Author: fvmun

Behind the Scenes of a Miniature World

Three days at the ILO to observe FerMUN from the inside: hundreds of high school students, debates, negotiations, and a newsroom full of young journalists. A story of immersion at the heart of a conference where students are in charge.

Silence. Or rather, the feeling that I should remain silent. That’s the first thing I sense at the ILO, once I’ve passed the security checkpoint. A small moment of pride as I greet the guard and place my badge on the scanner for the first time. Then comes the sensation of feeling so… small in such an immense space. I hear students talking in the distance. There are more of them than adults around me. So many young people in a place usually reserved for those I consider specialists. Impressive. Very quickly, a familiar face appears. Ruben Buchot joins me. He will be my contact for the next three days, the press coordinator within the FerMUN 2026 board. He proudly wears his suit. He is already in character. With him, I tour the premises. I discover the room reserved for budding journalists: large bay windows give it the look of an air traffic control tower. I’ve never seen a newsroom like this. It already makes you want to get to work.

Then comes the time to head to the opening ceremony. This time, I walk with the teachers toward the UN security checkpoint. Here, the controls are even stricter. Everything goes through the X-ray machine. In the maze of the UN building, we reach the Assembly Hall of the Palais des Nations, where the opening ceremony will begin a few minutes later.

Never Too Young to Lead

General commotion. The Ferney students are busy while the other delegations take their seats. I spot primary school children, eyes wide, impressed; high schoolers posing for photos; and, in the back, proud parents watching their kids in such a prestigious place. The ceremony begins with Abdul-Salam Antwi, Secretary-General of FerMUN, a senior in high school. Tatiana Valovaya, Director-General of the United Nations Office at Geneva, then takes the floor and recalls the UN’s legacy. Next, Mr. Le Roy, Ambassador of France, former UN Under-Secretary-General and specialist in multilateralism, is invited on stage. His words sound like punchlines. “You’re never too young to lead and never too old to learn,” says Abdul-Salam Antwi. Behind the formula, the message is clear: here, students aren’t just pretending to be diplomats. They are here to experiment, debate, negotiate, and defend a position that isn’t necessarily their own. The committees haven’t started debating yet, but I’ve already understood one thing: I’m not about to watch a game. I’m witnessing training for reality. Everyone receives what they need to get through the next few days at the ILO: their badge, their meal tickets. Their roles are already assigned. The simulation can begin.

Convincing Without Imposing

For three days, I move between committees to support the student journalists. And I take the opportunity to observe what unfolds in the ILO rooms. In front of me, hundreds of high school students organize themselves into lobbies and take positions on topics whose complexity I sometimes struggle to grasp myself. In the FAO committee, they debate agricultural and aquatic strategies to limit microorganisms’ resistance to chemical inputs without compromising farm productivity. They are fifteen, sixteen, seventeen years old. And they switch on their microphones to argue. I am impressed by their performances. Inevitably, I think back to my own high school years. At their age, would I have been able to speak in front of an entire room, in English, to defend a country’s position on such a specific issue? Here, students debate respectfully and often in impeccable English. There are those who distribute speaking time, those who negotiate in the hallways, those who take notes. And then there are those who must defend delicate positions: each student represents a delegation, and therefore a country. They must learn to defend a stance that isn’t necessarily their own. To listen. To convince without imposing. To give up, sometimes.

Meanwhile, the press team calls on me. Together, we brainstorm more dynamic, more immersive formats. For three days, the journalist in me takes on another role: that of adviser. I watch the articles evolve, the angles sharpen, the students gain confidence in their writing and in their way of telling the story of what they are experiencing. I won’t attend the closing ceremony. Yet I know, from reliable sources, that it will be full of surprises and joy.

In the end, I don’t know who learned more — the students or me. They had the chance to experience, for three days, the daily life of specialists in working conditions, artificial intelligence, health, or agriculture. I spent those days watching these almost-adults debate topics that sometimes exceed them, then seeing them again at the coffee break, a glass of water in hand, like any other high school students. And that is perhaps what struck me the most. My gratitude goes to the teams who support these young people and allow them to take their place. Throughout the experience, the teachers set aside their labels. They observe, guide, intervene when necessary. But the students are in charge. For nearly a year, they prepared for these few days. Then comes the moment to let them lead. And to watch what they are capable of becoming.

