Three Working Papers: Is it Enough?

By Edison Park

The UNGASS convened today to discuss three working papers on the topic of solving economic corruption. Each resolution paper focused on different aspects of the crisis, resulting in debate and a sense of confusion in the committee.

The first working paper that was presented was the Anti-Corruption Courts Resolution (ACC), which emphasized the importance of not only responding to the corruption in the situation with the First Russian Czech Bank (FRCB), but also working towards long term goals in fighting corruption as a whole. The resolution consists of multiple strong clauses, including the creation of a three court system that consists of an international level, United Nations level, and a national level. The resolution, if voted favorably upon, would use funds from the United Nations General Fund and the World Bank to educate leaders on corruption and also establish programs to encourage further transparency in bank actions.

The Accountability and Prevention Against Corruption Resolution (APAC) instead focused on economic and political stability. In an attempt to protect the legitimacy of democratic practices, this working paper presents a resolution that specifically denounces foreign involvement entirely in elections. The paper also includes the creation of a new United Nations committee which would oversee bank and government interactions.

The final working paper was the Corruption Accountability and Prevention Resolution (CAP), which centered on researching into the reasoning behind corrupt practices. This working paper introduces the establishment of the International Organization of Corruption Identification and Correction (IOCIC), which would review financial interactions and conduct audits on corrupt actors. 

Disputes broke out following the presentations of the papers, as delegates made it clear that collaborating and combining resolutions would be dissatisfactory. The delegation of Tanzania made this sentiment clear when stating that the ACC Resolution is the “superior resolution” and dismissed the APAC Resolution as mere “suggestions.” However, the delegation of Jordan stated that the APAC Resolution offered “multiple solutions”, and that it is the most “solid plan”. In addition to this, the chair spoke on the legitimacy of specific clauses in the working papers. The chair clarified that loans are a government regulated and transparent action already, and that the creation of courts on corruption would be extremely difficult to pass. As these concerns relate to all the papers, delegates have debated continuously on the effectiveness of each resolution plan.

As debate continues, it is unclear if the true resolution to corruption is one of these working papers, a combination of them, or not any of them. The decision is expected to be made by the end of the day. 

Japanese Reconstruction Agency: Nuclear Fallout in Policy?

By Edison Park

Protesters in Tokyo today left the Japanese Reconstruction agency paralyzed. The protestors demanded better transparency from the government, and have shown dissatisfaction with the directives that have been passed, namely the Evacuation 101 & Nuclear Stabilization Directive and the Rescue, Evacuation, and Supply 2.0 Directive. In response to this, new directives have been proposed.

Directive 3.0 was presented at approximately 4:10 PM, and was sponsored by Shingo Ura, Yuichiro Hata, Renho Saito, and Shigeru Sugawara. The first clause of the directive immediately raised controversy, as it demands “conducting scheduled blackouts in low-demand hours” and “restricting energy usage during daylight hours.” These are actions to be taken in order to alleviate the power outages throughout the nation. Confusion arose within the committee; Mayor Masanori Yamamoto questioned, “How does making more people suffer help those who are already suffering?” He adds, “If the power lines are destroyed, then causing blackouts just causes more suffering and confusion.” The protestors’ demands were met later in the directive through a proposal of Quasi Autonomous Non-Governmental Organizations publish detailed reports of government actions and also calls for a media team to be created for greater transparency. These clauses have not been problematic.

Another directive that was presented was the Medicine Distribution and Communications Restoration Directive, sponsored by Osamu Fujimura, Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, and Masanori Yamamoto. This directive focused on the distribution of information and medicine to the Japanese people. The first clause allocates 2 billion yen to provide radios for the purpose of communication, while also mandating a press conference every hour and looking to reconstruct cell phone towers. However, this idea of reconstruction of cell phone towers raised questions within the agency, as many delegates felt the need to look for more instant action, rather than committing to the reconstruction at the current moment. The second clause allocates 200 billion yen to provide anti-radiation medicine to the people. Some delegates also found this clause to not be an immediate solution to the problems at hand; Representative Tatsuo Hirano explicitly asked, “How is this plan an immediate solution?” Economist Sakiko Fukuda-Parr responded by stating that even a plan that takes months is still an immediate solution. 

The final directive presented during this committee session was the Prioritizing the People Directive, which focused on restoring stability, reinforcing communication, and providing resources. The first clause of this directive focused on establishing a strong communication system, suggesting that a stronger weather system prediction be made, more public newspapers be published, and that hospital resources be used efficiently by relocating medical professionals to danger hotspots. This clause was disputed, again, due to the necessity of urgent action; delegates such as Fukuda-Parr felt that establishing a stronger weather prediction would take too long to be effective in resolving the current crisis. The other clauses urged relocations to the more established cities of Aizuwakamatsu and Iwaki, as well as supplying more care packages for the victims and developing radiation testing for residents. 

The committee has suspended debate, and will vote on these directives today. The people of Japan await their decisions.

