Fact checking memes at EU, ISMUN 2025

by Genevieve Kwok

After lunch, the European Union council went straight into an unmoderated caucus to write for their resolutions, forming 2 major blocs.

“If you don’t get into one of the blocs within 5 minutes, just don’t speak for the rest of the session.” Threatened the chair jokingly, who hoped to speed up resolution debate so that sufficient time could be arranged for superlatives.

The first resolution debate was mainly submitted by Lithuania. In their speech, they cited African wishes for the EU to grant assistance faster, therefore aiming to increase speed for assistance efforts towards Africa. Said efforts included helping return migrants to Africa swiftly and efficiently, supervising African border control, and setting up education institutions to spread anti-corruption awareness. Lithuania also expressed that they were willing to first collaborate with countries who are not military controlled, and then move to military controlled ones and negotiate with them after, emphasizing the importance of slow careful negotiation to work around African and Western ideological differences. Estonia raised a POI on how Lithuania’s resolution aims to increase cooperation between EU and Africa, but given Africa’s history with human rights abuses with policing illegal migrants, such cooperation may lead to neglect of the wellbeing of such immigrants, suggesting the EU to operate on their own instead of cooperating with Africa. 

POIs on how to ensure Africa would not become overreliant on financial and other aid provided by the EU, as is the case with some other LDCs were also asked. Lithuania explained that it was better to provide aid first to alleviate Africa’s pressing security and economic issues, before considering long term ramifications. Bulgaria pointed out that education programmes set up by the EU can be shut down by Africa, and the EU would be unable to do anything to stop them, questioning the effectiveness of education when it could not be enforced to be made compulsory. Lithuania suggested working on a consensus with the African government before setting up education programmes, stating that the institutions would have to be held on African soil anyway, emphasizing the importance of international cooperation and obtaining African consent. Africa’s history with corruption was also repeatedly brought up, to which Lithuania cited that their resolution has proposed the establishment of  third party monitoring agencies, in order to ensure African officials will not abuse the aid given, instead distributing it fairly to its citizens.

“This question has been asked three times already, can other delegations please stop bringing this issue up?” Lithuania complained.

“Lithuania’s resolution is just like the game among us, “sus”. In this case, sus means sustainable.” The Italian delegation said in support of Lithuania’s resolution. Italy listed the mutual benefits for all countries should the resolution be passed, with education preventing corruption in African government parties, as well as how the resolution’s all rounded solutions helped promote sustainable development of the African economy, giving economic benefits to the EU in the long term. Despite Belgium’s arguments that Lithuania’s resolution lacked defined measuring guidelines for efficiency and effectiveness of European and and other assistory measures, the resolution passed with an overwhelming majority.

Moving on the the debate of the second resolution, mainly submitted by Estonia, who disappeared for several minutes in what appeared to be a show of stage fright. Despite this, Estonia’s speech delivered smoothly their wishes to increase the number of African workers employed in European countries for boosting economic growth of both parties. Estonia emphasized that the well developed countries of the EU must take responsibility for northern African border control crimes, condemning the human rights violations and reported mistreatment, and even torture, of both legal and illegal migrants. Estonia decried such actions by border control as horrendous, stating that “Diddy’s crimes are child’s play compared to this.” Estonia also cited the “low taper fade is massive” meme to emphasize how large the issues of border control mistreatment are, prompting much confusion from various delegates unfamiliar with the meme. Both a POC and a fact check were conducted to check whether or not “low taper fade” is massive, leading to the chairs scrolling various sources on the Internet.

“The chair will deem it massive” The chairs eventually declared, after scrolling YouTube Shorts for 5 minutes in search for an answer.

POIs were raised on whether the UN was qualified to conduct the various clauses proposed by Estonia in the resolution, such as turning the blue card programme to a yellow card programme, and forming a UN backed group to investigate war crimes allegedly committed by the Wagner Group, to which Estonia replied that the UN was indeed qualified to do, or at least the most qualified organisation to do so. Greece raised questions on Estonia’s proposed yellow card programme, worrying on how to prevent abuses of workers, as well as their potentially low skills. Estonia, however, assured that immigrants would be vetted for criminal records and have their work experience investigated, before letting them into the EU for better migrant control. Bulgaria greatly objected to Estonia’s resolution, especially to Clause 6. In their opposition speech, Bulgaria stated that Russia and China, both major powers of the UN and in the Wagner group, had voting and participation rights in the Security Council, which would be in charge of conducting the proposed investigation into the alleged wrongdoings of the Wagner group, making the investigation redundant. While Slovenia objected that China and Russia were not in the EU, Bulgaria reiterated its arguments, adding that especially with the recent improved, if not good terms China and the US were on, bias would be inevitable should any investigation on the Wagner group be formed. 

“Fact check! Are the US and China in a good relationship right now?” Shouted the Norwegian delegation, prompting yet another round of surfing on the Internet by the chairs. After asking AI, reading a few news articles, and browsing google images until a fanart of the Hetalia Axis Powers, as well as anime art of Donald Trump and Xi Jinping shaking hands appeared, the chairs conceded that China and the US could be regarded as “on good terms”.

Unfortunately, Estonia’s resolution was unable to pass, and the final council session of ISMUN2025 concluded with much laughter from various delegates. While the topics debated in MUN council sessions can often be heavy and quite serious, it is always heartwarming to see delegates put so much passion in their proposals and solutions, and seeing delegates mingle among each other with friendly smiles and cheerful conversation when council sessions conclude can lift the spirits of even the most cold hearted individuals.