Anaïs Viand

MockMUN 2026: A Day of Preparation for FerMUN 2027

On Monday, June 8, 2026, with the baccalaureate exams fast approaching, the Saint‑Genis‑Pouilly International High School transformed into a real‑life NGO to host nearly 200 students preparing for the FerMUN 2027 conference. Through debates, amendments, and resolutions, the students worked together to find compromises and solutions to various problems. In an increasingly complex society and in the face of tense current events, the theme of freedom is often set aside to prioritize collective security, even if it means upsetting the public by taking away their independence. This tension is now being debated and discussed in the various committees from different perspectives. Their work on numerous compromises serves as serious preparation for the upcoming FerMUN 2027 conference.

LGBTQIA+ rights versus cultural traditions and norms

While fundamental rights are still being debated—particularly the right to freedom for the LGBTQIA+ community—many member states remain strongly opposed to this demand; Tunisia is a case in point. This reluctance remains highly problematic in the eyes of countries that defend these rights, notably Germany, but progress is being observed in countries such as Brazil and South Africa. Despite their strong ideological differences in the past, movements in favor of these rights are growing in number, leading to real change.

Individual freedom regarding euthanasia versus collective responsibility

While the possibility of assisted dying is debated, the issue nevertheless raises ethical dilemmas. Since death is still considered a taboo subject, the question of assisted suicide remains highly contentious; should individual freedom be prioritized, or collective responsibility? Many countries, such as Colombia, Switzerland, and New Zealand, oppose the concept of medically assisted dying.

Spy regulations under scrutiny

Within the committee focused on espionage, the line between security, respect for sovereignty, and freedom is still being debated. New technologies are considered more dangerous today, with cybersecurity and cyberattacks providing access to supposedly private files that can endanger nations and sometimes an entire continent. Among delegations, peace is a major point of disagreement, and the regulation of espionage is being called into question.

Nuclear Weapons: Between Threat, Peace, and Risk

In Committee 4, focused on nuclear weapons, the possibility of nuclear disarmament is one of the major issues. The United States is difficult to convince because nuclear weapons are one of its main advantages, and deterrence is one of its primary assets that allows the country to maintain peace. Alliances provide protection for smaller countries, but there is a line that must not be crossed: the use of nuclear weapons for one’s own country in the midst of a war. For now, fortunately, that line has not been crossed. This weapon therefore maintains peace as long as it is used for persuasive purposes and not against an enemy country.

In the end, this MockMUN day wrapped up on a high note, with a positive atmosphere. “It’s a great experience for building self‑confidence; you get to try out things you might not have tried before, and you meet new people you wouldn’t have spoken to otherwise.” We hope the FerMUN 2027 conference will have just as positive an impact. Thank you to all the participants for this wonderful day.

Malhia Vialle Faundez & Liv Bruckert‑Gagneu

LGBTQ+ Committee: Germany Ready to Do Whatever It Takes to Defend Itself

For centuries, members of the LGBTQ+ community have been subjected to discrimination, violence and even criminalisation across the globe. While significant progress has been made in recent decades, the situation remains alarming in other parts of the world, where homosexuality can still be punishable by death. While the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims the equality of all individuals without distinction, it is clear that this equality is far from a reality for millions of LGBTQ+ people. The delegates of the committee on LGBTQ+ rights have therefore set themselves the task of finding common ground in order to identify global solutions to this discrimination.

A first progressive resolution

Backed by South Africa, Argentina, Brazil and Canada, Germany introduced a resolution calling for stronger international action to protect LGBTQ+ people from discrimination and criminalisation. The coalition argues that the rights of LGBTQ+ people are universal human rights and that the United Nations has a responsibility to ensure that these rights are respected worldwide. The resolution aims to strengthen the UN’s monitoring of violence and abuse against LGBTQ+ people, to encourage countries to adopt anti-discrimination laws, and to guarantee equal access to employment, healthcare and housing. It also supports the granting of asylum to people persecuted on the grounds of their sexual orientation or gender identity, the promotion of inclusive educational programmes, the creation of safe spaces for young people in the LGBTQ+ community, and the repeal of laws that discriminate against these communities. Overall, the resolution presents a proactive, human rights-based approach, emphasising equality, inclusion and international cooperation to combat discrimination.

