By Agence France Presse at 2:51 PM 5/31/2020 (PDT)
Despite entering their 6th hour of debate the Commission on Science and Technology for Development began their second session of the day with excitement and small-talk.
After voting on and passing a resolution for their Topic A, The Development of Artificial Intelligence in War Technology, the committee proceeded to move towards Topic B: Consumer Harm from Technology Monopolies. Unlike in other committees, the secondary speakers list was rapidly filled and had a multitude of countries expressing their personal positions regarding technology monopolies.
The Delegation of Kenya expressed the belief that countries should encourage technology monopolies. However, in order to stop technology monopolies from wreaking havoc on its consumers,the Delegation of Kenya encouraged the institution of international policies such as price regulations.
The Delegation of the United States introduced its position by listing some of its most notorious technology monopolies: Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft. After establishing its ethos, the United States delegation emphasized its disdain for antitrust laws (often encouraged to be used for situations regarding technology monopolies), dubbing them as ineffective. Therefore, as a developed country, the United States emphasized that it valued seeking innovative and nontraditional methods to paraway consumer harm and consumer empowerment.
Soon after, a 10-to-1 moderated caucus on country positions was passed. Then, the Delegation of the United States exercised its first speakers right to clarify its position on tech monopolies. The Delegation expressed that the United States does not support uncontrolled technology monopolies, referencing its president proposing anti-trust laws and members on opposing ends of the political spectrum striving to break up technology monopolies.
The Delegations of Japan and Pakistan echoed the Delegation of the United States sentiments to create regulations on technology monopolies while not harming nor controlling consumers.
In a paralleled manner, the Deletion of India sought to strive a balance amongst monopolistic business practices and consumer well being,
Introducing new information, the Delegation of Kenya recalled that Kenya has passed price control acts and consumer protection acts. Therefore, it is trying to bring technology monopolies into its country, emphasizing that its great strides in the technological industry earned it the title of a Silicon Savannah. Then, the Delegation of the Central African Republic echoed the Delegations of Kenya’s interests in expanding their technological monopolies. It expressed that thus far, the Central African Republic is only familiar with Google, but does not want a complete takeover which would cause small technology companies to go extinct.
Contrary to its committee members, the Delegation of Germany expressed an interest in maintaining smaller technological businesses to allow for competition and development amongst companies. This was subsequently supported by the Delegation of Mexico.
The concept of the many issues of technological monopolies were first introduced by the Delegation of Iran, as it recalled its conflict with Apple, in which the rights of its consumers were infringed upon by being prohibited from utilizing the app store. These issues would later be elaborated on in a moderated caucus.
The two clearly established positions amongst the committee were countries seeking to slowly expand their technology monopolies and those seeking to increase the limitations placed upon monopolies to varying extents.
At the end of the session, it became evident that the CSTD committee is well equipped with the tools to effectively discuss and work through its issues. The committee managed to entertain fruitful moderated caucuses regarding different nations’ positions, the benefits of technology monopolies, their downsides and proposed regulations on technology monopolies. Moreover, none of these caucuses expired and they evidently benefited the committee members.
Currently, it is clear that the CSTD committee has found a common ground and has the cooperation necessary amongst its members to attain globally effective solutions.
To edit this page, click here.