to devote a good portion of your research to reading up on your fellow delegates in the committee. Scour the bios provided in the background guide and evaluate who your friends and enemies should be. Then delve deeper into historical data or current events to better inform your plan for alliances. Immediately upon entering committee, you should establish connections with your designated allies, and reach out to your “enemies” as well to gauge their personalities, strengths, and weaknesses. Be flexible, and be creative. After all, crisis committees are your chance to indulge your creative side. If you find you are bogged down with Bored Identities as allies or facing a Ringleader as a rival, you may have to rethink your plan of attack. Building a solid network of people you can rely on is crucial to ensuring that the Puppeteer will not be able to pull the proverbial wool over your eyes. However, treat every alliance you forge in a crisis committee with caution—you should trust no one fully, as the nature of a crisis committee is ever-changing. Any exchanges you have involving key or confidential information should be conducted through face-to-face conversations as much as possible; avoid writing sensitive information about your strategy or plans in notes, as the Puppeteer is notorious for intercepting communications between delegates and twisting the information they find in order to break alliances and cast aspersions on others’ intentions. If you think you may be dealing with a Puppeteer, you can always test the waters by feeding them some false or useless information, a red herring if you will, and observing what they do with the information. Do not spend too much of your time worrying about identifying the Puppeteer and trying to trick a confession out of your fellow delegates, however. Your primary focus should be determining who you can and cannot trust, and forging alliances that will allow you to successfully implement your plans and directives.

5. The Aspiring Kissinger

Finally, we have the crème de la crème, and the rarest of breeds, the Aspiring Kissinger. This delegate, while also a so-called “power delegate,” operates in a manner that is entirely distinct from the Ringleader, or even the Puppeteer. The Aspiring Kissinger, as the name implies, is diplomatic to the core. They do not view collaboration as weakness, but rather as a viable method of arriving at the best solution to the problem at hand. They lead by synthesizing, not stealing, everyone else’s ideas, and exude confidence and calm while doing so. They will be the delegate that personally approaches individuals and pulls them aside into a group to hash out a resolution based on everyone’s ideas. You’ll find them outside of the committee room rapidly typing up a mound of sheets of paper with their group’s clauses scrawled upon them. They will speak often and confidently, but with less of the bombast than some of the other types of delegates. Indeed, their practices and policies look very much like the strategies given above for dealing with the Ringleader. Ultimately, the Aspiring Kissinger does not view diplomacy and winning as separate agendas, but instead believes that being a diplomat is the key to doing well in a committee.

Although you will not need to do much to “counter” the Aspiring Kissinger, you should recognize that the doctrine of compromise they are prone to promote, while ideal, does not always happen in practice. Regardless of how perfect and reflective of the body’s opinion you think your resolution or directive is, there will always be at least one aspect of it that is entirely unpalatable to at least one person in the room. Therefore, in order to succeed, you must focus on the less-disputed points of your resolution and redirect any points of contention so that your fellow delegates will view your resolution as being overall beneficial to the goals of the committee, and worth their vote.

While the “types” of delegates examined in this article are, of course, generalizations based on recurring characters in committee and on the circuit, there are valuable lessons to be learned from studying these personalities and ways of working with them. Analyzing and evaluating your fellow delegates will help you formulate your own committee identity, exert influence over other delegates’ policies, positions, and agendas, and, most importantly, be the best delegate that you can be.

Missed “The Five People You Meet on the MUN Circuit, Part I—Common Characters”? Read it here.

 Have your own stories or experiences with these types of delegates, or have some more tips for success to share? Leave a comment below!

In Model UN, just as in life, you will meet the same type of person over and over again. Whether you walk into a committee in London or Lisbon, you will be met with familiar personalities wielding unfamiliar placards.  Model UN, and indeed, diplomacy, is just as much about politicking as it is about people. All the strategy in the world will be rendered useless if you are not able to connect with and lead the people around you. Therefore, a key component of succeeding at MUN is recognizing the types of delegates to expect in your committee and knowing how to counter their strategies. With this goal in mind, let’s take a look at some of the most common characters on the circuit and how to deal with them in a way that will optimize your chances of success in committee.

1. The Ringleader

Found more often in GAs than in crisis committees, the Ringleader is a fairly common breed.  The peacocks of the MUN world, these are the delegates whom you immediately notice upon entering your committee room for the first time.  Often garbed in devastatingly debonair attire, the likes of which you’re fairly certain you saw at one of Gatsby’s parties the night before, these delegates are not only smartly-dressed, but smart to boot.  Most of these delegates will doubtlessly have at least a couple of gavels to their name, and can be very intimidating to have as a fellow delegate.  The Ringleader will seize every opportunity to speak, and is not afraid to commandeer others’ ideas as their own, or to incorporate your ideas into their resolution without your explicit consent or knowledge, if they think it will help them succeed. Extremely confident, these delegates will seek to run the committee by securing the unconditional support of others. They will go to great lengths to make sure their resolution or position is the dominant one, and will work frequently outside the hours of committee in order to accomplish their goal. Working lunches or even breakfasts are familiar territory for the Ringleader, who is not afraid to ask others to work hard on their behalf in order to win. The Ringleader views MUN as a circus in which they are the main act, and will tirelessly endeavor to create and maintain the illusion of being the ringmaster.

But fear not, like peacocks, these delegates’ feathers can be easily ruffled. It is important to recognize that the Ringleader’s dog-eat-dog attitude may backfire or alienate a large portion of the committee. Openly criticizing the work of your fellow delegates without a constructive end or an alternate solution, as the Ringleader is wont to do, will gain you more enemies than friends. Instead, approach your rivals directly and see if you can work with them to come up with a solution that meets both of your goals or, failing that, form a group of supporters based on an alternate solution. Also recognize that the Ringleader, while they have no doubt put much effort into pre-committee preparation, may have cultivated only a general knowledge on the subject, relying more on their grandiloquence to get them by. Therefore, you should focus on building a base of specific knowledge on the given subject, (i.e. existing organizations and treaties) from which you can springboard your resolution or directives. Another smart move would be to come up with a title or slogan that aptly and catchily describes your resolution or position (witty or funny acronyms are a great way to accomplish this), so that your fellow delegates will be able to quickly identify your work, and your ideas can be easily disseminated throughout the committee. Lastly, you should focus on forming relationships—whether working relationships or friendships—with as many people as possible in your committee. Learn your fellow delegates’ names (their real names, not their countries or crisis names!), invite them to lunch or coffee to get to know them better (and not expressly to work), and socialize with them and their delegations after committee is done for the day. Doing so will maximize your popularity and influence within the committee, and naturally counteract the strategies of the Ringleader by showing others that you can simultaneously be friendly and approachable while also being a key player in committee.

2. The Bored Identity

The second most noticeable type of delegate in any committee is the Bored Identity, who, while also easy to pinpoint, is in many ways the antithesis of the Ringleader. These are the delegates who are largely uninterested or disengaged from the flow of committee. To give them the benefit of the doubt, it may be that the Bored Identity in your committee is simply a first-timer, and feels out of their depth with the whole MUN experience, in which case you should help them out where you can. But more often than not, the Bored Identity is a delegate who joined MUN solely because they heard about the awesome parties, who’s been on the circuit so long they’ve become jaded with the whole ordeal, or who is just along for the ride. The Bored Identity’s preferred habitat is the back of the room, where they can text and peruse the Internet without fear of being spotted, listlessly socialize with the delegates nearest to them, or easily duck out of the room during an unmod to fetch some Starbucks to keep them awake during the rest of the session. The Bored Identity usually shies away from speaking time or committee involvement (sometimes skipping sessions altogether), and for this reason, is also more often found in GAs or larger committees, where it is easier for them to avoid the limelight.

