Interview with Chief Su

BY: Huseyin Mermercioglu

Can you describe your role in the UN as the Chief Superintendent?

As a matter of fact Chief Superintendent is my rank at the national service. In the UN we don’t have this ranking system. Currently, my role is the Acting Senior Police Adviser which has the abbreviation the ASPA. The ASPA is the Head of the Police Component. Our mission in Cyprus is called the UN peacekeeping force in Cyprus. The UN Mandate was authorised by the Security Council in 1964. So, we’ve been here for 56 years. My role in the Police Component is to facilitate, to maintain and to restore all the law and order. I’ll explain it in further details during the presentation.

What lead you to follow your career path?

I would like to say that my career is very muchly associated with the United Nations. I’m from China. My policing experience started in 1995, from the local police station as a community police officer to the National headquarters. I’ve been continuing my contribution for the last 17 years in the UN. This includes a couple of field missions as well as UN headquarter experiences in New York. Currently I’m the police reform adviser in Brindisi, Italy.

Does that mean you constantly travel?

Yes, I do!

What has been the toughest job in a country like Cyprus with a prior conflict?

Well, you can see the UN have been here for the past 56 years. I will say that the main challenge is still the political issues from the fact that we have two main communities. There’s several rounds of negotiations but currently we have a road map ahead of us. Still there are a lot of challenges in many terms. Even though they’re very technical issues we assume they are political matters. I see this as a challenge. If you ask me my opinions about the future, I’d like to say that the leaders and the communities have to show the true willingness to reunite. I’m also sharing the component on crime and criminal matters. I see a lot of potential and the multi-communal events have been increasing in the last 11 years. They have been quite successful. The members from both sides can sit together and exchange information. It’s for the benefit for all people on the island.

What type of events have you encountered in between the Cypriot communities?

I can give you an example just from this week. There was an art exhibition in the Ledra Palace Hotel and it’s quite impressive to be a witness for people’s reactions. It was a bi-communal event and it’s a return of these art paintings from both sides. The two leaders also attended the event and this is a quite positive action. A lot of people including the artists and their relatives were quite moved. This is an example that there’s still hope.

Do you believe that there is still hope of changing the mind-set of people with loss, trauma and anger?

Yes.

Have you recognized any changes in the society’s viewpoints towards the issue?

I think they have started to accept the other community. Currently, there are mandates monitored at the crossing points. You can see the movement between the two communities. I saw some fascinating statistics and how it has increased over the years. We should encourage these kind of interactions between the two communities. We should encourage them to visit each other and maybe live with the other community for a while. Especially, education for young people is needed and I recommend encouraging them to visit the other part. In my opinion you have many shared culture and background. Young people should be sharing their interest with the other community.

Do you have any suggestions for our generation from your experiences as a leader?

I was at a firm in Switzerland and I had the privilege to explore the young generation there. I saw a lot of potential for the younger generation.

As I was observing, I have recognized that young people have similar interests globally. They receive information much faster than the older generation. So more or less, they are on the same page compared to the older generation. This is the potential and recognition. They have better understanding of the world and global issues especially what we’ll be talking about in this conference about the climate crisis.

The Plenary Session

BY: Lara Tokar

9.40 – resolution on the question of managing the threat of biological weapons presented by the delegate of Palestine and another speech for came from the delegate of Armenia. 10.02 – attack speech against the resolution about biological weapons. The delegate didn’t open himself upto any points of informations on the account that “the resolution speaks for itself”. This is followed by another attack speech by a delegate of DPRK who strongly urges the house to vote against this resolution. 10.13 – The first resolution succesfully passes! Clapping is in order. The house then moves on to a resolution submitted by GA2 on the question of providing affordable and clean energy to developing countries. 3 minutes of reading time is allocated followed by a speech by the delegate of the UK urging the house to vote for the resolution. The delegate of France on the next speech for the resolution, receives a point of order as he was speaking “too loud”. Sign for how passionate he is! 10.31 am – The delegate of Uruguay speaking against begins his speech with a reference of a speech of last year’s, “it’s basic politics”. After his speech urging the house to vote against the resolution, he yields the floor to the delegate of Armenia who confirms that she believes this resolution to be inadequate with her speech. 10.43 am – The resolution does not pass. The delegates move on to debating the third resolution as the main submitter being Kuwait. Following another speech in favour by the delegate of Russia, the delegate of South Korea takes the floor to deliver a speech against the resolution. Although the delegate only opens her upto one point of information, as the one she received was in favour of her argument, the chairs entertain two more points of information. 11.05 – The final resolution to be debated is on the question of voluntary euthanasia. The house moves on to listening to a second speech by the delegate of the Dominican Republic following the first passionate speech for the resolution. 11.25 – Time against this resolutions begins as the delegate of Argentina takes the floor to deliver a speech against which emphasises on his belief on free will. Following another concise attack speech, the final voting procedure follows. The resolution passes and it is time for a coffee break before the official closing of the session.

