During the summer of 2025, I participated in the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) Geneva Immersion Program through the Nanovic Institute. The program took place just before my senior year and gave me the chance to connect what I had studied in the classroom with the organizations, issues, and people shaping global affairs in practice.
Before going to Geneva, I understood the city as an important place for international cooperation. I knew it was home to the United Nations, the World Health Organization, and many other organizations. But being there made that feel very different. For one week, through lectures, institutional visits, workshops, and conversations with practitioners, I was able to see what multilateral diplomacy looks like up close.
Walking through the Palais des Nations was striking. The UN was no longer just an acronym, a chapter in a textbook, or a topic in the news. It was a real workplace, filled with people responding to problems that affect communities around the world. There I realized diplomacy is not only about formal agreements or public speeches. Much of it happens through daily conversations, negotiations, procedures, and decisions that rarely make headlines but still shape people’s lives.
That became clearer during our visit to the World Trade Organization, one of the most meaningful parts of the program for me. As someone studying both business and global affairs, I have always been interested in the relationship between markets, rules, and international cooperation. At the WTO, we learned about a framework called “TOWEL,” which explains that trade rules should be “clean” and appropriately “soft.” The acronym summarizes several WTO principles: Transparency and predictability; Open and competitive markets; Without discrimination; Exceptions for issues such as health and security; and special flexibility for Less developed countries.
The visit helped me see trade as more than an economic topic. Rules about markets affect jobs, consumer access, development opportunities, and a country’s ability to respond to crises. For me, it reinforced that business and global affairs are deeply connected. Markets are not separate from institutions or politics; they are shaped by them.
The UNITAR negotiation workshop gave me another way to think about this. Before the session, I thought negotiation was mostly about defending a position and convincing others to agree. The workshop challenged that assumption. We discussed how effective negotiation often starts with understanding what each side actually needs, not just what each side says it wants. Through the exercise, we practiced listening, identifying shared interests, and thinking through solutions that could move a conversation forward. It made me realize that negotiation is less about winning and more about creating enough trust for people to keep working together.
Another visit that stayed with me was to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. This experience connected directly to research I had conducted the previous summer in Portugal, with support from the Nanovic Institute, on the labor market integration of migrants. In Portugal, I focused on what happens after people arrive in a new country: how they find work, build community, and create a sense of belonging. At UNHCR, we learned about the conflicts, crises, and instability that force people to leave home, as well as the difficult work of supporting them once they do. The visit reminded me that behind every migration statistic is a person searching for safety, stability, and a future.
The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Museum brought that human dimension into focus in a different way. After spending much of the week talking about institutions and policy, the museum asked us to think about the people most affected by the crisis. Its exhibits told stories of conflict, displacement, resilience, and humanitarian action, reminding me that international affairs is never only about states or institutions. It is also about individual lives.
The museum also helped me understand Geneva’s history more clearly. Geneva’s international identity did not begin only with the United Nations. In the nineteenth century, Henry Dunant, a Swiss businessman from Geneva, witnessed the suffering of wounded soldiers after the Battle of Solferino. His response helped inspire the creation of the Red Cross and the first Geneva Convention. Later, Geneva became the headquarters of the League of Nations after World War I. After World War II, its role as a center of international diplomacy continued through the United Nations system.
Learning that history changed the way I saw Geneva. It is not only a city where governments negotiate. It is also a place shaped by the belief that even during war, crisis, and disagreement, human dignity still requires rules, dialogue, and protection. That idea connected closely to themes I first encountered in the course, “Introduction to Global Affairs and Integral Human Development,” where we discussed how institutions can help protect human dignity and advance the common good.
Looking back, what I value most about the Geneva Immersion Program is that it made my education feel more concrete. The institutions I had studied for years became real places, with real people working through difficult questions that rarely have simple answers. The experience deepened my understanding of international affairs and reminded me that meaningful change requires both knowledge and responsible action, especially action that keeps human dignity at the center.
I am deeply grateful to the Nanovic Institute for making this opportunity possible. Geneva challenged me to think differently about diplomacy, leadership, and global engagement. It also reminded me that behind every institution, policy, and international agreement are people trying to build a more cooperative and humane world. Those lessons have stayed with me long after I left Geneva and continue to shape how I think about my future and the role I hope to play in it.