The Newsletter of the Model United Nations of The Hague – 26 April 2015 – The Hague – 11 Pages – Volume 1 | Issue 4

> IMPRESSUM

Editors-in-ChiefNabadip DebAlexandra van Walraven

Layout DesignerIskander Khairoutdinov

PhotographerJip van LeemputIuna Vieira

JournalistsDianto LeeflangChristine NikanderIuna VieiraTanya ZhekovaCamelia VasilovStela Marinova GinevaRachel GreenwaldIlinca BogaciovSakari NuuttilaTamara RaatsShariqa HabibMaria Mois

After three days of intense debates and fruitful deliberations the MUNOTH 2015 ended on a bright note with the closing ceremony being held at the Leiden University College premises.

Delegates from 144 nationalities who started out as students but ended the conference as diplomats hopeful of a better future for the world we live in. While the General Assembly discussed on the issue of food security; the Human Rights Council discussed the Syrian Arab Republic situation; the International Court of Justice listened to the case of Marshall Islands versus the United Kingdom and creating a customary norm on nuclear weapon testing and the Security Council debated on the United Nations’ relations with the regional bodies.

The conference was graced by among others, by His Excellency The Ambassador of Qatar and the Deputy Director of Europol during the inauguration ceremony and the diplomatic soiree. The debate was not the entire picture though. The delegates socialized with a great party at the La Bodeguita and took back

some amazing memories from the excellent venue of NH Hotel, Den Haag which also houses the World Trade Centre, Hague.

The editorial board of the MUNOTH Observer would like to thank the Secretariat for the conference which was made possible due to their immense efforts over the past few months. Their work was exemplary in terms of dedication and sincerity evident at the success of MUNOTH 2015.

The MUNOITH Observer would like to end by thanking the unsung heroes of MUNOTH- the journalists and photographers who made four newsletters, more than hundred blog and Instagram updates and the official after-movie possible through their impressive work ethnics and commitment. We would also like to thank our layout designer, Iskander who made the newsletter the work of art that they are.

Thank you for this year’s conference and the Observer signs of hoping to have you all back next year. <<

MUNOTH 2015 ends on a bright note> EDITORIaL

MUN as a career? 10

Humans of CSC 6

/MUNof TheHague/MUNOTHObserver

munoth.orgmunothobserver.wordpress.com

@themunothobserver

The MUNOTH Observer – 26 April 2015 2

The Devil in the Details> SakaRI NUUTTILa

During the MUNOTH conference, the Human Rights Council experienced how difficult reaching a consensual agreement through negotiations can be. Lengthy discussion ensued over the fine print and writing working papers and resolutions. The clauses of the working papers, projected on the big screen, were scrutinized closely through tedious rounds of objections, corrections, and revisions.

The smallest details, down to grammatical errors, were noted by the delegates and subsequently duly amended by the chairs. The French delegation, for example, was particularly adamant on correctly adding the ing-endings to all preamble verbs of the resolution on the deterioration of human rights in Syria.

It is naturally essential for resolutions and treaties to be written in a clear and detailed manner. However, following the discussion on details of resolutions shows how much bending and compromising is required from all delegations to reach any kind of consensus. This can make comprehensive resolutions with unequivocal wording extremely difficult.Indeed, international resolutions often face the danger of being redundant and ambiguous, leaving their meanings open to interpretation. Resolutions of this kind have very limited practical value and can, as history has shown multiple times, even contribute to intensifying the crisis.

On Sunday, the HRC voted clause by clause on its second working paper of the conference, for a resolution concerning extrajudicial executions in the Middle

East. Voting on the working paper was conducted in this manner due to time constraints and because it was clear that some delegations would not give their consent to certain clauses.

Discussion on the clauses was, once again, very specific. The Russian delegation objected to the use of the word “huge” when referring to the magnitude of the influx of refugees from Syria to Lebanon, on the grounds of it sounding unacademic. Many suggestions were made by delegates, and finally the word “mass” was agreed upon as appropriate.Not all debates over wording were purely of grammatical nature. The HRC delegates were strict in crafting both resolutions so that their implications would be comprehensive, inclusive and indiscriminating. In an attempt to achieve this, however, debates ran

HUMaN RIgHTS COUNCIL

The MUNOTH Observer – 26 April 2015 3

in circles, as several delegations were unwilling to compromise on certain points.

