The guys involved

This year we were representing Angola and the delegate assignments were as follows:

GENERAL ASSEMBLY (GA)
Guillaume Fey (IB2): 1st Committee (Disarmament and International Security)
Hanna Kunnapuu (IB1): 2nd Committee (Economic and Financial)
Eva Wientjes (IB1): 3rd Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural)
Phoebe Pearce (IB1): 4th Committee (Special Political and Decolonisation)
Senait Mulu Gebreeyesus (IB1): 5th Committee (Administrative and Budgetary)
Josiah Markink (F4): 6th Committee (Legal)

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL (ECOSOC)
Emir Kaan Karadag (IB1)
Bas Peters (F4)

DISARMAMENT COMMISSION
Charlotte van Lanschot (IB1): Sub-commission 1
Hidde Wientjes (F5): Sub-commission 2

ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION
Astrid Price (IB1): Sub-commission 1
Kavita Luther (IB1): Sub-commission 2

HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
Zoe Kent (F5): Sub-commission 1
Jason Muhlberger (F5): Sub-commission 2

SPECIAL CONFERENCE ON LIMITS TO GROWTH
Eva Dekkers (IB1): Sub-commission 1
Edward Toy (IB1): Sub-commission 2

In addition to being a GA delegate, Guillaume Fey also acted as AMBASSADOR of Angola at this year's THIMUN.

Sunday January 25

Sixteen students and three ‘MUN directors’ left from school in the early afternoon and travelled by coach to The Hague. The journey was uneventful and we arrived in The Hague at around 5 p.m., registered at the World Forum (where THIMUN takes place every year) and went straight to our hotel, the ‘Badhotel’ in Scheveningen, not too far from the beach. Rooms were allocated, luggage was offloaded and we then all went to a pancake restaurant along the promenade and ate together. Students were allowed to go out on their own afterward, provided they went in groups and were back at the hotel by ‘curfew’, 23.00 hrs.

Monday January 26

For the students this day consisted largely of preparatory meetings and lobbying, so no real debating. At the preparatory meetings they received instructions on how their committee would be run and the rules which would apply once sessions got under way. More important however was the lobbying process. In the lobby areas the students (or now ‘delegates’ of Angola) got together with delegates from other countries with views similar to their own and ‘merged’ different resolutions in order to form one or more resolutions to be debated from tomorrow on. How successful a delegate is in lobbying depends on how well they have prepared beforehand. If they have researched the different issues thoroughly and tried hard to put together a resolution on one of the topics being discussed, they will very likely be able to get one or more of their own clauses included in a merged resolution. Most of our delegation managed to get one or more clauses, and in several cases all of their clauses, included in merged resolutions.

Later on in the afternoon the official opening ceremony took place with a number of speakers (including the mayor of The Hague) and Guillaume Fey, as ambassador of Angola, carried the country flag during this ceremony.

Tuesday January 27

The real debating had to wait for opening speeches in all of the committees and commissions. Since there are 150 or more delegates in each committee, only selected countries are allowed to make opening speeches. As ambassador, Guillaume had to make an opening speech in the General Assembly (GA) before a huge audience, and Eva Dekkers made one in her sub-commission of the ‘Special Conference on Limits to Growth’, the theme of this year’s THIMUN. These speeches had been practised the evening before in front of our whole delegation, and both went well on the day. Once opening speeches had been made, the real debating of resolutions began.... Several of our students ‘took the floor’ or spoke for or against the resolutions being debated. Senait Gebreeyesus in the GA 5th Committee (Administration and Budgetary) spoke against two resolutions and responded to six ‘points of information’ (i.e. questions) during the afternoon session. Josiah Markink in the GA 6th Committee (Legal) also submitted two amendments to resolutions. In the Disarmament sub-commission 2 Hidde Wientjes took the floor and had several points of information before the debate deteriorated into very undiplomatic argument and trading of insults, several delegates had to be removed and the commission was dismissed 30 minutes early. Fortunately this did not happen again during the week.

Several delegates were already complaining that, despite constantly rasing their ‘placard’, the board with their country name on it which is raised to indicate that a delegate wishes to speak or ask a question, they were not recognized by the chair of their committee. This was a complaint which would be repeated during the course of the week. There are 150 or more delegates in most of the committees, so it is more difficult to get to speak than at smaller MUNs, and some delegates were sat in positions where it was practically impossible for the chair to see them, never mind recognize them! This was a particular problem for Astrid Price in the Environment sub-commission 1,  and would continue to be so for the rest of the week, despite notes to the chair pointing out the problem.

