How a Position Paper Changes Between a GA Committee a UNSC and a Crisis Committee

How a Position Paper Changes Between a GA Committee, a UNSC, and a Crisis Committee

You have written a position paper for a General Assembly committee. You submit it, walk into a Security Council, and the dais tells you it does not fit. The problem is not your writing ability. A MUN position paper is structurally different by committee type, not stylistically different. A GA paper argues a member state's policy on a broad agenda item. A UNSC paper must address binding resolutions and the veto powers of the P5. A crisis paper is written for an individual character with personal resources and a portfolio, not a state. The topic background stays similar across the first two; the proposed solutions diverge radically. Here is what changes in each and why, drawn from conference handbooks and dais expectations.

GA Position Paper Example: the Default Format

A General Assembly committee position paper follows the four-section structure that most conferences borrowed from NMUN and HMUN: Topic Background, Past UN Action, Country Policy, Proposed Solutions. The paper runs 1-2 pages single-spaced, uses formal diplomatic language in third person, and requires MLA or APA citations with 5-15 sources. The dais at conferences like HMUN and THIMUN treats this format as the baseline. Master this, and you can adapt to anything else.

Topic Background Stays Broad

In a GA paper, the Topic Background covers the global scope of the issue. For a committee on disarmament, describe the scale of small arms proliferation across regions, not one member state's specific problem. The study guide from the dais provides the framing; your job is to show you read it and can place your delegation within that global picture. This portion is nearly interchangeable between GA and specialised agency formats.

Country Policy Must Match the State's Real Positions

The Country Policy is where most first-time delegates go wrong. Represent the actual policy of the member state you were assigned, not your personal opinion. If you represent France and the topic is nuclear disarmament, your paper cannot call for a total ban on nuclear weapons. France is a nuclear-armed state that maintains a deterrent. The dais at HMUN and NMUN has read the real French statements to the UN; they will spot an invented position. The conference background guide lists your nation's past votes and treaty ratifications. Use those as your starting point.

Proposed Solutions Stay Broad and Multilateral

In a GA committee, your Proposed Solutions propose actions the entire UN membership could take. Suggest a new treaty, a funding mechanism for a UN programme, or a strengthened reporting framework. Do not propose what your single delegation will do. The solution must be multilateral because a GA committee produces a draft resolution that requires majority support to pass. The proposals need enough consensus appeal that blocs can merge around them. This is where the GA format diverges most sharply from crisis and UNSC formats.

Security Council Position Paper Format: Binding Resolutions and Veto Power

A Security Council position paper differs from the GA format in three structural ways: the paper must address binding resolutions, the veto power of the P5, and the committee's smaller size. Specialised agencies produce papers that run 1-3 pages single-spaced with deeper technical or legal detail on the committee's mandate. The dais at NMUN and HMUN expects you to show awareness that Security Council resolutions are binding under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, unlike GA resolutions which are recommendatory.

Topic Background Includes the Council's Past Actions

The Topic Background still covers the global scope, but it must also summarise what the Security Council has already done on the issue. If the topic is the situation in Yemen, list the relevant Council resolutions, their operative clauses, and which were vetoed. The dais uses this to test whether you understand the Council's legal authority and its limits. The background guide for UNSC committees provides a resolution history table; use it.

Country Policy Accounts for P5 Status or Lack of It

If you represent a P5 member, your Country Policy must state whether you would use your veto, threaten a veto, or negotiate a compromise. The veto is not theoretical. It determines your delegation's entire negotiating position. If you represent a non-permanent member, your policy must show how you build coalitions around or against a P5 position. "Binding resolution" must appear in this portion because it changes what your delegation can accept. Non-permanent members cannot block a binding resolution alone; they need to convince a P5 member to veto or abstain.

Proposed Solutions Address Enforcement Mechanisms

The Proposed Solutions focus on what the Council can actually order: sanctions, arms embargos, no-fly zones, peacekeeping mandates, or referral to the International Criminal Court. These are not aspirational recommendations. They are enforceable actions that affect the sovereignty of member states. The specificity must be technically detailed within the Council's exact mandate and instruments. A proposed solution that requires a GA budget approval or a treaty negotiation outside the Council tells the dais you do not understand the committee's powers. THIMUN and HMUN evaluate this for legal precision, not breadth.

