MUN WHO notes
Topic 1: Fentanyl and synthetic opioids
General notes
* Fentanyl is a very strong synthetic opioid used medically for severe pain, but illegal fentanyl can cause deadly overdoses.
* Main problems: illegal production, precursor chemicals, counterfeit pills, trafficking, and overdose deaths.
* Naloxone can reverse an opioid overdose.
* WHO mainly focuses on the health side: prevention, treatment, data collection, harm reduction, and recommending whether dangerous substances should be internationally controlled.
* A good solution should balance drug control + public health, instead of only punishment.
Chile
* Chile would likely support stronger controls on illegal synthetic drugs, better international information-sharing, monitoring precursor chemicals, and access to naloxone.
* Chile should also defend legitimate medical use of fentanyl, so it should not support a total ban.
* Good Chile line: fight trafficking while protecting access to necessary medicines and addiction treatment.
Useful ideas for a resolution
* Early-warning systems for new synthetic drugs
* More naloxone access
* Better tracking of precursor chemicals
* Stronger customs and laboratory capacity
* Treatment and rehabilitation programs
⸻
Topic 2: Contraception and family planning in low-income countries
General notes
* The issue is not only whether contraception exists, but whether people can actually access it safely and affordably.
* Main barriers: cost, rural distance, lack of doctors, shortages, misinformation, cultural pressure, and lack of privacy.
* Important methods include condoms, pills, injections, implants, and IUDs.
* LARCs = long-acting reversible contraception, such as implants and IUDs.
* People should have informed choice, rather than being pushed toward one method.
* WHO also emphasizes trained healthcare workers, reliable supply chains, and services that reach rural populations.
Chile
* Chile would generally support wider access to contraception and reproductive healthcare.
* It would likely support:
* multiple contraceptive choices
* services for rural communities
* trained healthcare workers
* sexual-health education
* privacy and informed consent
* international funding for poorer states
* Chile should strongly avoid anything that looks like forced contraception or population control.
‘ Useful ideas for a resolution
* Mobile clinics in rural areas.
* WHO/UNFPA funding for contraceptive supplies
* Training healthcare workers
* Telehealth for remote communities
* Privacy rules for reproductive-health data
Basically memorize this
Topic 1:
Chile = control illegal fentanyl + prevention + treatment + naloxone + keep legal medical access.
Topic 2:
Chile = accessible contraception + choice + privacy + rural healthcare + no coercion.
That level is probably enough to walk into committee prepared without memorizing 10 pages.
!!! you should know that Chile already works on:
* early detection of new synthetic drugs;
* monitoring fentanyl and other controlled medicines;
* electronic prescriptions and drug traceability;
* naloxone availability;
* training emergency services;
* international information sharing.
Chile’s existing policy also distinguishes between illegal diversion and legitimate pharmaceutical use. That matters because fentanyl is still a medically useful drug
Family planning:
Chile’s domestic system emphasizes access, several contraceptive options, informed decision- making and public healthcare provision.
Yes. I’m going to treat “resolution” as a short opening speech, because a resolution itself is a written document with clauses. Both of these are around 45–55 seconds.
Your WHO agenda is specifically fentanyl/synthetic opioids and access to contraception/family planning in low-income countries.
Topic 1 — Fentanyl and synthetic opioids
Opening speech — Chile
Honorable Chair, distinguished delegates,
The delegation of Chile recognizes the growing threat posed by fentanyl and other synthetic opioids. However, this issue must be addressed through both public health and international cooperation. Chile supports stronger monitoring of precursor chemicals, early-warning systems for emerging synthetic drugs, and improved information-sharing between states. At the same time, we believe countries must expand access to naloxone, treatment, and emergency healthcare while preserving the legitimate medical use of opioids. Chile calls for a coordinated response that targets illicit production and trafficking while protecting public health and ensuring that necessary medicines remain accessible. Thank you.
That fits Chile quite well: Chile already has a synthetic-drug plan focused on monitoring, early-warning systems, controlling manufacturing inputs, medical opioid oversight, naloxone and international coordination.
What the debate is actually about
The committee probably will not disagree that fentanyl is dangerous. The arguments will be over how to respond.
