Writing Section 1: Topic Background

The Purpose of Section 1

The topic background section is not a Wikipedia summary. This is the most common mistake delegates make — they treat Section 1 as an opportunity to prove they can summarize the topic. Chairs already know the topic. They wrote the background guide. Your job is to demonstrate that you understand the problem's structure, its historical trajectory, and the specific dimensions most relevant to committee work.

A strong background section does three things: it frames the problem in a way that reveals your analytical depth, it traces the key milestones that shaped the current situation, and it identifies the fault lines where countries disagree. This last point is crucial — your background should naturally set up the tensions that your country position section will address.

Think of Section 1 as building a stage. You are deciding what scenery to place, what lighting to use, what props matter. These choices reveal your understanding. A delegate writing about nuclear nonproliferation who focuses only on the NPT has set a small stage. A delegate who frames the issue around the tension between disarmament obligations under Article VI, the security guarantees that nuclear-weapon states provide allies, and the emergence of new nuclear-capable states has set a stage large enough for sophisticated committee debate.

Structure and Flow

The strongest background sections follow a funnel structure: broad context narrowing to the specific dimensions the committee will debate.

Opening sentence: State the core problem with a specific anchor — a statistic, a date, a defining event. Not 'Water scarcity is a growing problem.' Instead: 'The UN World Water Development Report 2023 estimates that 2.4 billion people live in water-stressed countries, a figure projected to reach 3.5 billion by 2050 as climate change accelerates hydrological disruption.'

Historical trajectory (2-3 sentences): Trace the key international responses. What treaties, resolutions, or frameworks exist? When did the international community first address this? What has changed? For water scarcity: the 1977 Mar del Plata Conference, the 2010 GA resolution recognizing water as a human right (A/RES/64/292), the SDG 6 targets, and the 2023 UN Water Conference — the first in 46 years.

Current fault lines (2-3 sentences): Where do countries disagree? What are the competing frameworks? For water: transboundary water governance (upstream vs. downstream states), privatization vs. public management, and whether water access should be framed as a human right or an economic commodity.

Transition to country position: Your last sentence should create a natural bridge. 'These competing frameworks create particular challenges for nations in arid regions that depend on transboundary water sources' sets up a paper for Jordan, Egypt, or Iraq.

What to Include and What to Cut

Include:

• The most relevant UN resolution or treaty (with document number)
• One or two statistics that quantify the problem's scale
• The key international framework currently governing the issue
• The main points of disagreement between member states
• Recent developments that have changed the landscape

Cut:

• Dictionary definitions ('The United Nations defines terrorism as...')
• Ancient history unless directly relevant ('Since the beginning of time, humans have...')
• Exhaustive treaty summaries — mention the treaty, cite the key article, move on
• Obvious statements that any informed reader already knows
• Emotional language — save persuasion for Section 2

A useful test: read your background section and ask, 'Could I remove this sentence without losing anything important for understanding the debate?' If yes, remove it. Chairs notice density. A 200-word background that covers six substantive points impresses more than a 400-word background that covers three.