An ethical battle lost by Germany

Debates began despite the limited number of amendments. The issue of freedom of expression on social media and its influence on teenagers was briefly touched upon, with the Indian delegation arguing that the removal of certain discriminatory comments from posts could undermine individuals’ right to freedom of expression. Shortly afterwards, the Ugandan delegation engaged in a significant debate with the German delegation over a clause encouraging the strengthening of international monitoring of acts of violence and discrimination against members of the LGBTQ+ community: its main argument was that this measure might not respect certain cultures and might not be suited to the level of development of certain countries. The German delegation considered this amendment irrelevant as it was irrelevant and ran counter to the resolution’s main objective, which was to protect the LGBTQ+ community from discrimination, even though many cultures do not accept it. The amendment was adopted, with most of the delegations present siding with the Ugandan delegation.

Generally speaking, most of the countries in favour of this resolution clearly defended it, but the countries opposed to it tipped the vote, and the resolution was not adopted.

Renata Eva Skaburskas, Ludivine Hemakwa et Melissa Maina

Euthanasia: A Never-Ending Debate?

On June 8, 2026, the MOCKMUN debates took place at the Lycée de Saint‑Genis. Within the committee addressing euthanasia, a spirit of mutual support prevailed among the delegates, particularly during the origami rose‑making activity, which proved challenging for some… However, during the debates, the committee turned into a true battlefield. Two opposing camps emerged: the countries in favor of euthanasia, and those firmly opposed to it. Euthanasia can be active, meaning it directly causes death, but it can also be passive, allowing a person to die by indirectly causing their death through the withdrawal of life‑sustaining treatment.

End-of-life care: the main countries advocating for it

Many countries accept euthanasia and seek to promote this principle so that every individual, regardless of their background, may have the right to die. Our neighboring country, Switzerland, for example, allows citizens of other countries to come and undergo the procedure there, but it is clear that the Netherlands remain the leader and pioneer in this field.

Indeed, this delegation was heavily involved throughout the morning in defending its pro‑euthanasia stance. Other countries hold a more nuanced view; some prohibit active euthanasia but permit passive euthanasia, such as India. Indeed, the government of that country supports passive euthanasia because it is less shocking and brutal than active euthanasia. However, the situation remains complicated because the first authorization for the use of euthanasia was granted last March with great difficulty. The patient had been in a vegetative state for several years, and after lengthy deliberations, the Supreme Court agreed to grant him the right to passive euthanasia. This was a landmark moment in India’s history, as it was the first time euthanasia had been approved despite a long and complicated legal process. This reflects a shift in public opinion regarding this sensitive issue.

Opposition to euthanasia: the divide in arguments

However, some countries oppose the use and spread of euthanasia within their borders for a variety of reasons, which may be both religious and cultural. Mexico and Morocco, for example, have populations that are predominantly Catholic or Muslim. The idea of decreeing a person’s death in place of God is unimaginable to them. Other nations, such as Spain, New Zealand, and Poland, have aligned themselves with the view that the use of euthanasia is neither just nor ethical. For the governments of these countries, the act of intentionally killing a person is unthinkable because it violates the patient’s dignity, which is protected by various laws.

It is because of these widely divergent opinions that the morning ended with a resolution that failed to pass…

This clearly demonstrates just how sensitive and controversial the topic of euthanasia is. One might wonder if we will ever be able to overcome our differences in order to find, together, the best way to help those who are suffering. Let us not forget: we are fighting to defend those who cannot defend themselves.

Chloé ARNAUD, Adriano PORRU, Zoe PISTILLO

Interstate Spying – Surprising Agreements in a Mixed Atmosphere

Room B107, during MockMUN 2026, was the scene of unlikely alliances and tense exchanges. When Iran and Israel form an alliance, questions inevitably arise, especially given the current geopolitical context. When it comes to regulating espionage between states while preserving national security, traditional positions can be unexpectedly overturned.

A surprising alliance given current geopolitical events

Israel and Iran drew particular attention by agreeing on the first resolution. Despite the geopolitical tensions between them, the two delegations found themselves working together, alongside Russia, China, and North Korea. All agreed on the need for greater flexibility in managing intelligence activities between states.

However, despite this temporary alignment, Iran remains in a more vulnerable position due to its conflict with Israel. This dynamic led to exchanges that were at times tense, even aggressive, between delegations that had nevertheless signed the same resolution.