Wednesday January 28

The second edition of ‘Munity’, the THIMUN newspaper, featured a photo of a beaming Bas Peters, who must have been looking forward to a good day of debate in ECOSOC (Economic and Social Council). While most delegates on this half-day were struggling to get themselves recognized by their chair, this did not turn out to be case for him. He took the floor twice and answered six points of information, and was instrumental in defeating an amendment, for which he received applause from the other delegates. Josiah also took the floor twice in his commission. Several delegates attempted to submit amendments (Hidde, Zoe Kent in GA Human Rights sub-commission 1, and Astrid no less than three times) but these were either not accepted by the chair or failed. Phoebe Pearce in GA 4th Committee (Special Political and Decolonization) took advantage of her position on the front row, and well within the view of the chair, to take the floor and speak in favour of her co-submitted resolution, and also to ask questions of other speakers. Charlotte van Lanschot in Disarmament sub-commission 1 (housed separately of the conference centre in the high-security building of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)) spoke for the first time in favour of a resolution which later passed.

Wednesday was a half-day, so delegates were free after lunch. The MUN directors had suggested an outing or excursion somewhere, but the students preferred free time, and most went into town to do a little sightseeing and shopping.

Thursday January 29

Another full day of debate. In the GA 2nd Committee (Economic and Financial) Kavita Künnapuu made her first speech, in Human Rights sub-commission 2 Jason Muhlberger rose to two points of information, and in ECOSOC Emir Karadag rose to three points of information. Josiah in GA 6th Committee rose to points of information four times but was not recognized when he wanted to take the floor and speak. Many delegates struggled once again to get themselves recognized by their chairs, and as a result there was a good deal of frustration expressed at the debriefing session held later that day. Probably the most successful delegate on this day was Bas in ECOSOC, who took the floor four times and also asked questions (or points of information); he also submitted large numbers of amendments, though on these occasions he was not recognized by the chair.

Unfortunately, both Zoe Kent and Eva Wientjes had not been feeling well since Wednesday, and Zoe decided to go home today. Eva stayed but was not able to make much of a contribution during the last two days of the conference.

Friday January 30

The six GA committees continued to debate this morning, but in the afternoon all came together in the ‘World Theatre’ to debate some of the resolutions already passed in the individual committees. During the morning Guillaume was able to speak and received applause for his contribution; this did not however really make up for the number of times that the chair failed to recognize him during the week. Josiah continued to impress: he spoke in the committee in the morning, and was the only one of our delegates to speak during the final debates in the General Assembly itself during the afternoon. His chair told him that he was ranked number 5 in his committee in terms of the number of times he spoke during the week - this is quite an achievement in a committee of around 150 delegates. Bas continued to work hard in ECOSOC, taking the floor no less than five times in the course of the day. Other delegates noted that the atmosphere in their committee was “not very serious today”.

Later in the afternoon the closing ceremony took place and still later the party/dance, which also took place in the World Forum building.

TOO GOOD, TOO BAD

What did the students like/dislike most about their THIMUN experience?
Among the positive aspects mentioned were the good level of debate in many of the committees/commissions. The whole experience of being at THIMUN and the cosmopolitan nature of the event were also seen by students as positive in themselves. Being given the opportunity to speak in public and meeting new people (and in some cases old friends) also figured high on the list of positives. Being in a hotel together away from home was undoubtedly also an interesting experience for many of the students.

On the negative side, far and away the greatest criticism was for the lunches provided by the organizers of the event. This is a perennial complaint, although we should perhaps pause to consider just how difficult it is to provide over 4,000 people with a reasonable lunch within a very short period of time. Other complaints related to the difficulty of being recognized during debate, or “being invisible” as Astrid put it. Another complaint related to the ‘curfew’, set at 11 p.m., which most students thought was too early; their MUN directors disagreed with them here however....

MUN directors Mr. Tonnaer, Mr. Morfea and Mr. Pearce enjoyed their week at THIMUN. We tried during our weekly sessions leading up to THIMUN to encourage the group to prepare properly for the event - the success of students at THIMUN depends to a large extent on how well they prepare beforehand and, as in previous years, some students prepared better than others. This is certainly an area where there could be improvement: students must devote more time to preparing policy statements and resolutions, and researching their assigned country. On the other hand, it was a pleasure to see students performing in a context other than that of school, and to see how seriously they took their participation at THIMUN once they were there. Most, if not all, of them would agree that it was a worthwhile learning experience and worth doing again - and if you don’t believe me, ask the students themselves! The group was co-operative and well-behaved, making the task of the MUN directors that much easier.

All students received a THIMUN badge and a certificate of participation, and a number of prizes were awarded. Joint winners of the prize for best performance in the current affairs quiz held in the weeks before THIMUN went to Guillaume Fey and Phoebe Pearce. The prize for best delegate at THIMUN, awarded for best pre-conference preparation and best conference participation, was a close run thing but went in the end to .... Bas Peters.

Congratulations to the prize-winners, and thanks to those students who gave an excellent presentation of their THIMUN experience at the school assembly on February 10th and, SEE YOU NEXT YEAR!

Photos