Crisis Committee Position Paper Structure: Character, Not Country

A crisis committee position paper abandons nearly everything the GA format teaches. You do not represent a member state. You represent an individual actor with a portfolio, personal resources, and a character arc. The paper runs 0.5-1 page single-spaced or uses a bullet-point memo format. The language is direct and operational; first person is acceptable if you write in-character. NAIMUN and ILMUNC, known for crisis committees, expect this format. The dais treats the position paper as an eligibility threshold for awards rather than a major scoring component, with grading weight of 10-30% of total award score or used only to qualify for consideration.

Required Sections Shift to Character and Strategy

The required sections for a crisis position paper are Character/Position Background, Strategic Objectives, and Crisis Response Framework. Do not write a Topic Background; the crisis scenario provides the context. Do not write Past UN Action; your character's world may not involve the UN. The Character Background explains who you are and what your portfolio controls. If you are the Minister of Defence of a fictional country, describe which military branches report to you, your budget authority, and your relationship with the head of state. The term "portfolio" is central here; the dais uses this to understand what directives you can realistically issue.

Strategic Objectives Replace Country Policy

Instead of stating a member state's policy, state your character's goals. These goals can contradict your nation's official position because you are an individual actor with personal ambition. A defence minister might want a larger army budget even if the country is running a deficit. The dais at NAIMUN evaluates whether your objectives are consistent with your character's resources and position. "Personal resources" appears in this portion: list what you control financially, militarily, or politically. A crisis committee character with no resources cannot accomplish anything, and the dais will ignore a paper that claims otherwise.

Crisis Response Framework Demands Actionable Directives

The Crisis Response Framework replaces Proposed Solutions. Write specific, actionable directives tied to your character's portfolio and the immediate crisis scenario. These are not multilateral proposals. They are orders: "Direct the 3rd Infantry Division to secure the border crossing at Point Alpha within 12 hours." The dais uses these directives to determine your starting initiative and influence. "Directive" is the primary output of crisis committees, distinct from resolutions. NAIMUN and MUNUC expect directives to be short, operational, and time-bound. A crisis position paper that contains vague statements like "work toward regional stability" instead of specific orders will be ignored. Your character will start the committee with no influence.

Position Paper Differences by Committee: Where the Divergence Happens

The differences by committee are not in the writing quality; they are in the structural decisions you make before you write a word. The table below shows where each portion changes and where it stays the same across the three committee types. The Topic Background stays similar across GA and UNSC committees but disappears in crisis. The Proposed Solutions is where all three diverge completely: GA papers propose broad multilateral actions, UNSC papers propose enforceable binding measures, and crisis papers propose individual directives. The term "past international action" appears in GA and UNSC papers but has no equivalent in crisis because crisis committees simulate fictional or historical scenarios where past UN action may not exist.

The failure case for most delegates is submitting a GA-format paper to a crisis or a UNSC committee. The dais at NAIMUN or HMUN will not penalise you for the error; they will simply not read the paper as relevant. The delegate loses the award eligibility threshold or the starting influence they could have earned. Confirm which committee type you are assigned to before you begin research. If the conference website says "Crisis Committee" or "Specialised Agency (Security Council)", you need the corresponding format. THIMUN and NAMUN publish committee type designations in their registration materials. Verify before you submit.

What the Dais Actually Reads and Scores

Conference handbooks describe what a position paper should contain, but how they are evaluated differs from the published criteria. At large gatherings with over 2,000 delegates, such as HMUN and NAIMUN, dais members receive papers days before the event. Many are skimmed or checked only for completion. The gap between published award criteria and actual award drivers is significant: organisers claim to weight position papers, speaking, and resolution contribution equally, but in practice dais visibility and bloc leadership dominate. A well-written position paper from a quiet delegate rarely wins an award.

The grading weight for GA committees is 20-50% of total award score, but this weight applies only if the dais reads the paper carefully. At NMUN, known for position-paper awards and a pedagogical rather than competitive framing, the dais does read carefully. At HMUN and NAIMUN, where the committee culture is competitive and fast-paced, the position paper functions more as an eligibility gate. "Bloc politics" determines awards more than the position paper in these competitive settings. The most reliable strategy: write a strong position paper that meets the format requirements, then focus your energy on in-room negotiation and bloc building.