The Bored Identity does not pose a threat as an individual, but you should be wary of the Ringleader attempting to gather the votes or signatures of several of these delegates. For someone who has not been attuned to the goings-on of committee, the Ringleader can serve as an obvious and convenient guiding light during voting procedure. Thus, your task is to make sure you do not overlook the Bored Identity segment while lobbying for support for your resolution or directive. Keeping in mind that you should not accept clauses or additions to your work from those who have clearly been disconnected from the debate or do not display substantive knowledge on the subject at hand, you should still take a few minutes to introduce yourself and your ideas to these delegates, as well as listen to any feedback they may have. Their support may prove to be crucial to your success.

3. The Orator

While the Ringleader and the Bored Identity can be recognized by their actions (or lack thereof), the Orator can be identified by their words. The Orator is that delegate, in a crisis or a GA, who spends the vast majority of their time writing lengthy, flowery speeches that they then deliver to the committee with unyielding gusto and panache, whenever called upon. The Orator’s favorite thing to do is to give generic calls to action, challenging the committee to eliminate world hunger, foster world peace, and solve humanity’s issues. The Orator, while eloquent and full of flair, is often one step removed from committee, as they are more devoted to crafting their speeches than to following the flow of debate. Thus, the course of committee may not impact their speeches to the extent that other delegates’ speeches are influenced by the committee’s events. Sometimes the Orator will even come in with pre-written speeches and the goal of delivering each of these to the committee, regardless of whether or not it is particularly relevant at the time they are granted the floor.

Luckily, while the Orator’s speaking skills may be formidable, they are one of the easier types of delegates to deal with, as their agenda most likely will not cross paths with yours. The Orator can even be a valuable asset; if you are able to sway the Orator to your side, they may speak on your behalf or in support of your resolution or position, and in so doing, rally others to your cause. For this reason, it is worth sending a few notes to the Orator with your ideas and some general diplomatic overtures, but make sure you do not fall prey to having the Orator speak instead of you.

Read about the remaining two characters in “The Five People You Meet on the MUN Circuit, Part II—MUN Maestros.”

Have your own stories or experiences with these types of delegates, or have some more tips for success to share? Leave a comment below!

This recap was provided by Secretary-General Elena Mireille Stephenson

The Society for International Affairs at Stanford (SIAS) recently hosted its annual high school conference, SMUNC, from November 15th to 17th, on Stanford’s sunny Palo Alto campus. Over 500 delegates attended the predominantly crisis-based conference, participating in committees ranging from the Jewish-Roman War of 66 B.C. to the French Revolution to Facebook Board of Directors, in addition to traditional General Assembly committees, including DISEC and WHO.

Friday’s Opening Ceremony began with some reflections by SIAS President Ian Chan ‘14 on his eight years participating in Model U.N. and a few tips for the SMUNC delegates. His remarks were followed by  introductions from Secretary-General Elena Mireille Stephenson ‘14 and Executive Director Donna Saadati-Soto ‘15. The keynote speaker was UNICEF’s Senior Vice President of Program and Community Engagement, Lynn Stratford, who spoke about her work with UNICEF’s HIV/AIDS campaigns, the current crisis following Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines, for which delegates raised over $1100 over the weekend, and the skill set that she has gained from working for an organization such as UNICEF. The speech was followed by a question and answer period moderated by Secretary-General Stephenson.

Candidates debate in the 1960 election committee

SMUNC 2013 continued the conference’s tradition of focusing on fast-paced, innovative crisis committees, including four separate JCCs (Joint Crisis Committees), a notable addition to previous SMUNCs, and a rarity on the high school circuit. In these committees, delegates tackled the Egyptian Arab Spring, World War II,  the Korean Peninsula, and the 1960 U.S. Presidential Election. This last committee featured an experimental format that was highly successful: the Kennedy and Nixon campaigns battled through the primaries on Friday night and the summer leading up to the general election on Saturday. The committee culminated with an hour-and-a-half long debate between the candidates on Saturday night, with Secretary-General Stephenson and Under Secretary-General for Committees Kunal Sangani ‘16 serving as live-action graphs of the public opinion.

Small crisis committees are a favorite format of SMUNC

In addition to the JCCs, SMUNC 2013 featured a number of crisis cabinets and General Assembly bodies. Delegates were kept up to date on the excitement of the other committees by a newsletter put out during the conference by Press Corps leader Minkee Sohn ‘17.

The Closing Ceremony celebrated the hard work of all SMUNC delegates with humorous recaps of each committee’s highlights, delivered by Under Secretary-Generals Sangani and Sean Hiroshima ‘15, followed by committee awards and delegation awards to Gulf Coast High School (Outstanding Delegation) and California High School (Best Delegation).

A special thank you to our inaugural sponsors, Stanford University’s Division of International, Comparative, and Area Studies, the Program in International Relations; and our partners Zazzle and Best Delegate.

It goes without saying that technological innovation has the power to greatly alter the norms of both debate and Model UN alike. In recent years, the traditional delegate’s overflowing binder, filled to the brim with research, is being replaced with cell phones, laptops, and tablets, each with access to limitless information on the internet. This incites a conundrum in the MUN community: is it better for delegates to have access to any information they need in committee by allowing the use of electronics, or should electronics be banned, forcing all research to be conducted prior to the conference? Additionally, because the use of electronics creates more of a risk for pre-written resolutions, do electronics have the potential to cause more harm than good if abused?

Currently, there is a great schism in the debate on this topic, as countless conferences have prohibited the use of electronics during committee; however, many others openly encourage their use in the committee room, believing that they allow for better debate. We’ve tried to break this dilemma down into its pros and cons:

Pros of allowing electronics-

1. Electronic Devices Expedite the Drafting of Resolutions:

With the use of laptops, along with other electronic devices, delegates can type up resolutions faster than they would be able to by hand. Additionally, through the use of document sharing programs such as Google Drive (along with dozens of other programs) delegates in a bloc can collaborate in real-time when writing a resolution, and all type up one document simultaneously. Electronics also allow for delegates to send Working Papers/Draft Resolutions to their chairs quicker and prevents the chair from having to retype documents, thus allowing the chair to focus more on debate.

Two delegates are able to work simultaneously on their resolution by using their laptops.

2  Electronics Have the Potential to Promote Diplomacy:

Seeing as not all delegates will have laptops or tablets with them, members of a bloc will need to share these items with the members of their bloc. This is a great way to promote diplomacy between delegates, as they will have to cooperate with limited resources to complete their resolution. Being able to work together diplomatically while using such technologies will encourage more collaboration between delegates in committee.

3.  Electronics May Allow for a Higher Level of Debate:

Electronics with internet access have the potential to greatly enrich the debate that occurs in committee. Delegates would have the ability to research facts on the spot in committee and make sure that they are staying on policy whenever they propose a point in a speech. This could allow for much more factually correct and informative committee sessions, which would make Model UN even more of a learning experience.

Cons of Allowing Electronics-

1. Electronics Can Create Discrepancies in Resolution Writing:

By introducing electronics into conferences, it may become harder to distinguish if a delegate has pre-written their resolution, an action that will often result in disqualification from awards. Additionally, electronics could make it easier for students to plagiarize directly from information they look up on the internet. Also, increased electronics use will give a disproportionate amount of authority to the few delegates that have the resolution saved on their laptop or tablet.

2. Not Every Delegate Will Have Electronics:

Because not every delegate will be able to bring these electronics into committee, those who are able to bring them in will have an advantage right from the get-go. It shouldn’t be fair to increase a delegate’s chances of winning based on whether they can afford such technologies, as opposed to their speaking and debating capabilities.

Delegates at conferences without electronics must collaborate together to draft a resolution.

