CIMUN Chronicle / Article / 2016

Working Papers Generate Concerns of Imperialist Motives in UNHRC


IPD Article Image - Working Papers Generate Concerns of Imperialist Motives in UNHRC

By Maya Navarro and Cloda McCormack, The Chronicle


The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is addressing the only approved working paper on the table and its alleged potential for being “imperialist” in nature, according to the Japanese delegation. They are debating this while on the topic of technology in economic development and human rights.


Working paper 1.2, led primarily by the People’s Republic of China, has been seen as “too imperialistic to gain any traction in committee,” according to the representative of Pakistan in the UNHRC. “Clauses about unpayable loans given to developing nations are not being addressed adequately in committee.”  This viewpoint is held by many members of the UNHRC, as a Belgian representative commented that “the neo-imperialist actions taken by China in past couple of years, such as the expansion of the military in the South China Sea,” has “tighten[ed] the grip of developing nations.”


Furthermore, the representative of Spain called attention to working paper 1.2 and accused that it is not sustainable in accordance with the United Nations Sustainability Goals. “When asked about incentives for developed nations to help underdeveloped nations in the long-run, these incentives, which include more sources from underdeveloped countries, will only benefit the economy of developed nations,” the representative of Spain said. The Spaniard continued that this working paper “Shows China’s hidden agenda, to control the world.”


Immediately after,  the Venezuelan representative spoke in support of said paper, stating it “has a diverse portfolio of options for humanitarian aid,” in attempts to garner support for this working paper from Least Developed Countries in the room.  Although this working paper is causing obvious divides throughout the committee, it is the only one with substantial debate, leading to the belief that it may be the only one chances of passing, most likely with later amendments to please as many states as possible.