The UN reform movement calls for the UN Security Council to be changed. The underlying assumption is that it will create thicker decision-making that will allow more views on the causes of, dynamics of, and solutions to conflicts. This paper adopts a comparative analysis of three cycles of narratives in the UN Security Council and emergency sessions of the UN General Assembly when both bodies debated the same issue of violence in the Gaza Strip. The findings reveal that, unlike its public image, the emergency sessions of the UN General Assembly were used to make the analysis thinner and less descriptive. Another finding is that it was predominantly Arab, Muslim, and revisionist Latin American countries that influenced the majority to adopt the thin narrative.

联合国改革运动呼吁改变联合国安理会。基本假设是，它将创造更深入的决策，让人们对冲突的起因、动态和解决方案有更多的看法。本文对联合国安理会和联合国大会紧急会议上三个周期的叙述进行了比较分析，当时两个机构就加沙地带的同一暴力问题进行了辩论。调查结果显示，与其公众形象不同，联合国大会的紧急会议被用来使分析变得更薄弱和缺乏描述性。另一个发现是，影响大多数人采用薄弱叙事的主要是阿拉伯、穆斯林和修正主义拉丁美洲国家。