3. Electronics May Encourage Delegates to Do Less Research Before the Conference:

If delegates with electronics know that they will be able to look up anything they need to know in the middle of committee, where is the incentive for them to do any extra preparation in the weeks leading up to the conference? Electronic use may inadvertently reduce the amount of research delegates do, detracting from Model UN as a whole.

There are many different opinions on the matter. While some conferences are steadfast in their decisions to bar the use of electronics, many others are beginning to open up to the idea of allowing their use. This debate is sure to be present in the future years to come in Model UN, and hopefully a compromise between the two schools of thought will be reached.

Have an opinion on how conferences should deal with this problem? Leave a comment below on what role you believe electronics should play in committee. 

Submitted by Nikita Barde, Media Manager at Best Delegate & Staff Member of RUMUN 2013

RUMUN’s Secretariat (left to right: Vyshakh Kodoth, Sabrina Arias, Brandon Smith)

This past weekend, the Institute for Domestic and International Affairs (IDIA) hosted the Rutgers Model United Nations (RUMUN) conference at the Heldrich Hotel in New Brunswick, New Jersey. The conference was titled “The Future We Want”, with a theme of sustainable development to shape all the committees and weekend activities. RUMUN always focuses on making their conferences educational and informative for delegates, and many interactive activities, workshops, smaller committee sizes and focused debate to implement the theme. Sabrina Arias, Secretary-General of RUMUN 2013 commented on the success of the conference by stating that “the dedication and hard work of staff helped put on a flawless conference. The students and advisors loved the theme, activities, committee topics, and workshops, but most of all, they loved the professional and attentiveness of the staff members.” Arias, along with Vyshak Kodoth and Brandon Smith, the Director of Staff and Director of Adminstration, respectively, helped organize a successful conference that impressed over a thousand students,  numerous faculty members, as well as the RUMUN staff, who learned a lot from the experience.  Outlined are some of the unique parts of RUMUN 2013.

Outreach Programs. As mentioned before, RUMUN prides itself on placing a heavy emphasis on education for all delegates that attend, and began to work towards this goal several months prior to the conference. RUMUN’s outreach program encouraged schools to become more involved with Model UN, in an effort to teach them not only Model UN proceedings, but important skills such as cooperation, collaboration and leadership. IDIA staff members visited schools such as Highland Park High School and Stuart Country Day School.

Workshops and Activities.In addition, IDIA staff members organized workshops and activities in an effort to directly involve and interact with delegates on a more personal level. The conference workshops provided students with real world experiences related to politics and international affairs with presentations from knowledgeable IDIA staff members.

Visual Artwork. The Conference Logistics and Administration (CLA) team began designing and creating visuals to represent various aspects of sustainable development. Some of the visuals included a 10 foot poster describing the statistics regarding women and migration in rural, suburban, and urban areas, 3-dimensional models of different continents describing various aspects such as malnourishment, recycling rates, and urbanization, and a poster with key questions to give students key ideas to think about. Months of designing, cutting, assembling, writing and painting finally paid off, by giving students and faculty an opportunity to learn in an artistic manner.

Social Media. The IDIA staff encouraged students to learn more and relate to the theme by posting previews of each committee, updates regarding conference prep, and other posts relating to sustainable development on the official Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/RutgersModelUnitedNations) and Twitter account (@RutgersMUN). Students could respond to posts and add input of their own on both social media accounts, and this promoted the theme and conference prior to this past weekend.

The delegation awards were as following:

Best Large School- Highland Park High School

Best Medium School- The Dalton School

Best Small School- Elmont Memorial High School

Outstanding Large School- Franklin High School

Outstanding Medium School- Noor UlIman School

Outstanding Small School- Bergen County Academies

Here are some pictures from the conference (credits to Yuvraj Ram, RUMUN Staff Member)

RUMUN 2013 Staff

An example of a good, relationship building note. Try not to have terrible handwriting like mine.

Writing notes is one of the most tedious but rewarding parts of any MUN committee. Notes allow you to communicate with other delegates regardless of the size of your room, help you form alliances, work on resolutions, and even help you make friends. Regardless of how useful notes can be in a committee, it’s necessary to use them wisely and effectively. Here are a few tips for writing effective notes:

Always start with a greeting: Regardless of who you’re sending the note to, always precede it with some sort of a greeting. Usually, if sending a note in the first committee session, or to someone new, start with a greeting like “Hello,” or sometimes even “Dear”. As the conference progresses, you’ll probably be close with some of your fellow delegates, and it is okay to start using a greeting like “Hey” or “Hi”.

Be Friendly: Always use your notes for positive reasons, but never to put down someone’s policy or to say that someone is incorrect about something. Notes exist to make allies, not enemies, and writing negative notes can ruin the whole diplomatic concept of Model UN. It’s perfectly fine to ask questions about something someone said in committee, as long as you don’t write it sarcastically or with an ill-mannered tone. It’s even alright to politely write that you disagree with something, as long as you provide some sort of middle ground where you can meet. Do not send notes just to point out problems, always make sure you include a solution.

Keep it short: Unless you’re in a double delegation, sending notes is going to be very time consuming for you, and they may be even a huge distraction from the actual debate. Knowing this, it is important to keep your notes short, with minimal fluff. The goal of a note is not to be for casual conversation, but to be a medium for short communication between un-moderated caucuses. They give you the option to send a few points, and then quickly resume participation in debate.

Try to keep them neat: While many delegates will just use a ripped piece of paper for notes, it’s always nicer to use a post-it note or an index card. Not just because it looks nice, but mainly because it makes you look professional and will thus increase the chances of the person working with you. Also, it is recommended you write in print not script, mainly because it makes the note much more legible.

Keep them appropriate: This cannot be stressed enough, mainly because inappropriate notes can make the whole committee suffer. Notes should be solely about the debate in committee, and talking about personal matters (yes, that includes the dance) can jeopardize the ability to send notes for the entire committee. Most chairs will contact your adviser if you’re caught sending inappropriate notes or notes completely unrelated to committee. However, if on the last session your chair permits you to send comedy notes and you know committee is definitely over, go for it, just make sure they’re appropriate.

The format I like to use is typically along the lines of:

Greeting (Hello, Dear, etc.) Country Name,

            A few bullet points or sentences either answering a question, asking a question, or complimenting a fellow delegate. Try to end with some sort of call such as “Would you like to work together?” or “Let me know if you have any other questions.”

Farewell (Thank You, Best, etc.),
Your Country Name

The World Health Organization at UPMUNC XLVII

This year, in the double-delegation WHO committee at UPMUNC XLVII, a new committee format was showcased.

UPMUNC Secretary-General Hirsh Shah called it the CRISOSOC; a crossbreed of the standard ECOSOC committee with a real-time, live update crisis.

Whether this format will become a part of the Model U.N. circuit remains to be seen, but this new committee style opens the door for an entirely different style of debate.

Giving delegates in a larger committee the form of moderated caucus found only in the crisis room creates a rapid, quick-thinking debate that is consistently sparked by crisis updates and saved from the unfortunate debate stasis so feared in General Assemblies, ECOSOCs and Specialized Agencies.

This format keeps discussion fresh and requires an entirely different strategy from delegates.  The CRISOSOC changes the game and requires delegates to think on their feet while still creating logical solutions to the problems at hand.

The WHO at UPMUNC XLVII, which adopted the CRISOSOC format for much of the fifth and sixth sessions, saw an instant increase in proactivity and strength of debate once the crisis, one which addressed religious acceptance of IVF, was introduced by Chair Bianca Faccio.

From then on, the committee began to write directives, not resolutions, a system that was hindered by the sheer number of literature being submitted.

While this posed a problem for the possible CRISOSOC of the future, it also drew attention to the increased level of cooperation required to produce positive directives as a committee. Delegates can no longer fall into the standard resolution writing format, but must seek universal contribution from the committee to pass solutions to the crisis.

