SalMUN 2009
Welcome to SalMUN 2009 Forum!
First time on the forum? please read the instructions!
In order to post, please login =)
If you already saw this message, you may cancel it.
SalMUN 2009

This forum is a lobbying place for MUN delegates to get prepared for the actual SalMUN 2009 Conference in Bahia!

You are not connected. Please login or register


Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1 CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 4th 2009, 21:14

Israel has stated its support for the new plan for a Palestinian state. However, Israel's terms include that it be an "unarmed state". Would the Israeli delegate be kind enough to clarify that condition? The delegate of the Palestinian Authority does not believe Israel would in any way be trying to deny the right of the new state to a military, right? Please elaborate...

Furthermore, why does Israel currently support the growth of settlements in the West Bank and Gaza?

Please respond soon Israel...

View user profile

2 Israel response on October 7th 2009, 12:06

The delegate of Israel hopes Palestinian Authority knows that most evidence from archeologists and historians suggests that the Jewish were in Israel before the Palestinians and that the Jews have a historical and spiritual claim to Israel. We built communities in 1300 BCE., even though we were dispersed during the Jewish Diaspora. But Israel does not support the growth of settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, and Israel has demolished several settlements and is building the wall to prevent more settlements from being made.

Also, the delegate of Israel hopes Palestinian Authority knows that Palestinian refugees (political and military) use suicide bombings targeting innocent civilians as a strategy to weaken Israel. This started around the year 2000, and Palestinians are using this is a weapon against Israel, but it is causing untold pain and suffering, torture. How does the Palestinian Authority plan to end its people’s act of suicide when they just crave to take the lives of Israelis? Israel is forced to defend itself.

Allowing Palestine a military would allow them to freely attack Israel, which is not in our interest. Israel will offer some security, but the Palestinians are simply too desperate and dangerous to be allowed a militia. It is a compromise. The Palestinians do not regard or respect international law and cannot be taken seriously because Palestinians have been using suicide bombs. They are completely committed to the destruction of Israel, and the Palestinians government is run by the terrorist group, Hamas, which has attacked Israel innumerable times, so we cannot allow them to have an army, because it would be unwise of Israel. Israel will continue to support this cause for peace, but Palestine cannot have an army. It would cause even more terrorist acts, and be unbeneficial for the Middle East.

View user profile

3 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 8th 2009, 23:38

He (Netanyahu) also said that existing settlements should be allowed to grow - a position opposed by the U.S.

View user profile

4 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 9th 2009, 00:03

Israel will offer some security, but the Palestinians are simply too desperate and dangerous to be allowed a militia.

The Palestinians do not regard or respect international law and cannot be taken seriously because Palestinians have been using suicide bombs.

First, one of the main reasons for the Palestinain struggle is the fact that the palestinian people do not have a state.
Second,the PNA is not aking for a "militia". In fact, the Palestinain Authroity believes that a new state deserves its militaryfor protection, after all, being able to secure one's own borders is part of SOVEREIGNTY, is it not?
Lastly, honestly delegate, Palestinains can't be takesn seriously because they have been using suicide bombs?!?!?! This is the most absurd statement the PNA delegate has heard in her lifetime. Worse, it seems the delegate is contradicting her own country for, if Israel has been making any attempt, however biased, to create a palestinian state it means it does take Palestinians seriously.

However, come to think of it, maybe Israel really does not take Palestinains seriously, stealing so much of the Palestinian people's territory with the separation wall, having nuclear weapons, a fact confirmed by the CIA and further enforced by not having signed the NPT.... Oh, but that is not really not taking Palestinian seriously its believing that the other nations of the world arwe blind and stupid enough to believe Israel's denials.

Yet, unfortunatelly, the delegate of Israel has clearly shown that she does not take the Palestinian people seriously. Wow. That sure shows that we will not reach peace. HOw will the PNA make any agreement with a nation who does not "take it seriously". Seriously delegate, why will you bother to attenda conference to discuss the issues with the refugees you believe are "suicide bombers", who you do not "take seriously"?

Interestingly, "Palestinians are too desperate and too dangerous to have a militia (certainly you meant official military)", but the Palestinian people were the true victims of the 2008 Gaza offensive. How to describe that attack... with "desperate" or "dangerous"? Certainly, not with "harmeless".

View user profile

5 dangerous? on October 11th 2009, 22:14

In June 2006, allies of Hamas kidnapped a reporter from BBC and Israeli Corporal Gilad Shalit. Palestine cannot have a military because Jerusalem and most of all Israeli cities are in weapon range of all Palestinian states.

Also, in June 2007, Palestine’s selected government, the Hamas attacked Fatah and Palestinian Authority military posts, hospitals, government buildings, and drew Fatah out of Gaza Strip. Almost every single Palestinian group was founded with the goal of violently destroying Israel and has a terrorist history.

In 2001, Palestinians from the Gaza Strip shot Qassam rockets at Israeli settlements and civilians in the Gaza Strip and in Israel. Not dangerous?

In poll, majority of Palestinians want Hamas to recognize Israel as independent state and settle peace, but in June 2007, Hamas refused to recognize Israel's right or make any effort for peace. Hamas just continually launches rockets into Israeli territory. Palestine must be controlled and limited or it will be overwhelmed in power and with an army and terrorist leaders, cause international chaos.