One side will focus more on control and enforcement: precursor chemicals, borders, trafficking networks, pharmaceutical diversion, illegal laboratories and new fentanyl analogues.
Another side will emphasize public health: naloxone, addiction treatment, harm reduction, emergency services and avoiding policies that discourage drug users from seeking medical care.
WHO itself supports a balance. Fentanyl is a legitimate medicine and is on WHO’s Essential Medicines list, while non-medical fentanyl and related substances create severe overdose risks. WHO also supports naloxone, treatment and surveillance of emerging synthetic opioids.
So your easiest line as Chile is:
“We need control without preventing legitimate medical access, and enforcement without ignoring treatment.”
Countries in your committee that matter for this debate
United States: Fentanyl is an especially major domestic public-health issue there, so expect the US delegate to focus strongly on trafficking, precursors and overdose prevention. Chile and the US currently have broad cooperation in areas including security, and the US is Chile’s second-largest trading partner.
A useful question:
“How does the United States propose strengthening precursor controls while maintaining cooperation with producing and transit countries?”
China: Very important. China has placed fentanyl-related substances under category-wide control and has tightened controls on precursor chemicals. It has also been cooperating with the US on counternarcotics investigations.
Chile also has a major relationship with China: China is currently Chile’s largest trading partner.
Question:
“Would China support an international WHO-linked information system for rapidly identifying new synthetic opioids and precursor chemicals?”
That lets you engage China without accusing them of causing the problem.
Mexico: Very relevant because fentanyl trafficking and precursor controls directly affect Mexico. China specifically applies several fentanyl-precursor export controls to shipments involving Mexico, the US and Canada.
Question:
“How can international cooperation help transit and manufacturing countries distinguish legitimate chemical trade from diversion into illicit fentanyl production?”
Colombia: Another useful Latin American voice. Colombia has its own early-warning system and in 2026 published a dedicated report on fentanyl and other synthetic opioids used for non-medical purposes. Chile describes its relations with Colombia as historically close and based on ongoing political, economic and multilateral cooperation.
Question:
“Would Colombia support connecting national early-warning systems across Latin America?”
That is particularly natural for Chile because Chile already has one too.
Argentina: Chile’s closest geographic relationship in the room. The two countries share a huge border and currently describe their bilateral relationship as a priority for regional coordination.
On fentanyl, you can ask something regional:
“How can South American states improve cross-border exchange of information on emerging synthetic drugs?”
The biggest thing to remember for Topic 1
Do not accidentally argue for banning all fentanyl.
If another delegate says:
“We must completely eliminate fentanyl.”
You have an easy response:
“Would the delegate clarify how their proposal would preserve fentanyl’s legitimate use in anesthesia and severe pain management?”
WHO explicitly recognizes fentanyl as a legitimate medicine.
⸻
Topic 2 — Contraception and family planning in low-income countries
Opening speech — Chile
Honorable Chair, distinguished delegates,
The delegation of Chile believes that access to safe family planning is an essential part of public healthcare. Simply supplying contraceptives is not enough; people must have access to accurate information, trained healthcare professionals, multiple contraceptive options, and services that reach rural and underserved communities. Chile supports international cooperation to strengthen healthcare systems, prevent supply shortages and expand voluntary and informed access to contraception. At the same time, all programs must respect individual choice, confidentiality and national circumstances. Chile looks forward to developing practical solutions that make family planning genuinely accessible rather than merely available. Thank you.
Chile’s public health system currently provides 13 contraceptive methods free to FONASA users, including adolescents, through primary-care centers and rural health posts. It also uses telehealth for some contraceptive consultations.
What the debate is really about
Again, almost nobody is simply going to say:
“People shouldn’t have healthcare.”
The disagreement will probably be about how far international policy should go and how programs should operate.
You may hear debates over:
* whether contraception should be treated mainly as healthcare or also as a rights issue;
* adolescent access;
* comprehensive sexuality education;
* religious and cultural objections;
* whether spousal consent should ever be required;
* how international programs should be funded;
* whether foreign donors should determine policy;
* telehealth and privacy;
* how much control national governments should retain.
