DISEC squabbles over semantics, reunifies Korean peninsula

DISEC’s issues with precise language from session one continue to plague them to the very end.

New York, NY
DISEC
J. Humphreys for KCNA

Heated debate has broken out between delegates from the DPRK, the Russian Federation, the Federal Republic of Germany, and a representative invited from southern Korea.

The debate centres around the issue of ambiguity present in the language of the working paper. The meaning of and distinction between civilian and military, or strategic and tactical, for example, is unclear in the paper.

The Russian Federation is concerned about the latitude this affords states parties to interpret the prospective resolution, fearing they would abuse this power. The DPRK delegation feels this fears are unfounded, because the language of the paper is not mandatory.

Additionally, the working paper appears to contain a clause that would support a mechanism for unifying the Korean peninsula, by fusing Korea with the hostile elements south of the demilitarized zone. A delegate for southern Korea admitted to authorship of this clause when pressed. This unprecedented development sits far outside the remit of the council, and, however sincerely aspirational it may be, is laughably naïve.

This rogue, 21^st century Sunshine policy is nothing short of reprobate treachery. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea condemns these attempts to undermine the legitimate mission of the DISEC.

Socialist nation passes resolution on religious discrimination

Despite an oppressive delegation climate, socialist Republic of Cuba successfully negotiated a powerful resolution through the UNHRC.

New York, NY
UNHRC
J. Humphreys for KCNA

A resolution sponsored by the Cuban delegation has successfully been adopted by the committee. The resolution, which confers significant latitude on the states’ parties to determine the terms on which religious freedom is protected, recommends the creation of a religious register.

The purpose of such a register is to allow state authorities to monitor idolatrous elements of the citizenry and alert public safety offices to the prospect of security threats. Despite protests by more laissez-faire and socially degenerate states, Cuba was able to achieve great diplomatic success in deftly moving the resolution through the council.

This, significantly, represents not merely a failure by Western states to enforce a treacherous and internationally myopic resolution against vulnerable states, but a truly impressive win for the recognition of human rights regimes in socialist nations as models for the rest of the world.

The resolution further urged the elimination of religious discrimination, the protection of people affected by religious discrimination, and other such good things presently covered by existing DPRK laws.

On a vaguely related point, authorship of the resolution was the responsibility of the US.

Interview with delegation for Republic of Turkey

Amid terror crisis, a delegate for the Republic of Turkey speaks exclusively with KCNA

Brussels, BE
NATO
J. Humphreys for KCNA

What does the Republic of Turkey make of these recent terrorist attacks on your country?
The Republic of Turkey believes the cause of these attacks was that the NATO-led coalition was based in the airbase that was the subject of the terrorist attack. The Republic of Turkey has acquiesced to lead the coalition against ISIS and has therefore been vulnerable to its attacks.

How does this affect Turkey’s approach to this debate?
The Republic of Turkey is concerned that some member states are undermining the overall objectives of the organisation by pursuing individual interest. Hypocrisy is rampant within the organisation as it currently stands, and the organisation fails to recognise the consequences of its actions on the international community. Debate has stagnated. Turkey has been the subject of baseless assertions. The Republic of Turkey is deeply angered by its supposed allies and wishes for more purposeful and respectful debate.

Do you think some member states are naïve in commenting on this issue due to their lack of proximity to the conflict zone?
The Republic of Turkey has been disappointed by some of the comments made in this committee. Not all nations have the luxury of being distant from this conflict. Not all nations are shielded from conflict by their geographic location.

Leaders’ meeting an orgy of neoliberal onanism

Hamburg, Germany
G20
J. Humphreys for KCNA

The G20 has convened this week to discuss the future direction of trade policy in the 21^st century. With the untypical exception of the United States, every delegate has essentially been in agreement with each other that in the contemporary trade climate, the best solution is to steer into the skid of globalisation, and prosper while Western forces are willing to cooperate with one another to the extent it favours their imperial interests.

The exception to this rule thus far has been US President and dysfunctional, malignant, right-wing fascist Donald Trump, whose radical isolationism has drawn the ire of many G20 delegates.

The spectacle of world leaders agreeing with one another over their respective trading capabilities was vividly pornographic. Wherever conflict has broken out in the committee, it has been over matters such as environmental protection, financial regulation, and similar trivialities.

Chancellor Angela Merkel, in such an outburst, attacked both the Russian Federation and the United Kingdom’s overseas dependency of Canada as hypocritical petro-economies for their transparent hand wringing over environmental concerns.

In a sterling speech, guest of honour Marshall Kim Jong Un humbled the committee with a reminder of the DPRK’s prosperity under the juche idea. The DPRK was entirely unaffected by both the “global financial crisis” in 2009 and the subsequent European debt crisis.

The committee is expected to move onto a discussion on the topic of tax avoidance in the very near future, in what is almost guaranteed to be an impressive exhibition of unbridled comedy.