A more relaxed atmosphere on the other side of the room

The second resolution, co‑sponsored by the United Kingdom, Germany, Brazil, the United States, and Switzerland, focuses more on security and the protection of civilians. It warns against the risks of insufficiently regulated state‑to‑state espionage and advocates for the adoption of stricter regulations. These countries, benefiting from a more stable geopolitical environment, approached the debates in a calmer atmosphere, which facilitated the review and adoption of amendments. This contrasted sharply with the tensions observed between delegations from countries in conflict, such as Iran and Israel.

At the conclusion of the debates, Room B107 demonstrated that diplomacy can sometimes give rise to unexpected alliances. Despite deep differences and persistent tensions, the delegations were able to defend their interests while seeking compromises, illustrating the complexity of international relations. This session nevertheless raises a question that goes beyond the scope of MockMUN: to what extent can states cooperate on common security issues when their geopolitical interests collide — a debate that remains highly relevant today.

Joana Watelet & Flore Gasser Husselstein

Tactical nuclear weapons: a reflection of a world that remains fractured?

June 8th, 2026, Saint-Genis-Pouilly – Delegates are engaged in fruitful discussions on the issue of nuclear weapons. Their goal is to find ways to prevent the chaotic escalation of the effects of tactical nuclear weapons in proxy conflicts. While the atmosphere in the room remains conducive to work, some fundamental disagreements are already emerging, pitting countries with starkly different ideologies against one another.

A geopolitical divide is taking shape

This clash of perspectives highlights a geopolitical divide—one that is certainly traditional, yet remains as complex as ever in the ongoing debates. On one side, a bloc led by Western powers and their allies is attempting to impose a strictly diplomatic approach, advocating for a rigorous legal framework to freeze the use of these technologies and mandate exclusively conventional defenses. On the other side, several emerging or independent nations express marked skepticism toward what they perceive as an attempt at a strategic freeze. For these delegations, overly restrictive international regulations risk limiting their freedom to make decisions regarding self-defense, leaving the field open to countries that already possess the largest traditional military arsenals on the planet.

Chemical Weapons vs. Nuclear Weapons

This theoretical disagreement quickly gave rise to very concrete debates over the amendments. The discussions focused in particular on the technical distinction between threats, specifically on the need to distinguish between the damage caused by chemical weapons and that caused by nuclear weapons. This discussion led the committee to question the legitimacy of a nuclear response to a non-conventional attack, with some countries advocating a second-order deterrence strategy, where the virtual threat becomes a defensive tool, while others called for precise and transparent implementation procedures. Despite these sticking points and several minutes of negotiations, a consensus was reached by a majority vote in favor of a proposal by the Russian delegation aimed at reducing the power of weapons and minimizing human casualties in the event of a crisis.

To look beyond the official statements made on the floor, three key delegations—Iran, Japan, and Russia—were interviewed to gather their impressions on how events have unfolded. Overall, these delegations believe that the positions of the various countries are fairly consistent, with the exception of certain delegations that hold more extreme views regarding nuclear weapons.

Overall, the ethical question surrounding nuclear weapons hinges on mindsets—which have remained traditional or have evolved over time depending on the country—and it is this complexity that makes this topic such a thought-provoking one.

Amaya Cutimbo, Marek Petras & Margaux Cleary

Get to know your 2027 board!

February 27th 2026 marks the unveiling of the new board for FerMUN 2027. The 8 students of this team have now been preparing the MockMUN alongside the MUN students for almost three months, and it is about time to get to know more about them!

Clara Nguyen 

As the new leader and face of our conference, Clara Nguyen takes on the role of Secretary-General for FerMUN 2027. Alongside her academic studies, Clara is interested in creative activities—piano, singing, photography, writing… Her deep interest in MUN took root during her experience as president: “I’ve never learned so much—about MUN, about myself, and about teamwork.” The closing ceremony, the result of months of effort, hard work, and preparation, is her fondest memory. Clara’s goal: a fun and productive conference, but above all, rewarding teamwork over the next nine months. 

Hanaë Schwebel

From logistics admin to committee chair, Hanaë Schwebel is now taking on the role of Deputy Secretary-General in charge of the chairs. Curious and open-minded, she enjoys listening to music, reading, swimming, and spending time with family and friends. She plans to pursue studies in finance or pharmacy in the future. Motivated by a desire to pass on her knowledge, Hanaë now wishes to get more involved by supporting new MUNers. For FerMUN 2027, she aspires to become a true mentor, there to guide, advise, and encourage this future team of chairs. 