Japanese Reconstruction Agency: Action Plans

By: Edison Park

The Japanese Reconstruction Agency met for a second session today to discuss specifics regarding plans of action. Following the continued debate on what aspects of the crisis should be prioritized, the agency split into blocs to push directives. Two directives were passed in this session.

The first directive, sponsored by Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Osamu Fujimura, Masanori Yamamoto, and Minoru Hanada, focuses on providing immediate relief to the Japanese citizens and stabilizing nuclear power plants. The Evacuation 101 and Nuclear Stabilization Directive allocates a total of 190 billion yen (approx. 1.9 billion USD) for the following actions:

• Have top Japanese construction companies build temporary shelters (100 billion yen)

• Have NGOs lead an evacuation of a 20-kilometer radius of the Fukushima Daiichi and Daini power plants (5 billion yen)

• Utilize trucks owned by TEPCO, a Japanese utility company, to transport government-owned generators and water to stabilize nuclear reactors (25 billion yen)

• Provide care packages that are to be distributed by NGOs every 3 days (50 billion yen)

• Evacuation of those not impacted by the nuclear blast in response to other problems caused by the disaster (10 billion yen)

The second directive, sponsored by Yuichiro Hata, Renho Saito, Shingo Ura, Kiyoshi Kurokawa, Aiko Sugimoto, Shigeru Sugawara, and Sekita Yasuo, focuses on the livelihood of the Japanese people and the consequences of both of the natural disasters and the following nuclear radiation. The Rescue, Evacuation, and Supply Directive outlines the following ideas: 

• Send preliminary alerts directed towards towns within 5 kilometers of the nuclear disaster for evacuation purposes

• Use the Japanese Air Self-Defense to help the evacuation 

• Instruct local governments to distribute medicine to the people for the radioactivity

• Allow the efforts made by foreign nations

• Create an agency to deal with radiation-affected areas

• Use government media to spread transparent news on the situation

Concerns with the second directive were introduced by Masanori Yamamoto, Osamu Fujimura, and Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, specifically regarding the weight of foreign influence, funding, and a lack of specific information. Delegates mainly found troubles with the fifth operative clause, which insinuates a reliance on foreign aid. Despite these concerns, the directive barely passed with ten votes for and six votes against.

The committee will continue the discussion for further action after lunch.

The Japanese Reconstruction Agency: An Insider on the First Session

By: Edison Park

In response to the Japanese nuclear disaster of this year, 2011, the Japanese Reconstruction Agency has convened to discuss plans to regain national stability. The agency, despite debates on what the priorities should be, has made clear topics that they desire to focus on during their first session.

The agency has focused on the immediate actions that need to be taken, the first seeming to be the evacuation of the citizens. With a current 2-kilometer radius evacuation and the people being left in the dark on all the information of the situation, the agency aspires to expand this radius, while also informing the citizens on the situation to ensure trust and transparency. This has shown to be a major priority for most delegates; Representative of the Liberal Democratic Party, Masayoshi Yoshino, has expressed concerns as a Fukushima native, and presses for a minimum 3-kilometer radius evacuation rather than the current mandated 2-kilometer radius. This radius evacuation has been debated, but the clear consensus of the agency is that limiting nuclear exposure to the citizens is a necessity.

They have also briefly discussed the topic of the environment, stating that handling the environmental repercussions of the disaster should be a priority. Head of the Social Democratic Party of Japan, Mizuho Fukushima, regarded that even before the relocation of the people, it is essential to focus on the environmental consequences. 

The committee spoke mostly during the second hour about the importance of giving aid to the people, and that getting supplies into the affected areas appears to be difficult. As the current plan stands, the committee looks to focus on relocation efforts and then providing aid to these given areas. The agency has discussed how the aid would be transported and the delegates spoke on utilizing the military, coastal guard, and even airdropping supplies similar to the use of airdropping in Berlin by nations such as the United States. As for what the aid would look like, the committee briefly mentioned stimulus packages for the unemployed, but specifics have yet to be considered.

In receiving disaster aid, the agency seems to be concerned with the role of foreign nations. Foreign aid has been a pressing concern due to concerns of exploitation. A representative of the Democratic Party, Hiroshi Nakai, pressed the importance of using NGOs during the first moderated caucus, but reminded the committee that this is a time of weakness of the nation, and insinuated that overreliance on foreign aid may result in devastating consequences to the nation’s sovereignty. However, other delegates have insisted that it is important to not be stubborn in receiving aid, and the Mayor of Kesennuma, Shigeru Sugawara, has clarified by stating that reliance on foreign aid is an inevitable necessity.

Near the end of the first session, a CNN report emphasizing the urgency of the situation, as well as introducing a new topic: the mental health of the Japanese people. Before the end of the session, the committee began an unmoderated caucus to discuss this new topic and its position on the agenda in comparison to the other concerns.

In essence, the agency currently debates about the order of priority, as well as how these actions should look like. The session ended with the delegates emphasizing all of their concerns with the situation and initial ideas regarding plans of action. The agency is expected to begin a second session to discuss more specific plans and begin to take action further at 11:30 AM.