CRISOSOC Committees, by adopting the crisis format of fast-paced and clearly directed debate, allow for specific components of issues to be addressed one at a time. Updates draw attention to individual parts of an issue without the actual facts of the update constituting a “crisis”, but rather serving simply as a guide for debate. This promotes the discussion of specific facets of an issue individually, rather than trying to address the issue as a whole in a 1-minute speech.

This format provides for more substantive conversation rather than the traditional platitudes of Model United Nations. Debate becomes more focused on “What are we going to do”, and “Should we as an organization do anything about this?” rather than what specific “grassroots education programs”, “best practices and expertise sharing programs”, or “comprehensive funding protocols” will be implemented.

This assures that all of the major points that need to be addressed on a topic are fully addressed by the body, and that what is being discussed in committee are the issues that delegates prepared for, not the technical aspects of each working paper.

Because this format has delegates debating different aspects of an issue individually as new updates come up, to successfully draft legislation in committee, resolutions would best be built clause by clause.

As delegates debate each point, they could draft single clauses subtopics to determine the body’s policy and plan for how to address the issue, and then move on to the next sub-topic to form a comprehensive all-encompassing resolution at the end comprised of the individual clauses approved by the committee.

Gone is the standard large committee power delegate. The CRISOSOC gives every delegate the voice they deserve and puts all committee members on the same unbalanced ground. Delegates are forced to truly represent their nation’s best interests and forced to do so swiftly, no matter the issue.

Thus is the beauty of Model U.N., it is only limited by the community that so fervently supports it.

This committee format could revolutionize the way Model U.N. approaches the ECOSOC and committee in general, building a bridge between the General Assembly and Crisis committees of old.

The advent of this new committee format addresses a need within the Model U.N. community: a need to evolve at the same pace as the very world it tries to represent.

It is far too early to tell whether the CRISOSOC will become a Model U.N. staple, but the response from delegates in the WHO at UPMUNC XLVII was ultimately positive.

The CRISOSOC has a short-term future at the very least as McMUN 2014 aims to implement crisis elements into its World Water Forum 2039 committee. This committee should be the first true test of the CRISOSOC format and may decide it’s viability for the future.

The Model U.N. circuit is in constant need of fresh ideas whether they be in committee setting or in committee format. Perhaps the future of Model U.N. is the combination of some of its greatest traits through the CRISOSOC.

The growing popularity of Model UN as a “smart sport”, an exercise for smart students with social skills, has attracted more and more educators, teachers, and younger students to integrate Model UN into their academic curriculum or extra-curricular activities. Educators and teachers-alike call for Model UN to improve student’s public speaking skill, research skill, as well as confidence and interpersonal intelligence as early as at junior high/middle school.

However, unlike college students, sometimes they are not prepared with a basic, preliminary understanding of international issues, such as how the United Nations works. So it can be a serious challenge to directly bombard younger students with pain-staking rules of procedure and difficult, serious topics on Day 1, such as Iranian nuclear program or agriculture trade liberalization. Here are some useful tips to introduce much younger generation to the amazing world of Model UN:

Signature Model UN goodies (courtesy of ISAFIS)

1. Prepare signature Model UN goodies

Younger students are easily impressed by several signature Model UN goodies, such as international flags and colorful placards. If you are a coach or a teacher, you can also prepare small souvenirs from past Model UN conferences for those who perform well, so they are more motivated.

2. Prepare Crisis Committees

More and more Model UN conferences adopt crisis committee as a new approach to represent a more dynamic international relations. Why not bring it up to classroom too? Pick a fun topic to begin with, such as dealing with the aliens from Planet Coconut, the melt of all chocolate tree, or Death Eater’s invasion to Hogwarts. It can be a fun way to introduce rules of procedures, as well as to hone necessary skill, without worrying about researching for difficult topic.

Star Wars crisis committee at University of Pennsylvania Model United Nations Conference (UPMUNC) (courtesy of Best Delegate)

3. Team Up!

Younger students may be shy or pressured to speak in front of their friends while “representing nations and people on their shoulder” (sounds “big”). Or, they just do not know what to say on certain motion or topic. The solution is making a grop of two or three students during training simulation, so they have partner to deliberate and exchange roles of speaking. Of course, when they get serious, there is a certain strategy to succeed as double delegation in real Model UN.

4. Upgrade

Model UN is addictive, y’know. Introduce them with step-by-step skill and upgrading it as they develop will make them craving for more. There will be the time when they say, “Oh, c’mon, let’s just talk business” or “We want more!”. And there you go, you are the best teacher on earth!

Do you have any more tips or experience to share about coaching Model UN? Share your thoughts in comment box below!

This recap was provided by Benjamin Dobkin

The 2013 edition of the Princeton Model United Nations Conference was a great success. The Conference attracted approximately 800 delegates from all over the world, including Colombia, Singapore, China, and Germany.  Delegates in General Assemblies drafted resolutions that addresses the most important and complex global problems challenging world leaders today. These topics ranged from international monetary policy to chemical and biological weaponry to corruption in healthcare.  Other delegates simulated specialized organizations such as the Chinese Politburo, the Ghanian Constitutional Convention, and the Berlin Conference. At the same time, many PMUNC delegates faced historical and modern geopolitical issues in real-time in a series of crisis committees. A few, such as those in the Joint-Crisis Committee, the Irish War for Independence, had the opportunity to re-write the course of history.  Other delegates discussed critical issues affecting U.S. foreign policy, such as the U.S.’s response to the Iranian nuclear crisis or Syrian Civil War. Outside of committee, delegates met their counterparts from all over the world and made long-lasting friendships. The entirely student-led staff of PMUNC enjoyed discussing global issues with students and Faculty Advisors alike, and looks forward to PMUNC 2014!

The delegation awards were as follows:

Attached are some pictures from the opening and closing ceremonies, as well as other key points in the conference. Additionally, we’ve attached the awards list from the conference:

This guest article was contributed by Nabila Elassar.

Moments from Nabila’s MUN Jounrey

By my fifth delegate experience in CU’s Model American Presidency, MUN had become my retreat. The sessions were my favorite part of the week, and the friends and community were the best part of university life. After winning best delegate in that year’s conference, I joined The German University in Cairo’s Model United Nations, and again, won best delegate.

Finally, I became a GUCMUN committee chair (Research/ Crisis co-ordinator) in my senior year of university. I wanted to be the one to guide and help others grow, and develop, as I had as a delegate.

But, nothing could have prepared me for the massive development I went through myself as a secretariat/ chair. Being responsible for the development of others, watching them change and grow, encouraging them, mentoring and helping them all throughout their journey was beyond words. In my delegates, I saw myself. I saw the shy girl that turned into a fearless speaker. I saw the little delegation making wonders in the conference. I saw massive change in seemingly quiet human beings. I saw miracles in action.  It was by far, the most rewarding, inspiring, amazing journey imaginable.

That is when I realized why Model United Nations journeys are SO much more, than just a make believe UN.

1. MUN can help you grow every part of your skills and potential as a human being

2. MUN can make you uncover talents you never knew you had

3. MUN can transform  you from a person of a passive non-interested view of politics, into a research hungry, debate welcoming fanatic.

4. MUN can dissolve your fear of public speaking, foster your self expression and eloquence, push out your creativity, and turn you into an influencer of others.

5. MUNs are usually a community. They invite you into a circle of lifelong friends, and newly found family.

6. The process of representing a country, while defending its rights and interests in an actual international conference setting, proposing real solutions to fix an ongoing world problem that the UN itself has not resolved yet… is indescribable. It makes you feel so powerful. And for a young person, it pushes you leaps forward in terms of maturity, problem solving ability and responsibility.

7. MUN shows you your weaknesses, and pushes your limits in handling challenges and pressure

8. MUN teaches you massive interpersonal skills, diplomatic skills, professionalism, crisis management, and true leadership.

