Public Speaking

The Blue Helm Debate

Simulate the United Nations Security Council — represent nations, engage in moderated and unmoderated caucuses, respond to live crises, and shape global decisions through diplomacy and argumentation.

Committee: UN Security Council

Classes: 9–12

Mode: Individual

Format: MUN Simulation

Agenda

“Deliberation on State-Sponsored Terrorism and the Application of Artificial Intelligence within the Domains of Terrorism and Warfare.”

Overview

In the Blue Helm Debate, participants simulate the United Nations Security Council — one of the most powerful bodies of the UN, responsible for maintaining international peace and security. Delegates represent different countries and engage in intense debates through moderated and unmoderated caucuses, while also responding to dynamic crisis situations introduced during the session. Participants will propose solutions, draft resolutions and directives, raise procedural points, and use diplomacy, strategy, and strong argumentation to defend their nation’s stance and influence global decisions.

Session Structure

Session 1

Moderated Caucus — Opening Statements

Delegates present their opening statements, outlining their respective national positions on the agenda. The Executive Board regulates the flow of debate, allotting speaking time and recognizing delegates in an orderly manner. Points of Information and Points of Order may be raised after each speech.

Session 2

Moderated Caucus — Sub-Agenda Deliberation

In-depth discussion and deliberation on the sub-agenda as determined by the committee. Delegates engage in structured debate with POIs and POOs permitted after each speech.

Session 3

Unmoderated Caucus

An informal phase of discussion where delegates interact freely, engage in negotiations, and collaboratively formulate documents and strategies. No POIs or POOs during this session.

Crisis

Crisis Simulation

A crisis scenario is introduced during the session. Delegates deliver responsive statements and actively participate in formulating relevant documentation reflecting their proposed courses of action.

Procedural Clauses

Point of Information: A formal query raised to question another delegate after their speech — to seek clarification or critically examine their statement.
Point of Order: Raised to highlight a factual inaccuracy or error in a delegate’s statement during proceedings.
Point of Personal Privilege: Invoked when a delegate experiences personal inconvenience or discomfort (e.g. difficulty hearing the speaker).
Point of Parliamentary Enquiry: Raised to seek clarification from the Chair regarding current proceedings, particularly after a temporary absence.
Right to Reply: Requested when a delegate believes their nation has been deliberately insulted or misrepresented, seeking an opportunity to respond formally.

Committee Documentation

Each delegate must submit a Position Paper to the heads before the commencement of the committee. The position paper is a formal document outlining the delegate’s country’s stance on the agenda — including background context, national policies, and proposed solutions.

Evaluation Criteria

Moderated Sessions: Factual accuracy and substance of speeches; relevance and grounding of POIs; significant weightage on POOs.
Unmoderated Session: Diplomatic conduct, including negotiation, collaboration, and effectiveness in engaging with fellow delegates.

Selection Criteria

Students will be selected on the basis of their oratory skills and depth of knowledge regarding the agenda. Aspiring delegates must undertake thorough research on the agenda and diligently refine their oratory skills.

Event Hosts

HostSrishti Gupta (Class 12-C)

HostShruti Pandey (Class 12-C)

HostAashi Mishra (Class 12-C)