Simran Singh catches up with the Director of UN Security Council to ask about their expectations of the committee and delegates as a whole.
Journalist: If you were doing this committee as a delegate, which country would you hope to be allotted to?
Director: USA, definitely, because the thing is that when you’re an American delegate you have nothing to hide. It’s definitely easier than being Russia, for example, which is a bit nuanced. Being USA, you have power and a certain unofficial dominance over committee.
Journalist: So you do think the delegate of USA in this committee is living up to your expectations?
Director: Well first committee day, I can’t say much about it because we had lots of small administrative mistakes from the delegates but also from our side, so I think by the second day all the delegates will live up to the standard we have set for them.
Journalist: Considering this is a Security Council, with continuous crisis updates, what is a skill you would expect from the delegates which won’t necessarily be required in, say, a General Assembly?
Director: Well for a Security Council, the delegates need to be REALLY well researched and have in-depth knowledge of the Charter. As this is a CCC (Continuous Crisis Committee) they need to combine their knowledge of the topic and the Charter with on-the-feet thinking in order to deal with the crises at hand.
Journalist: Which do you prefer: quality or quantity? A delegate who speaks a lot, but now always with original ideas, or a delegate who speaks rarely speaks but always with excellent points?
Director: I mean ideally, the best thing would be a balance between the two, but I definitely prefer quality because I’ve had delegates who’ve sent me only one or two independent actions or directives, but they have been amazing, literally made me change the flow of my crisis arc, because they were so good. So I definitely prefer quality over quantity, because you can have someone who speaks a lot, but repeats points, but then I’m not going to notice you.
Journalist: Now that you’ve been a member of the Executive Board a few times, which one would you say is more stressful, being a delegate or a member of the executive board?
Director: I think in order of stress, most stressful is being a director, then a delegate and then an AD, because when you’re a director, the entire committee is in your palm and you are entirely responsible for the success or failure of the committee. A delegate is difficult because you always have so much to do and so much competition. Being an AD is the easiest because you have your directors to solve all your problems and you have people who know where they’re going so you just follow their path.
Journalist: Well you have two Additional Directors working under you who are presumably going to have a role hosting SMUN next year. Do you feel a responsibility in grooming and mentoring them?
Director: Yes, definitely, and it’s not just with the ADs but also with the internal delegates. The thing with SMUN is when we take our own children into interschool competitions we’re sort of grooming them, not with official lessons, but like when they see how we’re working, the way we’re dealing with committee, they pick it up. Like my mentor from last year, Ira Mahajan, I learnt how to direct committee; I’ve learnt how to be a good director. So definitely we’re grooming them; we’re preparing them for handling SMUN next year.