9. MUN can give you hope, and belief in what you are capable of in life.

10. The honor of being able to develop other people, and help them grow with this journey,  turns  you into the best version of yourself.

Nabila Elassar

It is the normal sequence of events. You graduate, you move on. You start your professional life. I knew that. It was definitely possible to stay for a year, as others had. But, that’s not what I wanted. I didn’t want a re-do, nor d

id I want to take away someone else’s place, and chance to benefit from the secretariat experience. So, I had to endure.

But then, I found Best Delegate.com. After reading Ryan and Kevin’s stories, I could hardly believe myself. I wasn’t alone! There are others! They actually left their professional careers to form a different kind of professional career in which they did what they loved. The best job on Earth. Travelling the world, teaching MUN.

And with that, came a spark of hope. I now know what I want to do in life. I know what I am capable of. That would have never happened without the life skills and inspiring breakthroughs I made through MUN. Yes, there were challenges. Yes, it wasn’t easy. But every obstacle, every difficulty only made me stronger. To those difficulties, whether caused by other people, or by circumstances, I say: Thank you. You are the reason why MUN is, and will remain the best thing that has happened to me.

And that is why, with every bit of passion I have, I will always carry on teaching others how to make the most out of their time in MUN, using all my knowledge.

I now aim to encourage others to go through the expedition of being inspired, and becoming inspirers, through Models of The United Nations.

This was my MUN journey. What will be yours ?

In light of the positive responses we got from Part I of this article, I decided to follow it up with a Part II! Hopefully this quick background will continue to give new delegates and veterans enough of an understanding of the major international laws to use them in committee. For any questions, requests, or clarifications, feel free to contact lstefanos@nullbestdelegate.com.

The Charter of the United Nations (1945)

This document is arguably seen as the most important piece of international law in existence. Although legislations passed by the General Assembly are not technically binding, every single member state of the UN is a signatory of the charter because of its importance as an international norm. The Charter outlines etiquette rules in relations between states and is designed to promote peace and dialogue in order to avoid a third world war conflict. The two most commonly used parts of the Charter are Chapter IV, the General Assembly, and Chapter V, The Security Council. These two Chapters establish everything from voting procedures for the Permanent 5 States to who can vote as a member state and who only has observer status. After learning what the purposes and powers are of the two major organs of the UN, you would then check out Chapter VI and Chapter VII which deal with peaceful settlements, and when that fails, containing aggression and intervention. Under Chapter VI, member states have to first seek to solve conflicts through mediation, judicial settlement, and regional agencies. In the event that this fails, it is the responsibility of the Security Council to establish peace again and check state aggression under Chapter VII. This chapter also gives the Security Council the force of Peacekeeping Troops at its disposal for intervention.

The actual question of if intervention is ever necessary however remains pretty in the international community, but this question leads us to the next document:

The Responsibility to Protect (2005)

The Responsibility to Protect, otherwise known as R2P has been a controversial document since its establishment in 2005 by the Canadian government and the United Nations. The idea behind this law (which is quickly becoming an international norm) is that in a Post-Cold War Era, national sovereignty is no longer a natural right but a privilege. Countries have the primary responsibility to protect their citizens from human rights violations, specifically from genocide, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and war crimes. In the event a country does not meet these standards, R2P requires the international community to attempt to help the country in question; if that fails, member-states have the authority to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions and military intervention at the last resort.

During the initial drafting of R2P in 2005, countries were relatively optimistic that the international would be willing to move ahead with this initiative, but time showed that ultimately, countries do not want to completely give up their autonomies within their own borders. The UN did also adopt two parts of R2P in its Outcome Document in 2005: paragraph 138, which states that the international community should support one another in developing necessary early warning systems in tandem with the UN to secure human rights. The second part that was adopted, paragraph 139, emphasises that states and the UN Security Council must use their Chapter VI and Chapter VII privileges from the Charter to collectively act to ensure violations are not occurring.

This document may not be as concretely binding as the Charter, but R2P is definitely becoming an accepted norm by the international community and definitely has some weight in discussing human rights. Don’t be afraid to call certain notorious leaders out on the basis of R2P, I’m sure SOCHUM will love that!

The Ottawa Treaty (1997)

Also known as the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention, the Ottawa Treaty was a major agenda issue in the 1990’s thanks to the major support of the late Princess Diana of Wales. Thus far, 161 countries have signed this convention and 36, including the United States, India, Russia, and China, have yet to sign. This convention seeks to abolish the use of small AP mines that aim to injure humans and not tanks. As I just mentioned, the use of AP mines is controversial because they don’t aim to kill, they’re often designed to seriously injure in order to increase the enemy side’s need for medical and logistical support. While there are also land-mines that have larger targets such as tanks, AP mines are the most controversial because of their capability to be hidden so well that civilians often accidentally get caught in a minefield. AP mines are also not removed immediately after a conflict is over; while they are relatively easy to destroy, most warring parties leave the mines their for up to 30 years later which seriously can injure unsuspecting civilians.

Part of the reluctance to destroy AP mine stockpiles from larger countries comes from the fact that when protecting a large, unsafe border, one of the most convenient ways to do so is by placing landmines on it to serve as detectors for unwanted visitors. This can be especially useful in regions such as the Middle East where borders are relatively unstable because of Arab Spring and organizations like Al-Qaeda and move easily between states. At the same time, there are also a lot of refugees that are seeking to flee the turmoil in their countries that can get caught in an explosion.

Discussing this treaty in committee will definitely be a fun move since whether or not your representative country has signed it or not, you’re bound to have a pretty strong opinion on it. Besides, setting an agenda topic such as this one lets you set the tone of the committee for a while, so why not give it a try!

The Kyoto Protocol (1997 and 2012)

For all my environmentalists out there, the Kyoto Protocol is a necessity when talking about curtailing greenhouse emissions. This initiative was originally started in the 1990’s with Kyoto’s predecessor, the Montreal Protocol (1987). Kyoto aims to address the negative externalities of human industrialization by reducing greenhouse gasses in industrialized countries. Like the Ottawa Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol is possible even more controversial because of all the different countries that have accepted the agreement. For example, the United States has signed the document, but had never ratified it and does not plan on doing so anytime in the foreseeable future. Conversely, Canada was once a signatory but withdrew in 2011 on the basis that the agreement was too binding. This argument is also what is hindering several countries from signing and ratifying the Kyoto Protocol. The second part to opposition against the Kyoto Protocol is that it does not target developing countries; roughly 80% of the world is excluded in the words of former President George W. Bush. The idea behind this decision is that developed countries were able to industrialize without any restrictions, therefore countries developing right now should also have the same privilege and opportunity. Moral of the story? If you’re representing a developing country at a conference, don’t be afraid to guilt the great powers!

As far as international environmental law goes, this is definitely the most well known and accepted one. Even though many countries may not want to be as tightly bound as Kyoto requires, it is still nonetheless becoming an accepted norm that all countries should at least try to abide by. Even if there are states like the United States that are not fully members of this protocol, they are still making active efforts to reduce greenhouse emissions through programs such as  the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and the Western Climate Initiative that was signed between the United States and Canada.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998)

Because of the confusion that surrounds the differences between the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice, the Rome Statute is pretty important to look to clear this up. The ICC came into full existence in 2002 in order to assist countries that don’t have the necessary infrastructure in place to try individuals and leaders who have committed crimes against humanity. Like R2P, the Rome Statute also has four pillars that constitute as international crimes: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes of aggression. The primary difference between the ICC and the ICJ is that the ICC can only try individuals  and the ICJ tries national governments. Under the Rome Statute, the ICC is also an independent body that does not need UN approval for trials. The ICJ on the other hand is known as “The World Court” because it is the official court of the UN and is explained in more detail in Chapter XIV of the Charter of the United Nations.