In the end, the resolution on the deterioration of human rights in Syria passed with an overwhelming majority, and the resolution on extrajudicial executions failed by vote of an overwhelming majority.

Regardless, the MUNOTH Human Rights Council successfully drafted two resolutions on extremely complicated issues, and passed one of them, in just three days. We can only hope for a similar degree of effectiveness from the 47 delegations of the UN Human Rights Council on these pressing and important matters. <<

Cultural Complots> TaMaRa RaaTS

When discussing the discrepancy between international and national law with regards to extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary killings in the Middle East, the importance of sovereignty was stressed by almost all delegations. To bridge the gap between international and domestic law, reforms of the first mentioned were considered necessary.

The delegation of France brought up the point of cultural differences. When reforming the framework of international law, he emphasized that the culture and morals that underlie international law may differ from those that domestic policies of certain countries are formed to: “We have to keep local culture in mind.” He gave the example of the use of torture in some Middle Eastern cultures.

Brazil builds on France’s notion by stating: “We do not want to change the culture of one’s country.” He added that extrajudicial executions will increase problems and that NGOs must play a key role when reforms to international law are being made. He gave the argument that NGOs are neutral, not representative of states and are knowledgeable about local cultures. The United Arab Emirates took it up a notch by stating that in whatever way reform of international law would take

place, countries’ domestic law should undermine this.

The delegation of Nigeria would like to make a press statement about the progress made so far: “The delegation of Nigeria would like to express its enthusiasm about the constructive cooperation so far. We are especially content with the respect for countries’ sovereignty, the efforts to bridge the gap between national and international legal frameworks and its attention to battling terrorism. We would like to thank all present delegations for their effort and ideas.”

Five clauses in the resolution concerned cultural differences and establishment of educational bodies. The United Arab Emirates and Kazakhstan urge to educate people about Islam. This is not the same as imposition of Islam upon others. Education would provide clarity in the issue of equalizing Islam with terrorism. The Russian Federation deemed cultural interchange “essential.”

A few delegations expressed that they believe establishment of educational institutions are not relevant to the topic of extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary killings. The delegation of Nigeria for example believes that there is “no relation between conversation about

diversity and extrajudicial executions.” France added that there is no relevance to the Middle East in particular to establish educational campaigns to raise awareness of cultural diversity as the majority of people in the Middle East adhere to the Islam. The delegation called that it would be “a waste of time.”

The reactions to the draft resolution were more mixed than yesterday. Morocco expressed explicitly to the press that there should not be voted in favour of.

A complot to vote against the draft resolution was first presented to the press only as a rumour. Then, Nigeria asked all delegates through a note specifically if they were ready to vote against the draft by writing down their country. Pakistan, Syria and South Korea signed the memo.

The resolution did not pass. <<

The MUNOTH Observer – 26 April 2015 4

gENERaL aSSEMbLy

a Quick glance on Private International Law> CHRISTINE NIkaNDER

For a few hours of the final day of MUONTH 2015, the focus of the General Assembly shifted to the social and economic responsibilities of international corporations in their host countries.

The delegate of Germany spoke about the significance of managing and “overseeing” mechanisms in order to reinforce the responsibilities of multinational corporations in their host countries, whereas the delegate of the UK spoke of a “fear of [the] mixing of responsibilities of corporations and government”. The delegate of Greece described the “free trade agreements opposed upon us [Greece]”. The delegate also spoke of the essentialness of having the “benefit of a decent style of life” – he suggested that this be

could be attained through increased corporate responsibility. The delegate of Greece also stated that multinational corporations should “not be detrimental to preexisting companies within a state”. At a later point of the discourse, the delegate of Japan introduced problems arising through a lack of awareness of corporations to national legislation and through the complexity of policies in host nations.