Sekou-Cissé Gouro

Sekou-Cissé Gouro began his journey as an admin. Today, he is the Deputy Secretary-General in charge of delegates. Inspired by the success and unity of last year’s board, he is committed to making the next edition of FerMUN unforgettable. Sekou is passionate about travel and science. Following his MUN journey, where he discovered the world of diplomacy, Sekou will likely pursue a career in aerospace or medicine, with a particular interest in AI. 

Hélène Khukhunaishvili

Hélène Khukhunaishvili, press and communications officer, joined MUN because of her interest in international relations and journalism. In fact, it was the role of journalist within the MUN press corps that first really captured her heart. But beyond that, Hélène has a deep love for reading, writing, and the piano. She has been playing the instrument since she was 7, and her performance at the opening ceremony of FerMUN 2025 is one of her best memories of MUN.

Grégoire Oury

Grégoire Oury, admin in his sophomore year, is now taking on the responsibility of mentoring future admins for FerMUN 2027. As co-head of admins and the solidarity fund alongside Claire Beuchotte, his motivation for MUN stems from his interest in current events and debate, which he hopes to explore further alongside his passion for science. What motivates Grégoire to join the board is his “desire to engage in true teamwork and participate in a truly major project.” Beyond that, he wants to change the perception of the admin role—which is sometimes undervalued—by showing that it is essential, courageous, and just as memorable as the other roles. 

Claire Beuchotte

Claire Beuchotte is passionate about discovering new cultures, skiing, and traveling. She hopes to travel around the world one day. Arriving at FerMUN 2025 as an admin in her sophomore year with stars in her eyes, she admits to having felt lost at the start of her journey. Thanks to the people who supported and encouraged her, she gained self-confidence and is now Head of Administration and the Solidarity Fund, alongside Grégoire. For Claire, the Solidarity Fund is an essential pillar of FerMUN, helping to break down financial barriers to make our conference accessible to everyone.

Johanna Hayes

Johanna Hayes, the new head of interpretation, is also an athlete—with a particular interest in soccer since she was 6—and a cook, loving to try out new recipes in her free time. Motivated by her friends to join MUN, she has been an interpreter since the very beginning, which allowed her to thrive. This year, she hopes that every interpreter can find their footing in this role, just as she was able to. For Johanna, MUN truly became real, grand, and impressive during her first opening ceremony in 2025.

Madeleine Johansen

The new Translation Coordinator, Madeleine Johansen is also a sports enthusiast, participating in track and field and skiing in the winter. Since she was very young, she has admired the prestigious place where her parents work: the United Nations. Wanting to discover how the UN works, she joined MUN as an office admin, a role that introduced her to the conference. She became a translator in her freshman year, when she realized that this role is what ensures the conference runs smoothly. As head of translation, she wants to ensure that everyone feels comfortable at MUN, regardless of the language they speak: “Cohesion is the key to a successful conference.”

FAO – When Nations Agree to Feed the World.

In Room III of the prestigious ILO buildings, the FAO Committee is in session. Discussions focus on efforts to limit the resistance of microorganisms to chemical inputs while preserving the productivity of agricultural operations.

Signs are raised, amendments flow, and cooperation continues, leading to the emergence of a single resolution. Countries are realizing that their visions converge toward the same goal. This resolution has a universal scope and strengthens food security and farmers’ incomes through the various UN branches. Moreover, it adopts an approach inspired by the One Health concept. Delegations are seeking sustainable alternatives while mitigating threats to food security. During the debates, the atmosphere is silent and expressions are serious. The clauses proposed by the 24 participating countries are scrutinized, and due to time constraints, voting procedures follow one another quickly. Time is pressing, so Cameroon, the resolution’s spokesperson, had to submit amendments in order to speak and convince the committee to vote in favor of the resolution.By late afternoon, the vote takes place in favor of this ambitious and clause-rich resolution, which is adopted by a large majority. This marks a strong and fitting conclusion to the final day of the conference!

Nomin SANJAAJAMTS – Kiara SADASEEVEN

At the WHO, Health Under Pressure: Ideologies, Resources, and Fault Lines

Today, the atmosphere was electric in the WHO Committee at FerMUN 2026. Between ideological disagreements and debates over resources, delegations fought passionately to define the future of health and the safety of individuals exposed to violence.