Historical Council

BY: Hüseyin Mermercioğlu

Saturday 8th of February. The Historical Security Council proceeded on debating with the clause that was submitted by the People’s Republic of China. The next clause is submitted by the delegate of Iraq. This amendment didn’t pass due to an overwhelming votes against. The P5 members approached the board to have a meeting with the chairs. Unfortunately this clause didn’t pass as it was vetoed. The first break started at 11:00 and ended at 11:20. Interestingly enough, the delegates agreed on some clauses which passed with 0 people neither against nor obstaintons. The delegate of China is constantly getting abused by the chaire of HSC and vice versa. The HSC moved into Topic 2: The Question of South Africa which was submitted by the USSR. The delegate of the USSR kept his speech very concise and was open to points of information. The delegate was called out by the delegate of South Africa as he called them out racist regarding the clause. The debate were really tense and in some cases the delegates were getting off the topic. The chairs strongly insisted that their commentary should only refer to the year of 1986. A p5 meeting took place regarding this clause. The amednment from South Africa passed. The last clause passed with 12 for and 7 against votes.

Report on the Security Council 2100

BY: Stefanie Mannnari

The delegates, still tired from Friday’s conference and after a failed attempt to take a medimun photo, began debating clauses from the very beginning of Saturday’s conference. The first clause debated was submitted by Saudi Arabia and it suggested that member states would facilitate the integration of climate refugees in their host communities in ways such as ensuring they have legal status by offering them citizenship as well as them having representation by requiring for there to be at least one climate refugee in local government. The delegate of the UK then imposed a point of information, saying he was concerned about the clause since it didn’t take into consideration that all countries in the world have problems of their own and by sending refugees there we are ignoring the problems of those countries. Many delegates, including the delegate of Russia, the delegate of the USA and the delegate of Germany were all worried about this clause and the things it lacks. The delegate of the UK proceeded to speak against the clause saying that the clause requests that member states spend money and time while these countries have problems of their own, using the US as an example saying that it has lost Miami and Florida and therefore it is not efficient to relocate people in countries that already struggle. The delegate of China suggested an amendment of the clause regarding sub-clause ‘h’, saying that the fact that the clause tries to tackle the education system and merge the refugees with locals but this would create problems as there are language barriers and cultural differences which deems it as unrealistic. The amendment passed but the clause ended up not passing.

Later on in the day, havoc was brought to the room when the delegate of Germany declared war and invaded Venezuela. With three countries siding with Germany and two with Venezuela (while the rest remained neutral), Germany’s invasion of Venezuela was deemed as successful and therefore, the delegate of Venezuela could no longer vote while the delegate of Germany was now granted two votes. This was not enough for Germany, as it later on declared war on France, invading successfully and gaining France’s vote too. Immediately after, Venezuela declared war on the UK, very closely winning and gaining the UK’s vote and power, and using it to call a P5 meeting. The topic of the climate refugee crisis was resolved and finished and a new topic of the ice-free state of the Arctic was introduced. Many debates took place and delegates were given time to draft more clauses before the final resolution decision coming up on Sunday.

Report on GA3

BY: Lara Tokar

9.15 – After entering the right room and spending too long trying to get everyone in a wonderful picture, a democratic vote is taken to whether sit down and wait until then resolution comes or to have a dancing ice breaker. Most prefer to sit and work on ther resolutions.

9.20 – The first debate begins on the question of improving education for young people in sustainable development.

9.41 – Time for the first resolution elapses and the delegate of Peru takes the floor to deliver her speech against.

9.51- The resolution hasn’t passed. Clapping is not in order. At exactly 10 am – “Resolution Number 6” which is about once more improving education for young people in sustainable development is passed around the room.

At 10.24 am – the resolution passes. Clapping is in order.

10.27 – The chairs say the house is allowed to go for coffee break a little earlier but whoever is not back by 10.49 the latest will have to face a punishment. As two delegates enter at 10.50, they are made to stand at the front and sing for the house. They sing karaoke to Milkshake by Kelis as the house cheers. The third debate begins at 11.10 am exactly

At 11.50 the voting tames place for an amendment to the resolution presented by the delegate of Bantladesh. The amendment passes and clapping is in order. The resolution as a whole is later voted and it is passed with 39 votes for.

At 11.58 the next debating procedure on the LGBTQ+ rights in military service begins. The house applauds at 12.02 before the first speech as the Approval Committee commends the house for having the most well-structured resolutions.

At 12.24 – The previous voting procedure is repeated as the house is divided due to a significant number of abstentions. With a difference of 1 vote, the resolution doesn’t pass. Following this, a three minute recess is taken where the house dances to YMCA. Following this, the next debate begins with a speech by the delegate of Australia.

1.23pm – The resolution passes. Clapping is in order. After the lunchbreak at 1.30, everyone is back in the GA by 1.55 – except for a few who were late that will receive their punishments following the first debate. The first debate upon returning submitted by the DPRK begins on the question of climate induced migration from Sahel region. Two amendments, one by the delegate of Argentina and the other by the delegate of Russia were submitted. Both pass.

The resolution then passes at 3.07 pm and it is time for the punishment. Following the punishment involving karaoke to Barbie Girl and Superbass, the house moved on to an icebreaker with doing a Q&A with the chairs. Questions included celebrity crushes and favorite….fictional animals?

At 3.48pm reading time for the final resolution is allocated. After a break, at 4.50 the house is back in the GA to complete debating the resolution. An amendment submitted by the delegate of Uruguay is passed and another by the delegate of Norway not passed.

At 4.25 pm with an overwhelming majority of 45 votes for and 7 votes against the final resolution passes and the final punishment for those who were late after the break begins, a dance to Rasputin by Boney M.

At 5.35 pm the day is wrapped!