The delegate of Iran suggested that the focus of corporal responsibility should be placed on sovereignty. The delegate of Iran emphasized that a focus should be put on the “prevention of the infringement of sovereignty” and he spoke of “multinational foreign corporations taking away resources from its [the Iranian] people”. The delegate

stated that host nations should be the “prime governors” and elaborates on this by asserting that multinational corporations are “subject to comply to [the] rules and legislation of the host country”. The delegate of Iran further clarified his point by adding that multinational corporations should be ruled under national legislations.The delegate of Canada started her speech by collectively complimenting the business attire of all the delegates and the chairs of the General Assembly, who were seated in the room. The compliment was followed by a quick rhetorical question that forces delegates and chairs to contemplate on the origins and manufacturing processes of their clothing. The delegate spoke of “consumer consensus” and asserted that an increased awareness or an education

The MUNOTH Observer – 26 April 2015 5

CRISIS SECURITy COUNCIL

The Crisis Security Council dealt with a massive crisis in Colombia. After the Obstructive, Lethal, Aggressive and Fierce (OLAF) virus was launched by some Chinese nationals, Colombian cyber infrastructure collapsed. Terrorist organization FBRC took complete advantage of this situation and with the help of their rebel forces, started taking over the southern part of Colombia, thus beginning a civil war. FBRC progressed as far as the city of Santiago de Cali, which is the second largest city of Colombia.

As the debate continued on how to deal with the situation at hand, Russia blames the United States for being hypocritical and started a round of name calling. The United States prepares to pose a food embargo against Venezuela and the Russian delegation vocally criticized this move and managed to shift the focus of discussion.

Russia then gets caught in arms dealing with Nigeria which causes another whirlpool of name calling and denial. Following this event, illegal Russian

arms are found in Angola. This causes another round of concerned exchanges of accusations. Russia, as usual, denies these accusations and suggests that these were stolen arms that the Russian government has no connections to these dealings.

Russia continues to hold the spotlight as they criticize the United States’ misuse of veto power. As they hold strong ground against the United States’ policies, Malaysian delegation express their grave apprehension towards

Russia: Center of all Drama> SHaRIQa HabIb

tone, the delegate of Brazil spoke of national problems with deforestation. He stated that “protection of the rainforest is among the primary environmental goals” of Brazil and declared that many multinational corporations did not comply with the goals.” <<

of consumers in regard to the production of consumer goods may bring about “more competitive and more ethical” corporate manufacturing.

The delegate of Norway stated that an “important issue in corporate responsibility is the environment”. With a similar

The MUNOTH Observer – 26 April 2015 6

Humans of CSC> TaNya ZHEkOva & MaRIa MOIS

Julia Mitzinneck – angola

StruggleTo realize that the UN actually helps to preserve the hegemony of the major powers. In a sense I’ve lost part of my trust in the UN. As Angola, I was always forced to either agree with the big powers or just shut up.

SuccessI learned a lot about the UN. It was also nice to see compassion and cooperation from other countries like Nigeria who were in the same situation.

Funny momentA delegate X always asking “So, when is it this session going to be over?”

Debby P. Ruijzendaal – China

StruggleThose were some really tense 3 days, but I am very happy with everything. If it were easy it wouldn’t be fun.

SuccessWe got a resolution passed! At the beginning the US amended it with something, which was against our interests, but eventually through a lot of debates we managed to remove the US part.

Funny moment“This debate is like a donut – we’re just going around circles”

Łukasz karsznicki – Lithuania

StruggleIt is hard to find only one. The situation was that even when we were discussing minor matters, there were differences between us.

SuccessWe are going to successfully pass the resolution to establish the International Tribunal dealing with Human Rights violation in Colombia.

Funny momentThe debate was serious and intense, so there wasn’t much time for jokes.

Russia’s apathy concerning the threat on the Malaysian coast. However, Russia is next seen to have increased their naval movement. As much as Russia tries to neutralize the conflict in South America, they further get caught in dramatic international incidents, when

they attempt a rescue operation in South America and also caught dealing illegal arms in Colombia.

Russia’s endless effort to work as a team-player falls short as they continue to engage in clandestine operations. These

dealings, which could be considered illegal in nature, do not make them an ally to be trusted. Russia should act with caution in their future endeavors as it would seriously damage their reputation as a major world power. <<

Continued on munothobserver.wordpress.com <<

The MUNOTH Observer – 26 April 2015 7

The Security Council Passes the Second Resolution> RaCHEL gREENwaLD & ILINCa bOgaCIOv

Unlike the previous topic of debate, the Security Council has managed to quickly work through a resolution regarding the prevention and management of resource induced conflicts. Many thought this subject would be a harder one to tackle because it is more closely linked to a country’s national interest than the previous topic. With the exception of a few points of contention, the Council was able to work together quite effortlessly.