Due to the fact that the ICC is an independent body, its jurisdiction only applies to countries that are a party to the Rome Statute. There  are, as you can imagine, several countries that are have not ratified this document, including the United States, Russia, China, India, and several African and Middle Eastern nations. More and more African countries are choosing to not join because of the belief that the ICC targets African leaders, who do oftentimes have greater occurrence of human rights violations. One of the more controversial requirements of the Rome Statute is that all states must immediately arrest individuals who have been found guilty by the ICC if the individual enters another state. Unfortunately, this does not always happen as was seen in the case of the Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir in 2008 partly because the Sudan was not a party to the Rome Statute at the time but also because there are several member-states who see him as a key ally. Nevertheless, this law should still start some pretty dynamic conversion in LEGAL so give it a go!

So to sum it all up, in most cases, the norms and legacies of these laws are oftentimes even more crucial than the laws themselves. Even if a country is not a signatory to a certain treaty, that does not necessarily mean that it completely ignores them- we all have a public image to maintain, remember! Using a law effectively will also definitely give you an advantage in committee that not everyone will have so don’t be afraid to discuss them!

If you found this useful, you should definitely check out part one. As always, please feel free to send in suggestions, comments, and requests!

Part I:  http://bestdelegate.com/breaking-down-the-top-5-international-laws-treaties-and-conventions-youll-hear-being-discussed-in-committee/

Which college Model UN teams are the best on the circuit? There are many definitions of success in Model UN, and awards are not the purpose of Model UN. Nevertheless, they do tell us which teams are doing well and our rankings are meant to recognize teams for their accomplishments at conferences throughout the school year.

Methodology: The methodology is the same as in previous years with minor modifications in weightings to reflect attendance this year. The article above also provides insight into the purpose and philosophy behind the rankings.

• Disclaimer: Note that only teams that participate at university-hosted conferences that emphasize awards are included in the dataset, and we can only use data that is available to us. This ranking is not meant to capture all of college MUN as many good teams participate at conferences that do not value the competitive aspect of Model UN.
• Credits: Thank you to Best Delegate Media Manager Mari Manoogian for collecting the awards data and quotes.

Without further ado, here is the Top 25 for fall 2013:

1. University of Chicago

The University of Chicago is the number one team on the college circuit this fall after winning the Best Large Delegation at UPMUNC and NCSC. Pictured here: the team at UPMUNC.

The University of Chicago is the number one team on the college circuit this fall, and the competition has not been even close when it comes to aggregate scoring. UChicago narrowly lost to Georgetown by the weighted score equivalent of a verbal commendation at CMUNNY but still started its season strong with an Outstanding Large Delegation award there. It then defeated defending circuit champion UPenn at NCSC to win the Best Large Delegation award and topped Georgetown at UPMUNC to capture the Best Large Delegation award at the fall championship. Despite a wide lead in aggregate scoring, their top rank for the season is still very much up for grabs, as they will have a rematch with UPenn, Yale, and others for best large delegation honors at HNMUN. The team will also host ChoMUN in the spring.

UChicago had their sights set high at the beginning. Eric Wessan, the UChicago head delegate, shares that “this year, the University of Chicago had a goal to maintain and improve in our past success. We wanted to bring more people to more conferences, and we wanted to have our caliber of delegate to be the best that it could be. Throughout this fall, we have trained both during the week and on weekends to ensure that everyone, particularly those who had not done college Model United Nations or MUN at all were as prepared as possible. While obviously there are great improvements that still yet remain, I am very proud of our team, which has put in more heart and effort than I could have ever hoped.”

2. Georgetown University

Georgetown had the spotlight to begin the season as it won Best Large Delegation at CMUNNY over UChicago, Harvard, UPenn and others. It then followed up with a third place finish at SCSY where it received the most gavels of any team. After hosting NCSC, Georgetown went on to win the Outstanding Large Delegation award at UPMUNC ahead of Harvard, Yale, and others. Georgetown and UChicago went 1-1 in head-to-head matchups with UChicago winning the more competitive conference. The two teams will not get a chance to go head-to-head again at another large conference as Georgetown will attend McMUN and UChicago will attend HNMUN and host ChoMUN. Therefore, the race between these two will come down to aggregate scoring across the circuit.

However, Georgetown’s goals are not only on the awards. Sam Brothers, the head delegate for the Hoyas, explained, “I’m tremendously pleased with how the semester’s gone for Georgetown’s team. When I was running for head delegate, I recognized that balancing our team’s desire to win with allowing everyone in the broader Georgetown community to have the opportunity to travel with the team would be difficult, but with the help of conferences staff, I think we’ve pulled it off! I’m so proud of everyone’s performances this fall, and I can’t wait to see what the team’s going to do in the spring semester!”

3. Harvard University

Harvard may not have hardware in the fall to show for their efforts, but they have been putting on strong performances as a large delegation and achieved their highest rank ever since the rankings started. Harvard contended for a large delegation award at four competitive conferences this fall – the team finished third at CMUNNY, fourth at SCSY, third at NCSC, and third at UPMUNC. Members of the team will take a break from competing as delegates to help staff several conferences around the world in the next few months including three college-level conferences: HNMUN Latin America in Brazil in January, HNMUN in Boston in February, and WorldMUN in Brussels in March. Nina Chen and Katherine Ebright lead the Harvard team.

4. University of Pennsylvania

UPenn put in a solid performance and received three Outstanding Large Delegation awards out of four conferences it attended this fall semester. The first two actually took place on the same weekend when the team split its delegation. It won one at SCSY, where the team outscored Best Large Delegation award winner Columbia in terms of weighted points. It won the second at BarMUN behind Michigan State. It then followed up with a third one at NCSC behind UChicago. In addition, the team finished fourth at CMUNNY behind the three teams ranked above it. UPenn also hosted UPMUNC, the fall championship on the college circuit. Although the Best Large Delegation award has alluded the team this fall semester, it is still possible for them to achieve the top rank on the college circuit if they can defend their Best Large Delegation award at HNMUN, especially given that Harvard and UChicago have yet to host and Georgetown does not attend HNMUN. Head delegate Akhilesh Goswami will lead the UPenn team in their attempt to regain their top rank.

5. Florida International University

FIU and West Point are going head-to-head again for best small delegation supremacy. FIU won the Outstanding Small Delegation award at UPMUNC, the Best Small Delegation award at NCSC, and the Outstanding Small Delegation award at CMUNNY. Although FIU lost to West Point at UPMUNC and to an in-state rival, the University of Florida, for the first time in a while at CMUNNY, the team has been the most consistent among the small delegations and aggregate scoring kept them among the top five teams of the college circuit. FIU will meet West Point and other top teams again at HNMUN. Mark Hodgson once again leads the FIU team.

6. United States Military Academy at West Point

West Point is one of the elite best small delegations on the circuit and proved it by winning the Best Small Delegation award at UPMUNC ahead of FIU. West Point also finished tied for fifth at SCSY and in sixth place at NCSC. In addition, the team traveled to OxIMUN, hosted by Oxford, and captured the Best Small Delegation award there. In addition to a challenging schedule that includes HNMUN and WorldMUN, West Point will be hosting WPMUNI in the spring. Brandon Moore is serving as the head delegate for West Point this year, but credits his team for their motivated efforts. Moore explains, “West Point has been fortunate to have had some outstanding recruiting this year. The prerogative for preparation lies entirely with the individual members, so our success during the fall semester demonstrates a lot of personal motivation.”

Moore has also been impressed with the quality and collegiality on the college circuit this year, noting “though Model UN is a competition, it’s much more about establishing those lasting relationships with professional young adults around the globe. West Point specifically focuses on furthering greater civil-military understanding with our civilian counterparts, and we have been truly impressed with everyone’s professionalism and charisma this year.”