Afghanistan made a strong impression with a radical stance: according to them, money is not the problem. They even stated their desire to “replace resources with more protection.” For this delegation, only strict laws can guarantee women’s mental health.

Meanwhile, the Russian Federation and Nigeria warned against “police-phobia.” They argued that giving the police too much freedom creates disorder and scares victims, who then hesitate to report their attackers. Later, Romania highlighted a tragic reality: 90% of complaints are dismissed due to lack of evidence. However, their proposed amendment on the issue was rejected by the majority.

The debate then turned to how to provide healthcare to disadvantaged populations. Romania and Eswatini discussed the intervention of Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF). While the idea of an aid fund is appealing, many countries fear that relying solely on international assistance would create dependency. For these skeptical or resistant countries, the objective is clear: local health systems must be strengthened rather than relying exclusively on the WHO.

The breaking point came with India’s proposal to consider abortion as a mere hygiene and health procedure. Afghanistan deemed this perspective “definitely Western” and incompatible with their social and cultural realities. Nonetheless, Senegal and Sweden managed to pass a crucial amendment encouraging safe access to abortion and contraception in cases of sexual violence, aiming to prevent tragic deaths linked to sexual violence or unsafe practices.

At the end of the amendment session, Pakistan advocated for more inclusive language. Thanks to their intervention, supported by Romania, the final text now explicitly mentions orphans and war-affected children, along with all other children, who are often overlooked compared to migrants or children with disabilities.

Yasmine Akkabi

Artificial Intelligence: An Ethical Dilemma

January 9, 2026, the final morning of FerMUN. In Room XI, delegates of the Artificial Intelligence Committee debate two main topics: the protection of digital workers and the regulation of AI for social justice. The AI Committee is one of the most divided, with groups of delegates opposing one another at every turn. How did this come about?

Some Barriers Remain Insurmountable
 Between speeches, motions, and points of order, a clear divide between countries emerges in the room. While alliances form and connections develop, some barriers seem insurmountable. Sweden’s resolution was supported primarily by developing or underdeveloped countries, while Spain’s resolution opposes it, citing the presence of many wealthy nations among the co-signatories. The reason? Developed countries have already appropriated AI to increase wealth, giving them a more innovative vision and a focus on optimizing this strategic tool. In Sweden’s resolution, the same tool is seen as a systematic risk to employment that must be strictly regulated. One resolution prioritizes social protection, while the other aims for a labor market transition. Although these visions appear complementary, delegates struggled to find common ground. Debates erupted, clauses were discussed, and amendments were passed. At the heart of tensions, the Spanish government stood out with heated exchanges with other countries. Whether Germany or the United Kingdom, any country that voiced an opinion faced Spain’s sharp criticism. Countries remained isolated; the only solidarity was among co-signatories.

A Social Divide
 The assembly is visibly split, creating a social divide. The first resolution debated, led by Sweden, is supported by all worker representatives. The difference between workers’ priorities and those of governments and employers is stark. Sweden’s resolution appears to focus on combating discrimination, addressing social tensions, and providing support to populations marginalized or harmed by AI. In contrast, Spain’s employer-backed resolution, supported by governments and employers, emphasizes innovation and digital progress on a global scale. Each group prioritizes its own interests. “Profit is not the primary goal of our society; we must think about ourselves,” noted the Saudi worker. But what does he mean by “ourselves”? Aren’t employers also thinking about themselves? India, speaking against Sweden’s resolution, also mentioned a “slowdown in formal job creation.”

This divide is evident not only during the vote but also in fiery debates, with the Saudi worker referencing the “employers’ thirst for technological progress.” There was even a motion of censure from Spain’s employer representative against the UK worker.

Reflections on the Divide
 The divisions within the AI Committee prompt several questions: Can workers be considered obstacles to innovation, productivity, or modernization? Are employers and governments being selfish by not prioritizing workers’ rights? How can AI be presented as a tool for progress, aid, and innovation when it poses a threat to a large portion of the population? Sweden’s resolution ultimately passed, but narrowly: 37 in favor, 30 against. The fate of the second resolution remains undecided.

Hélène Khukhunaishvili & Dalanda Eden Diallo