The day started with a moderated caucus in order for the delegations to determine the focus of the debate. On the one hand, Malaysia and Chile were of the opinion

that the debate on solving natural resource induced conflicts should be restricted to certain resources to have a constructive resolution, considering the limited amount of time available. The two countries pointed out that certain natural resources are linked to certain types of conflicts, among which distinctions should be made.

The delegation of Chile in particular expressed its wish to delve into the topic of scarcity of water as cause of conflicts. But, the delegation of South Africa did not think it was necessary to limit the focus of the debate, claiming that all types of natural resources are deserving

of equal attention, as this would be the only way to encompass every country’s problem.

Even with these points of contention, all the members of the Council were able to compromise with each other to come up with a successful outcome. When the resolution they had only started this morning was passed, the room erupted into applause. After three days of debates and discussions, the work was complete. While there were often tensions and frustrations felt over the weekend, the Council managed to remain friendly with one another throughout all three days of discussions. <<

SECURITy COUNCIL

The MUNOTH Observer – 26 April 2015 8

Butler was asked if the actions of the UK illustrate an interpretation in good faith of the Non-Proliferation Treaty or whether in the hypothetical situation that the Court rules today in favor of the Marshall Islands this could be used in future cases to argue against possession of nuclear weapons. His answers as a non-lawyer cannot count as anything more than personal opinions”. The UK advocate Daniel Witte even declared himself insulted that such non-experts are asked to testify in “a matter of national importance for us, like our commitment to international treaties”.

On the contrary, the Marhsallese advocates argued, such depositions are truly valuable as they provide “impressions of the message that actual policy-making activities convey. We have asked our witnesses to comment on the real background and the application of the law, not on the law itself ”

George Lee Butler, former commander in chief of the United States Strategic Command, directly responsible for the missile program of USA, one of UK’s closest allies. He argued that “Nuclear proliferation is the greatest collective action problem in the world. If a reduction of 90% of the nuclear weapons stock is imposed, the remaining weapons would still be enough to wipe out life on the planet. This means that reducing the arsenal by any fraction is a good way to start. But if we stop along the way, we have failed.”

It makes perfect sense to take this statement seriously, as it comes from someone with a first hand experience in technical and political interests that pertain to nuclear weapons. However, some of the Marshallese questions were pointing towards a legal expertise. For instance, as the UK advocate Aleksander Bucholski observed, “Mr.

As we have covered extensively on our blog, yesterday was the time of tiresome witness hearings, some lasting even 45 minutes (congratulations on this occasion to the students who successfully impersonated such public figures like Noam Chomsky and Paul Ingram)! A reccuring question during the cross-examination of Marshall Islands witnesses has been “Are you a lawyer?”. None of them were.

Today we found out that with this line of questioning the United Kingdom intended to prove that they were not expert enough to answer questions of legal matters. The UK advocates asked formally that the court exclude as evidence the answers pertaining to issues outside the professional expertise of the witnesses.

For instance, one of the witnesses for the Marshall Islands at ICJ was

INTERNaTIONaL COURT Of JUSTICE

To be or not to be recognized as an expert? That is the question> CaMELIa vaSILOv

The MUNOTH Observer – 26 April 2015 9

hearings no breach of article 50 of the Statute of the ICJ occurred, as the relevant article for the procedure was article 43 paragraph 5: “The oral proceedings shall consist of the hearing by the Court of witnesses, experts, agents, counsel, and advocates.” The Court ruled that “no official positions have been deposed during the Hearings as every single witness present was expressing his own personal opinion and not the opinion of any Government, International or Intergovernmental Organization or any other subject recognized by the International Law.As for the relevance of each hearing, this Court will consider carefully what will be considered evidence and which will not.”

Thus, the British request was denied, however the value of the depositions made by Marshall Islands witnesses is clearly doubted. The reading of the decision, as you can see in the picture, gave partial satisfaction to both parties. Will the Judges manage the same feat of pleasing both parties when it comes to the final decision? <<

UK and USA, given the secrecy that states maintain in this field.