7. Claremont McKenna College

Claremont McKenna is either the most dominant team in your region or a rapidly rising top small delegation depending on which coast you reside in. On the West Coast, the gap between CMC and its rivals has only widened. CMC took home seven of eleven gavels and almost half of all weighted points at SBIMUN – that’s more than the next three teams (Berkeley, Stanford, and USC) combined. The team may not be as dominant on the East Coast yet, but its reputation has grown after winning Outstanding Small Delegation at NCSC and after putting in a solid performance at UPMUNC on back-to-back weekends after SBIMUN. Head delegates Kanupriya Rungta and Ankit Sud lead the CMC team. “It’s been amazing to see how enthusiastic everyone on the team is- our performance is a testament to the hard work each member has put in, especially since our team is so young. We are very excited for next semester,” Rungta, said.

8. Columbia University

Columbia is fielding its best team in recent years, and this young team has potential to climb into the top five. After kicking off the college season by hosting CMMUNY, Columbia went to SCSY and upset large delegation powerhouses UPenn, Georgetown, and Harvard to win the Best Large Delegation award. The team completed a successful fall semester with awards at UPMUNC, NCSC, and BarMUN. Columbia usually fields a small delegation, and it notably finished right behind top small delegations FIU and West Point and ahead of Claremont McKenna in terms of weighted score at NCSC. Chris Crant and Michael Ying lead Columbia’s team “Columbia’s MUN team in the recent past has experienced the unfortunate effect of large talented senior classes graduating. As a result, we have had to consistently field young teams,” said Crant. “However this trial by fire has begun to pay dividends this year, and the new deeper outreach program that was implemented this year will only serve as a complement. Thus, I am extremely excited about the future of this team and its unbridled potential.”

9. Yale University

The Yale team, also known as MUNTY, remains in the top ten after a fourth place finish at UPMUNC behind only UChicago, Georgetown, and Harvard. It also got on the scoreboard at NCSC and it hosted SCSY to start off its season. The big disparity between Yale’s performances at UPMUNC and NCSC may be due to Yale’s traditional strength in General Assembly committees. If so, then it will be an advantage for the team heading into HNMUN where it will try to challenge UChicago and UPenn for the Best Large Delegation award. Head delegate John Sununu leads MUNTY.

10. Rutgers University

With the exception of its performance at CMUNNY where it won some awards, the Rutgers team has finished in the top ten at SCSY, NCSC, and UPMUNC this semester. The team was able to attend UPMUNC this semester as their high school RUMUN conference moved to December, and the team finished particularly strong with 8 out of 9 delegates winning awards. Overall, its success puts Rutgers into the top ten on the college circuit. Internally, Rutgers has met many of its goals for the fall season. Head delegate Danial Manzoor explains, “We had delegates in committee that were passionate and truly cared about each and every topic they faced. The mix of the new pool of freshmen alongside with our returning veterans has really made me proud of my delegation. We have challenged ourselves individually and as a team at every conference. I speak on behalf of every Rutgers delegate when I say that our delegates have made life-long college memories, had fun at every conference, and made friends all over the circuit.”

11. Boston University

BU started the season by hosting BarMUN, and then put on a very strong performance at the end of October with a fourth place finish at NCSC behind only UChicago, UPenn, and Harvard and ahead of the small delegation award winners. In addition, BU added a solid performance at UPMUNC to cap its fall semester. The head delegate for BU, Katrina Trost, said of her team “BU has an extremely young team this year, and I have to say I’m very proud of the new delegates’ progress and the continued strong performance of veteran members. We’ve expanded our standing team and changed up our training process, and I’m looking forward to see how this impacts our awards and success in the spring, and in coming years.”

12. New York University

NYU had several strong performances this fall semester. The team continues to put in high-level performances at crosstown CMUNNY, and this year it finished in the top five there behind Georgetown, UChicago, Harvard, and UPenn. The team next got on the scoreboard at NCSC before rebounding with a top ten performance at UPMUNC. Kamal Tamboli, Abhishek Chandra, and Isabelle Klinghoffer lead the NYU team. The team will also host NYUMUNC in the spring.

13. Michigan State University

Michigan State is having one of its best starts ever highlighted by an upset of UPenn for Best Large Delegation honors at BarMUN. In addition, the team finished in the top ten at UPMUNC, proving that it can compete against the best and that the BarMUN performance was not just a smaller-conference fluke. Chris Bourdganis leads the MSU team and reflected on the team’s performance. “This is my 8th year of Model United Nations and I can honestly say our team’s trip to BarMUN this year and winning our first best large delegation award there has been the best MUN experience of my life. Our executive board is all extremely proud of all of our delegation, rookies and veterans alike,” said Bourdganis.

14. McGill University

McGill is having one of its best seasons ever. It started its season with a top-five finish at SCSY behind only UPenn, Columbia, Georgetown, and Harvard. It then took home some awards at NCSC and ended its fall semester on a high note by winning Best Small Delegation at CIAC ahead of Canadian rival Queen’s University. In fact, they had the highest weighted score of any team at CIAC. “The McGill delegations team has reached a new level in their dedication to preparation and training, which has translated to the team’s success in the fall semester,” said head delegate Emmett Meacher. “As the team continues to improve their skills, both on and off the circuit, we are looking forward to competition and another successful semester.” Of course, many other delegates are looking forward to attending McMUN when the season resumes from winter break.

15. The George Washington University

GW was missing a lot of its veteran leadership from its past classes of Colonial Cadets as they have been engaged in study abroad or internships this fall semester. That made it more difficult for a freshman-heavy team of Colonial Cadets to excel. However, the team still held its own by winning multiple awards at UPMUNC, NCSC, SCSY, and CMUNNY. Head delegate David Berris seeks to build on the success of their previous head delegate, Jared Greenspan, and said, “I hope to continue this exemplary form of leadership and make a statement with the momentum that we are carrying with us. GW will persevere as one of the top schools on the circuit with our graduated classes of cadets, now upperclassman, and our newly added cadets who are beginning to understand what a prestigious circuit they find themselves in.”

16. University of Florida

Florida had a strong fall season. Most notably, the team won the Best Small Delegation at CMUNNY ahead of in-state rival FIU, showing potential that the pecking order between the four competitive Florida college teams could soon change. Florida also finished in the top ten at UPMUNC to bolster its resume. In addition to its successes on the university-hosted World Division circuit, the team also came home with an Outstanding Delegation (first place) and Distinguished Delegation (second place) at SRMUN. Head delegates Chris Joyce, Troy Robinson, Aaron Kalafarski, and Fred Kolb lead the UF team. “It is really gratifying to receive recognition for our performance this semester. We have learned to balance the ‘work hard, play hard’ mentality. Competition wise, UF has a program to be reckoned with and our performance will only improve going forward,” Robinson said.

17. University of California, Berkeley

In the team’s eighteenth season on the college circuit, head delegates Mahith Amancherla and Apratim Vidyarthi set out the goals for the team to “aim to take UCBMUN where no man has gone before, by expanding on the training schedule, club-subsidization system, and implementing a rigorous CIA-analyst style testing system for the club, which brings together a diverse range of 110 club members.” In terms of performance, Berkeley won awards at CMUNNY and UPMUNC and again captured the Outstanding Large Delegation award at SBIMUN. Although there was a large gap between them and Best Large Delegation Claremont McKenna, the team has to be satisfied with its large haul of awards and significant distance ahead of third-place Stanford at SBIMUN. Berkeley will host UCBMUN in the spring.

