By: Robyn Welsh
The Advisory Panel on the Question of Natural Resources, Seas and Oceans (APQNRSO) is not your average committee. Even before the conference began, hours of hard work and dedication were poured into preparing for the conference. Each expert (the term used for participants rather than delegates) studied the report book and produced a policy statement outlining each of their personal positions. After preparing their thousand word long policy statements, experts could finally put their hard work to the test, and it has paid off.
In the APQ, students really are the experts in their fields, representing both Countries and NGOs specialized in the topic being discussed. They understand what they are doing and know far more about the topic at hand than an ambassador would. Rather than having delegates who debate on issues and form resolutions, experts in various fields work together, first merging and lobbying, then forming clauses in the Nuclear Security Summit Style (NSS). Soon after, they discuss the issues in a manner that closely resembles the Security Council. After discussing, experts come to an agreement, and if consensus is not reached, the clause is tabled until they can reach consensus at a later stage. Finally, the clauses are reworked into a communiqué emphasizing the committee’s point of view as a whole. The communiqué starts with ‘we’ highlighting the group as a collective.
Behind the closed doors of the APQNRSO, Ian Chang (expert of Vietnam in The Advisory Panel) proposed a clause to benefit the environment by putting more funding into carbon scrubbers in order to limit the amount of Carbon Dioxide being emitted into the air. Chang recognized that countries may not want to agree to limiting carbon dioxide emissions because it may stifle their economy. He furthermore believed that encouraging and putting more research into Carbon Scrubber technology would be a smarter alternative. This clause was unanimously passed, a step in the right direction when it comes to benefiting the environment.
Mr. Fokke de Jong, (a member of the board for the THIMUN Foundation) spoke very highly of the forum. Mr. de Jong believes the APQ is a great experience for participants because everyone has the same say in the issues discussed. Since the forum is so small, experts get equal speaking time. Although they may have their differences, “NGOs and Countries are working towards a common goal,” and in order to reach that goal they must look past these differences and focus on solving the issues together. With regards to the issues being discussed in the forum, Mr. de Jong stated that it is very timely to talk about them in this region, continuing to say that the issues are so easy to apply to the Pacific. He went on to comment that the issues discussed in the forum are, important for everyone in the region. It is, however, noteworthy that The United States is not a signatory because they believe it infringes on their national security.
The chairs of APQ had high regards for their forum. According to one of the chairs, Liam Teggin, “everybody is eager to speak and submit clauses,” he began, “and everyone applied to be here, so they are more dedicated.” Another chair, Claire Valluy, vouched for the delegates, laughing and stating that, “they are like machines. They write so many clauses that are amazing. We already have twenty clauses to combine and submit to the Security Council.” Akhil Gupta, the third and final chair in the forum, mentioned the consensus vote saying that, “in order to pass a clause everyone has to vote for it,” which helps to ensure the cooperation of all experts.
Though APQNRSO is relaxed, the level of cooperation is unmatched by any other forum. Experts tackle one broad issue by solving smaller issues within it and do so with grace and friendliness.
