I believe that the refugee crisis simulation was very successful. The first day, it did not seem like anyone would be able to agree upon any suggestion for a solution to the crisis. Even though, I did not speak out loud in front of the group, I was active in the informal discussion and negotiations. I specifically talked to the delegates of Budan in order to make sure we were on the same page and reacted to the US and Gilbia in the same matter. Not only did I talk to Budan, I worked on getting ARM and the UNHCR to be on our side. It was frustrating at first because both the US and Gilbia would not agree to a short term solution without a long term one, however, the differences of opinions would not allow the long term solution at the time. It was my goal to get ARM and the UNHCR to agree with our perspective. My group prepare pretty well for the simulation, we talked through all the preparation questions and figured out what we wanted our end goal to be. I think we were able to accomplish our endgame because we were able to stand our ground and support Budan in holding off the US and Gilbia while we figured out a way to fix the refugee situation. I enjoyed the formality of the simulation, it made the whole thing sophisticated. I also enjoyed how everyone played the part of their delegations. I also believe that it was the hardest part of the simulation; representing their delegations correctly. It’s hard to differ between what you personally believe and what the delegation you represents believes in. The only thing that I think should be changed is having more time for discussions, because I think our resolution was a little rushed. I learned more of the routine for real life discussions, kind of like Model UN. I also learned to put my personal beliefs aside in order to portray what my delegation believes, that is what I struggled most with during the karMUN conference.