18. University of Miami

Miami is putting in top-ten caliber performances. This helped them take home the Outstanding Small Delegation award at SCSY and a finish just outside the top ten at UPMUNC. Head delegate Skip McClinton cited how fun is part of the formula to the team’s success this year. “To turn a team into a family, all the pieces have to be there. The personalities, the passion, the fun, the hard work, all of which bonds distinct people together into a unit.” In terms of the future, head delegate Marie Hanewinckel remarked that “we are proud of the personal and skill growth of our squad, which has been mixed with amazing times one would expect from the Miami team. We cannot wait to face and overcome the obstacles ahead as a team, as a family.”

19. The College of William & Mary

William & Mary has some high expectations after winning two major delegation awards at the end of last spring, and this fall’s performance has not fallen short of the expectations of head delegate Connor Smith. W&M won the Outstanding Delegation award at DISCon behind Tulane and also won awards at UPMUNC, NCSC, and CMUNNY. The team is young, and they expect to grow in both size and quality in preparation for McMUN. The team will also host &MUN in the spring. “This season, I’m so proud that we sent over 70 delegates to 4 conferences, won our first Fall delegation award in almost 5 years, and had an overall rewarding, awesome time! I’m excited to gear up for our more competitive spring season and to continue building our talent base, especially in our amazing freshman class,” said Smith.

20. Emory University

Emory may not be winning the upper tier of delegate awards, but they are fielding teams that are winning numerous awards at each conference and the team has displayed consistency across UPMUNC, NCSC, CMUNNY, and DISCon. The team co-President, Pritika Gupta, said of the team’s performance, “ We laid a solid foundation for the large incoming class – which is also a good reminder that the team is growing at such a fast rate – and I think that was the best thing we could do to move forward. There are incredible amounts of potential within these kids and I’m already looking forward to next semester with them.” Kate Cyr and Maria Alvarez will take over head delegate responsibilities in the spring.

21. Clark University

Clark had a busier than usual fall semester by winning awards at CMUNNY, SCSY, BarMUN, and UPMUNC. They have traditionally been stronger in General Assembly conferences instead of the crisis-oriented ones that are more typical in the fall, so they may have a better chance to shine when they get to HNMUN. However, the focus of Clark’s team is less on awards and more on the experience of learning diplomacy. Head delegate Yohan Senarath explains that the Clark team “believes that diplomacy is a study of the human being. Our members are encouraged to study themselves. By understanding themselves better, they are essentially in a better position to engage with others around them.” Head delegate Patrick Burchat also leads Clark.

22. The Ohio State University

Ohio State breaks into the Top 25 for the first time ever in only its second year on the college circuit after winning several awards at the two most competitive conferences of the fall in UPMUNC and NCSC. They are also the third team from the Midwest to ever get ranked – the others are powerhouse UChicago and Big Ten leader Michigan State. Head delegate Erik Leiden recapped the experience of his young team. “Through some incredibly hard work, Midwestern charm, and personalized, dialogue-driven strategy sessions, members of Ohio State’s Collegiate Council on World Affairs have had their best performances yet this Fall…while maintaining our policy of being a 100% guaranteed Good Time. Go Bucks!”

23. Stanford University

The highlight of Stanford’s fall quarter was winning the Best Small Delegation award at SCSY. It was their first best delegation award on the East Coast in several years, and perhaps the team is starting a trend having won a delegation award at CMUNNY around the same time last year. Stanford also got on the scoreboard at NCSC and finished fourth in their fall West Coast matchup at SBIMUN behind Claremont McKenna, Berkeley, and USC. Alex Richard and Johan Bonilla are the head delegates for Stanford. Richard said of their performance this fall, “we’re very proud of our team’s dedication and hard work, which allowed our majority-freshman team to succeed across a wide variety of committees.”

24. Boston College

Boston College made the Top 25 rankings this fall with a third place finish behind only Michigan State and UPenn at cross-town BarMUN and by getting onto the scoreboard at CMUNNY. Head delegate Braeden Lord continues to build BC’s relatively new team on the college circuit.

25. Florida State University

Florida State put in a top-ten finish at NCSC to stay in the Top 25 rankings. FSU also got on the scoreboard at UPMUNC. Hillary Harlan is the head delegate for the FSU team.

Top 50 (alphabetical order)

• Arizona State University
• Carleton University
• Case Western Reserve University
• Colgate University
• The College of New Jersey
• Cornell University
• Duke University
• Ithaca College
• Middlebury College
• Mount Holyoke College
• Pennsylvania State University
• Princeton University
• Queen’s University
• State University of New York, Plattsburgh
• Tufts University
• Tulane University
• United States Naval Academy
• University of California, Los Angeles
• University of North Carolina
• University of Southern California
• University of Texas at Austin
• University of Virginia
• Vanderbilt University
• Washington College
• Wellesley College

Top 75 (alphabetical order)

• American University
• Bard College
• Elon University
• Emmanuel College
• Franklin & Marshall College
• George Mason University
• Georgia Institute of Technology
• Gettysburg College
• Johns Hopkins University
• Kutztown University
• Mount Allison University
• Northern Arizona University
• Roger Williams University
• Seton Hall University
• Suffolk University
• University of Alabama
• University of California, San Diego
• University of La Verne
• University of Minnesota
• University of Ottawa
• University of Pittsburgh
• University of Rochester
• University of Toronto
• Victor Valley College
• Washington University in St. Louis

Congratulations to all the teams! Enjoy your winter break and see you back on the circuit next semester!

Whether your goal in a Model UN committee is to win an award, learn more about international affairs, or develop better speaking skills, your committee chair will be at the helm of most of the direction your committee takes, and will be most responsible for making any of your goals a reality. Though it is up to you to ensure that you are successful in committee, it certainly can’t hurt to be in good graces with the chair throughout the weekend. With all this in mind, here are a few tips to help you stay in good relations with your chair:

Every chair might run their committee differently; be sure to follow all of their unique rules!

1. Introduce yourself before committee

Though you don’t need to give your chair your name, address, date of birth, favorite sports team, and your star sign, it’s important that you greet them before the start of committee. Simply by greeting your chair, telling them your name and telling them the country you’re representing, you will help distinguish yourself from other delegates, and begin to build a relationship with your chair.

2. Always remain diplomatic during committee

You never know when your chair will be watching, so be careful to always be polite and respectful of other delegates. This is especially important during Un-Moderated caucuses, as your chair will most likely be walking around the room, listening to many different conversations. You don’t want to be the one who gets caught by your chair while yelling at other delegates.

3. Keep an open line of communication with your chair

It is important to make sure you’re always communicating with your chair during committee. This is pivotal during the writing of resolutions, as you should be asking the chair if there’s any particular format the resolution should be in, and if there are any changes that need to be made.

4. Don’t do anything you think may annoy/upset your chair
There’s an overabundance of things that could be done to upset your chair, but rather than list all of them, check out Best Delegate’s previous article on the same topic:  http://bestdelegate.com/from-behind-the-dais-10-things-to-avoid-doing-that-will-upset-your-chair/. Try to avoid these things to maintain your good relationship with the chair.

5. Help clean up after a committee session

This is a simple gesture that will take 2-3 minutes of your time to leave a good impression on the chair. The floors of committee rooms are typically littered with notes or scrap paper after committee, and helping to clean them up will make your chair think more highly of you. (Bonus points if you get other delegates to stay after and help clean up with you.)

6.  Talk to your chair after each committee session

The conversation can be as short as thanking your chair for a great committee session. A good tip is to ask your chair is if they like how committee is going and if they have any comments on how you’re doing in committee. Afterwards, be sure to thank them for their help. If you follow any advice they give you, you are sure to stay in their good favor.

7. Be polite to your chair if you see them out of committee

It’s more than likely that you’ll see your chair at least once outside of committee during the weekend. If you do see them, be polite and say hello to them.

By following these tips, you’re sure to leave a good impression on the chair, and you may find that committee will be more enjoyable,  more fun, and a better learning experience.