Expert or not – why does it matter? While initially stating that is was too late to start doubting expertise, the court eventually took time to make a preliminary decision on this contention. The judges decide that during the

(Amalia von Magyary). Filippa Sofia Braarud added that in some cases the witnesses were “in a very fit position to answer such questions”, as they could provide insights that would have been completely unavailable otherwise. For example, George Lee Butler is one of the few people who could knowingly testify on the security relations between

The Judges Have Spoken: all claims rejected but one, the duty of all states to disarm is now a customary norm > STELa gINEva

the same values and obligations, the Marshall Islands stated that they have similar obligations and that customary law and treaty law are not mutually exclusive, thus the UK can be in breach of both. Asked what disarmament meant to them, the Marshall Islands responded that disarmament meant the decrease in the stockpile at an early date as stipulated in the treaty. Probed further as to the meaning of ‘early date’, the Marshall Islands referred to a practical date but considering when the treaty was concluded, one that is probably overdue. Disarmament, they said, would be possible in theory if all parties could have acted immediately.

The questions put forward to the United Kingdom were equally grueling. Numerous questions were asked to probe into their assertions that customary international norms with regards to the ownership of nuclear weapons do not exist. The United Kingdom aspects. Questioned whether nine countries

with regards to disarmament which was supported by their witness, Mr. Gaddis.

Before the final statements of the parties, there were questions raised to the parties by the judges. These were used to further clarify the positions of the parties so that the judges could better render their judgement. The Marshall Islands and the UK were both grilled in this session to test the validity and coherence of their position.

One of the questions that the Marshall Islands received was ‘does the Marshall Islands believe that the perception on non-proliferation has changed since 1968 when the treaty was signed?’ To this, the Marshall Islands responded that there was an intention of the international community to have non-proliferation, which they still believe to be present.

Further, to a question whether signatories and non-signatories have

Today, ICJ ruled in the Marshall Islands v. UK case, in what will probably be a case to set precedence for future similar cases, that it is now a customary norm that states must pursue disarmament and that all states have the right to be free from nuclear weapons. All other claims including the fifth one referring to jus cogens, were rejected, but this groundbreaking verdict has shocked the court room.

Prior to this, the courtroom was filled with the drafting of final memories, and the presentation of the said memories in front of the courtroom. The Marshall Islands presented the testimony from Mr. Paul Ingram, who implied that the secretive negotiations between the UK and US could be perceived as breaches to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The UK presented arguments against the validity of the testimony, which was later overruled by the court in a preliminary decision. They also stressed the need for ‘strict and effective international control’

The MUNOTH Observer – 26 April 2015 10

decision was clear. The implications of this customary norm on the non-proliferation debate remain to be seen. <<

above mentioned elements.

Both sides defended their positions rigorously. Be that as it may, the court’s

(the nine nuclear states concerned) can stop the creation of a customary norm, the UK stated that it is not a particular number but rather the presence of the

Lost in Translation: what’s with all the big words?> RaCHEL gREENwaLD

to the authenticity of the event. I also understand how careless word choices can lead to disastrous outcomes. Yet, I also think Model UN Conferences should serve as a place where students can learn and participate in a comfortable environment. If delegates are constantly concerned about being judged by the formality of their speech, than they won’t always participate in debates so freely.

However the skill of putting together eloquent sentences in a moment’s notice is definitely a skill that will prove to be useful as they continue to work in the field of international relations. <<

imperative to get to the point. Instead of saying, “can we have more water,” MUNOTH participants translate this easy request into, “point of personal privilege – the delegate to the United States of America requests that the devoid water bottles be replaced to assist with quenching the delegations’ thirst.” It was the first time I heard this kind of language used to discuss such an uncomplicated issue I had to hold in a laugh!

But, more importantly, I think the pressure to speak so formally results in many unheard voices. I understand that procedures need to be followed. I understand that a proper tone can add

As I made my way into the conference room housing the Security Council on the first day of MUNOTH I was not sure what to expect. I had never attended a Model UN Conference before, and I was excited to see how the event worked. However, as the day continued there was one component to these conferences that I found to be the most amusing. Every delegate speaks as if they have a thesaurus hiding in their back pockets to ensure they use the most complicated words to describe even the simplest issues.

As a journalist, I understand the importance of choosing your words carefully. However, I find it equally as

The MUN as a career? Approaching “MUN-Geeks” with critical questions about the role of power, and criticism in the MUN system

> IUNa vIEIRa

risk. It might be the first time you get in touch with so much power and power is something that you need to learn how to handle.” Nevertheless, he believes that MUN provides the framework to do so.

