“Your execution is completely wrong”
- UNSC Chair
Day two’s discussions were marred with numerous fault lines -- the security council broke into 2 seemingly polarised factions. On one aisle stood the delegates of Russia, Ethiopia, and Vietnam. On the other, everyone else. Solutions were valiantly put up as questions from both delegates and chairs quickly whittled the numerous suggestions to a couple few. Hostilities emerged between Russia and India, and the presiding chairs stepped in at various times, not just to ease conflict but to lecture the council members for their apparent lack of thorough research and preparation.
Prof. Thomas Shelling shares insights as debate drawn on
Attempting to furnish delegates with a clearer understanding of economic conditions in war-torn regions, Professor Thomas Shelling imparted invaluable insight on the applicability of economic theories into council proceedings. He highlighted the need for the desire for a ceasefire to come organically from the grassroots, and paralleled his arguments with the inefficiencies wrought by government intervention in market systems.
The delegate of Vietnam had much to say however, as he retorted with his own economic knowledge, citing negative externalities, which is the burden on third parties as a result of economic activities (i.e lung complications due to haze from slash-and-burn practices). He believed that market conditions would eventually need government intervention and support, much like how conflicts necessitate foreign action in due course.
Suggestions scrutinised ; Chair steps in
Amidst the many suggestions put forth by member states, one notable solution was the implementation of trust-building exercises between warring cliques in setting the foundation for peace arguments. This was met by nods of agreement across-the-board; the council had finally agreed on one method of peace mediation. In elaborating the details of these “trust-building exercises”, the delegate of Ethiopia propounded the possibility of sporting events between civilians on both sides. His suggestion was not taken too kindly by the chairs, who lambasted the proposition as being “impractical”
“By the end of the match, the 22 players won’t even be left standing!”
- UNSC Chair
India and Russia cross swords
In discussion in the possible involvement of the recognition of non-state players in peace discussions, the Russian delegate expressed her views in the necessity of acknowledging the requests of said non-state actors; she underlined the need of pacification as a method of allaying multilateral tensions. However, the Indian delegate did not take kindly to her statements, and accused the Russian delegate’s viewpoints of being incongruent with her own foreign policy, pointing to the Russian Armed Forces’ refusal to cooperate with non-state actors in Crimea as substantiation.
“Does India also recognise non-state players? It’s a simple yes or no question”
- Delegate of the Russian Federation
Despite the chair’s request that delegates not resort to ad-hominems in their arguments, the Russian delegate responded in kind. She struck while the iron of conflict was red-hot, and fired back with her own retorts; she made a scalding remark disguised as a rhetorical question (appended above), implying that the Indian delegate’s actions were hypocritical -- India does not consider non-state organisations when it comes to peace agreements, she stated.
Voice of reason emerges: merging of draft resolutions
The council then launched into a presentation of draft resolutions, with both sides of the aisle offering up the working pieces, an amalgamation of the gamut of ideas from the day prior.
The delegates of Vietnam, Ethiopia, and Russia -- leaders of the opposition bloc -- found that the solutions proposed in the US-led bloc’s draft resolution were not too dissimilar from their own. Recognising these semblances, the delegate of Vietnam cordially suggested to all delegates that they combine efforts, and collaborate on a single draft during the night. The council then went into a vote, with the more substantive “draft resolution 1.2” receiving the highest support. Thus far, the security council has not yet seen such an amiable atmosphere, signifying the departure from earlier hostilities as the possibility of a passed resolution inched ever closer.
The agreement definitively marked the end of any discord between blocs, symbolising the transition from enmity to amity.