Resolutions #53 and #15: General Assembly Debate
Being a resolution author is no simple task, the late nights researching, countless drafts and rewrites, trying to create a motivating yet concise speech, but nothing can compare to actually coming to this conference and finally having to present that which you had worked tirelessly on for weeks, if not months. While presenting in the committees and summits is no easy task, it is nothing compared to exposing a presentation in front of the entirety of a K.U.N.A. assembly, leaving one’s work on display, open to be poked, prodded, dissected, and put back together again, all while standing just a few short feet away, listening to all the criticisms and praises coming from fellow ambassadors.
This is exactly what the resolution authors representing Costa Rica did from DuPont Manual High School. Their resolution, Implementing Human Trafficking Safe Houses in Central America, having ranked the highest during earlier debates, was presented during General Assembly. The authors began by making their compelling opening speech, discussing the premise behind their bill and the benefits that it could provide if passed and implemented into law. A similar program, the “Forgotten Children”, had already been implemented in Uganda, and being a great success, was the basis for their resolution. Then began the heated pro and con debate, the ambassadors passionately arguing their reasons of support or opposition, attempting to coerce their fellow ambassadors to support their viewpoint on the resolution. Those in opposition brought numerous, valid points of flaws in the resolution to the attention of the authors and the audience. Flaws, such as that of how the bill will only affect Central and South American countries instead of the entire world as a United Nations resolution should. Also how the resolution could potentially fail at achieving the desired goals by having a lack of willing volunteers, hardly being able to assist all of those faced with human trafficking, and being spread out too thin to reach enough people affected by this slavery. But those in support of the resolution where quick to come to its defense. By initially stating that it was the United Nations duty to uphold the Universal Declaration of Rights, which allows for countries to create and implement resolutions similar to this one, supporters confidently stood their ground. Mohammed Al-Mosawi argued that this resolution would “lay out the foundation for affectively helping the victims of human trafficking”, followed by other ambassadors stating how its implementation could influence other countries around the world to take action against this modern slavery. This tense and heated debate eventually came to an end with the authors closing speech, addressing the con statements and reaffirming the pros, and ultimately the passing of resolution number fifth-teen.
Next, after having been voted upon by the entire conference, the resolution authors representing the Republic of Korea from North Oldham High School were chosen to present next and waltzed through the debate strong and steady. As if the haunting and sorrowful topic wasn’t motivating enough, the authors led their opening speech with a shocking phrase, “Every thirty seconds someone who is loved, appreciated, and thought about takes their own life”. They then went on to further explain the logistics of their resolution, telling of how the budget of the World Health Organization would increase by six percent, allowing for more funds to be distributed around the globe in relation to the suicide rate of countries. Their resolution calls for each country to work individually in order to create a plan of action that would best suit their country’s needs in relation to mental health and suicide rates and prevention. This chaotic pro and con debate started off with a round of applause, having been positively received by the crowd, but it was soon clearly seen that not many wished to speak against the resolution, causing a surplus of support, but a deficiency of opposition. Those few who were in opposition of the resolution mainly stated that implementation of this resolution would be a waste of the United Nation’s funds, due in part to the idea that countries should tend to such issues on their own, and the fact that not every citizen who is mentally ill or suicidal will seek help, causing all the time, effort, and money to be wasted on an ignored campaign. Another ambassador argued that this resolution should be opposed due to the reasoning that funds would be going to the World Health Organization, not necessarily meaning and guaranteeing the suicide prevention and awareness would be funded. On the other side of the argument, ambassadors, in an attempt to sway the remaining delagates to their side, used heartfelt emotional statements and thoroughly researched facts. They speak in support of this resolution so that as a society and united world we can truly begin to make a change in mental illness, easing the tension that its taboos and stigmatizations bring. Screaming from the top of their lungs with all their might, fueled by the emotion of the debate, supporters rallied “suicide is a disease we can cure together” and that it is “crucial that we recognize and stop the increasing suicide rates” by all means possible. The resolution authors ended the debate with their closing speech, stating that using the World Health Organization was the best route to take, and that the Declaration of Human Rights states that it is the United Nation’s responsibility for all health needs, including those of mental health. Still reverberating with the energy from the debate, most ambassadors raised their placards, saying “I!” in favor of implementation, causing resolution number fifty-three to be passed at general assembly.
Although only a few resolutions were able to be presented in front of the entire delegation, all were amazing a deserve praise and credit for all of the hard work and dedication that the authors put into them.