Jennifer Lee is currently representing the United States at the Crisis Security Council. It is her fourth conference this month. Like Finn, she emphasises the fun and the educational value of MUN when being asked about the role of power within the simulation. While she said that she has met people who take it too serious and who made MUN a big part of their life, she believes that if it is their hobby and there is nothing wrong about it. However, critics claim that MUN makes people fit into the UNs’ system from a young age, leaving no room for them to criticise it. According to Jennifer that is not the case: “One of the best ways to change the system is from within the system. You first have to gather information before you can change things. In some ways, MUN glorifies the system but we are all

somewhere between 25 and 30, as he estimates. While he admits that he takes “the game” very seriously, he also believes that this is necessary to exploit the educational value of MUN. When he was asked if his roles in the simulations give him a feeling of power he said that even though that might have been the case in the beginning nowadays its more about “getting people infected with the Model UN virus”. Many participants have said that they, especially in the beginning, suffered from something they refer to as “Post MUN depression”. Even though most MUNers think of it as missing their new friends and their daily MUN schedule, it might also be the sudden loss of empowerment: from the suit wearing representative of a powerful country to an everyday student entitled to do his/her homework. Finn also thinks that the feeling of power is one of the factors that motivates students to come back. On the question if this can become dangerous or problematic he says “I think it is an opportunity that can quickly become a

For an outsider who is not familiar with the rules and practises of MUN, the whole simulation might seem odd to some extend: dressing up, pretending to be diplomats, using big terms like “moderated caucus” and asking for points and motions on the clean floors of fancy hotel-conference rooms, expensive food and parties at night, while still discussing the most pressing real world issues of our times, such as the Syrian civil war. Although some might question the real impact of simulations like MUN, others swear on their lasting effects, beyond the enrichment of ones CV. The so called MUN geeks, many of which have made themselves a name for joining over 30 MUN conferences, have made the game a big part of their life. What makes them join the conferences again and again? What role does power play in their MUN enthusiasm, and what is their stand towards common criticisms of the MUN system?

Finn Carlson has done so many conferences that he lost count,

The MUNOTH Observer – 26 April 2015 11

is that people who have participated in hundreds of conferences are often extremely arrogant and think they are something better. They start to snap on people who do it for the first time, and call them out on stupid things like their clothing, and I always think ‘Common! What is your achievement, you are good at playing a game – but you might have zero experience with the real world’” (Quote by anonymous delegate). These different perspectives show that while for most people MUN is a hobby and a great educational experience, it might be taken too serious by others which can have negative impacts on more reserved delegates. Some people enjoy the dressing, being selected for awards, the self-presentation and the competition MUN brings.. Others rather participate with a critical approach aiming to use MUN to get a clearer vision on their own position towards the system. MUN is simply not made for everybody, but in anyway it is necessary to respect your fellow players and their approach towards the game – and in the end that is what it is: a game. <<

many of the skills gained in MUN can later be applied to achieving more, but I do not believe that everything should have an immediate impact on the world. You should also think of yourself and have some self-actualization.” Tom describes himself as very critical of the UN and rejects the argument that MUN makes young people less likely to criticise the system later on. While he does not believe that it is MUN’s place to encourage criticism he nevertheless thinks that it “make people more aware of it.”

The experiences of those three MUN geeks show that fortunately it is not the case that through their participation to so many conferences, they stopped to question and to criticise the system itself. However, MUN is a hobby that might be taken more seriously than casual free time activities. Some of the delegates who participated for the first time have had negative experiences with more experienced colleagues. “I wanted to get to know the UN’s system, but what I rather got to know

intelligent people who understand the failures, and the successes of the UN”.

Probably the most experienced participant in this conference is Tom Vesters, who joined over forty conferences. Besides being a chair or a delegate, Tom also works as coach giving MUN trainings. For him the competitiveness of MUN is closely connected to the feeling of power. During the conferences he was part of “ it hardly ever happened that people forgot that it is just a game” although he admits that he got into winning rather than playing during his early years as a delegate. When asked what he would criticise about MUN, Tom says “It is to driven on awards” which, according to him, leads to more competitiveness and makes some participants forget that it is a game. Another common criticism of the MUN is that it lacks real life impact and while it is a great educational opportunity, students would achieve more when investing the same afford and enthusiasm on “real world work” or volunteering. “I think that

> PRESS TEaM