Your briefing specifically flags issues like spousal consent, comprehensive sexuality education, conscientious objection, FemTech privacy, the digital gender divide and international funding. ACTMUN'26_ WHO Committee Briefing.docx
Chile gives you a pretty easy position because its own public system already emphasizes access to a range of contraceptive methods and informed decision-making.
⸻
Countries to understand on Topic 2
Rather than thinking “friends vs enemies,” think of these as different perspectives you are likely to hear.
Sweden
Sweden has a major international policy commitment to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) and a dedicated 2025–2029 development-cooperation strategy covering this area. In 2026 it also announced further global-health funding that included reproductive and maternal health.
So if Sweden speaks about access, women’s autonomy, healthcare funding or reproductive rights, that is consistent with its existing policy.
Question:
“How does Sweden propose ensuring that expanded access remains financially sustainable after international funding ends?”
That’s a better question than simply agreeing with them.
Denmark
Denmark is also very active on this issue. Its 2026 development priorities explicitly include contraception, sexuality education and broader sexual and reproductive health services, and Denmark is a major supporter of UNFPA.
Good question:
“How can donor states ensure that funding strengthens local health systems rather than creating long-term dependency?”
Very useful debate point.
France
France explicitly treats sexual and reproductive health and rights as connected to public health, gender equality and individual freedoms.
You could ask:
“How can WHO expand reproductive-health access while ensuring programs remain adaptable to different national healthcare systems?”
Brazil
Brazil is useful to you because it is another major Latin American state with a large public healthcare system. Its SUS currently provides several contraceptive methods free of charge and frames contraceptive choice around autonomy and access to reliable information.
Chile could therefore discuss practical public-health delivery with Brazil:
“How can countries use primary healthcare networks to expand access to long-acting contraception in underserved communities?”
South Africa
South Africa is particularly relevant because this topic concerns access in lower-resource settings and its public-health system has dedicated current guidance on family planning as part of primary healthcare.
A good question would be:
“What barriers does South Africa believe are most important to address first: cost, healthcare workers, supply shortages or geographic access?”
That invites them to contribute actual experience.
Uganda
Pay attention to Uganda because it may bring a perspective from a country much closer to the low-income-country context actually named in the topic.
Instead of challenging them immediately, a useful question is:
“What does Uganda believe wealthier states and WHO misunderstand about delivering family-planning services in low-income countries?”
That could give the committee something much more useful than European countries simply designing policies for LICs.
⸻
Your relationships in the room
You definitely do not need to memorize Chile’s diplomatic relationship with all 25 countries.
The useful ones are:
Argentina: Chile’s neighbor and one of its most important bilateral relationships. The governments described the relationship in September 2026 as being in excellent condition and a priority for South American coordination.
Colombia: close political and economic relationship; both are part of the Pacific Alliance, alongside Mexico and Peru.
Mexico: also connected to Chile through the Pacific Alliance, so regional cooperation is an easy area of conversation.
Brazil: major South American state; useful on public-health systems and regional approaches.
China: extremely important economically—currently Chile’s largest trading partner.
United States: also a major Chilean partner; currently Chile’s second-largest trading partner, with cooperation that includes security, education, science and technology.
France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Denmark, Sweden, Austria and Latvia: all EU members. Chile’s relationship with the EU is significant and structured through its modernized EU-Chile agreements; the EU is also Chile’s largest source of foreign direct investment.
So you have plenty of room to work across both Latin American and European delegations, while also maintaining substantial relationships with the US and China.
⸻
Five questions I would have ready in your notebook
For Topic 1:
1. “How will the delegate prevent precursor diversion without restricting legitimate pharmaceutical production?”
2. “Would the delegate support expanding national early-warning systems for emerging synthetic drugs?”
3. “Does the delegate support wider naloxone availability?”
4. “How will their proposal preserve legitimate medical access to fentanyl?”
5. “What role should WHO have compared with law-enforcement organizations?”
For Topic 2:
1. “How will the delegate ensure rural communities actually receive contraceptive services?”
2. “How will the proposal prevent contraceptive stockouts?”
3. “How will informed consent and individual choice be protected?”
4. “How can donor funding build permanent local healthcare capacity?”
5. “How will digital reproductive-health services protect patient privacy?”
Those questions are broad enough that you can use them against almost any delegation, which is much more useful in live debate than memorizing a separate attack for every country.