View user profile

6 US VIEW on October 15th 2009, 21:26

By reading this discussion it is clear how this unsolved issue has been concerning both sides of this dilemma. As a nation, who seeks the best for both lands and a solution towards peace, The United States of America would like to express its view towards the problem. The US supports the creation of a Palestinian state as by definition, the Palestine citizens already consider themselves as being a nation (nation: group of people united by history, land, culture or beliefs) and have been inhabiting the land for far too long. Yes the US recognizes that Israel was a land “given” back to the Jews after the holocaust and that for many years it’s people have been torn apart, suffered prejudice and had other nation meddling into their rights and religious beliefs, however we have to recognize that just like the Jews wanted SPACE TO START THEIR LIVES AGAIN, TERRITORY and RESPECT TOWARDS THEIR RELIGIOUS CHOICE, so does the Palestinians. The US would like to complement Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu for his agreement towards the creation of a Palestinian state and his “step forward”, as our president Obama has stated. The recognition that the creation of a Palestinian state is necessary is at least a positive step toward the end of this conflict.

View user profile

7 Qs! on October 15th 2009, 21:27

What really concerns the US is the nation’s refusal to commit to the end of Jewish settlements in the Palestinian land. Before any later damage is done, and citizens are forced to leave their homes in the area, the nation should recognize that it is better to maintain each group in a side and prevent that cultures get mixed. If Jews settle permanently in these areas, their departure might be more painful. The US delegate would like to hear from Israel a response concerning these settlements and the real reasons that push Israel into maintaining such situation.
Also, the US believes that there will never be peace and agreement in between both sides, if attacks are encouraged by the Palestine side. It is noted that Palestinians feel threatened and revolted by the treatment received from Israel and that after the creation of the Israeli West Bank Barrier, their anger increased, however the group’s voice will not be heard using such methods. Israel has stated that “Israeli statistics indicate that the barrier has substantially reduced the number of Palestinian infiltrations and suicide bombings and other attacks on civilians in Israel and in Israeli settlements, and Israeli officials assert that completion of the barrier will make it even more effective in stopping these attacks”. This shows how the country is concerned with the recurrent attacks from their neighbors. The US would like to hear from Palestine it’s concerns, thoughts and positions towards such suicidal bombings and attacks.

View user profile

8 israel withdrew on October 18th 2009, 13:09

Israel has a definite plan to withdraw from Gaza Strip and West Bank. On September 13, 1993, Israel and the PLO signed the "Declaration of Principles," which was a long term plan for Israel to withdrew from specific areas of Occupied Territories that would be governed by Palestinian Authority. Other countries may say Israel has not done this, but in September 2005, Israel officially withdrew from the Gaza Strip and dismantled 21 settlements. Also, Netanyahu has pledged not to build new settlements or to claim more land in a recent speech, and has stated his acceptance of the two-state solution for Israel and Palestinian territories. Israel is cooperating.

View user profile

9 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 18th 2009, 20:28

As part of this cooperation, does Israel intend to finally bring down the Apartheid Wall? Does the Israeli delegate have any idea of how much Palestinian territory this "unofficial settlement" steals? USA, if the wall were purely built for safety reasons, why not build it on the correct border lines? Clearly, this wall was not built for safety purposes, rather, it is an effective form of illegal annexation.

View user profile

10 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 18th 2009, 20:56

The wall is a temporary defensive mechanism to counter terrorist attacks and threats. Although only 11% of the line follows the Green Line, since the wall was biult, Israeli deaths have dramatically decreased, so it is effective. The IDF even claims that it is fundamental for anti-terrorsim in Israel.

View user profile

11 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 19th 2009, 15:50

Seriously, if the wall is meant for Israel's protection, why does it annex 47% of the West Bank? Is Israel aware that the ICJ rules it illegal as well? Furthermore, Palestinian homes were destroyed to build this wall. The most effective thing this wall did was expand Israeli territory and allow more Israeli settlements.

View user profile

12 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 19th 2009, 15:55

So... Israel says it does not intend to expand settlements; in fact, seeks to decrease them.
Despite calls from the U.S. for a complete freeze on expansion, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that, though Israel would not build any new settlements and would dismantle unauthorized outposts, it would still allow building within existing settlements to accommodate "natural growth."
Please, explain such contradictory statement. What is the difference between expansion and "natural growth"?!

View user profile

13 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 19th 2009, 17:07

Finally, what Israel and the US want to hear about. Bombings.
1. Bombings are conducted by the HAMAS, which refuses to recognize Israel, uses violence and recently won elections... for the majority of seats in the Lestlative Council.
2. The current PA President, Abbas, is from FATAH, which recognizes Israel. After the last elections, Abbas declared a state of Emergency and new elections are scheduled for June.

Let's make this clear. Most likely, Israel wants FATAH in government, for it is more open for negotiation. Now, FATAH has been losing support. Why?
1. 90% of Hamas's work is social, welfare cultural and educational. Hamas funds schools, orphanages, mosques, healthcare clinics, soup kitchens... even sport leagues.
2. The PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY CANT PROVIDE FOR THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE WITH THE SAME EFFECTIVENESS. Furthermore, constant failed negotiation with Israel has made Hamas more appealing.

Now, here's how it could work out.

If a Palestinian state were established, as an initiative of a Palestinian Authority led by a FATAH President, the party would gain support. With an official state established which would favor development and address the refugee problem, the Palestinian people would have better living conditions. (note: refugees do vote and they are truly not to enthusiastic about Israel's settlements and expansions which have conditioned them as such).
When in history have more extremist groups been elected to power? When the people had terrible living conditions and resentment towards other states, the groups that mirror their rage become more appealing. Unless Palestinians have a state and settlements STOP (at least) violence will end up seeming like the only escape.
Unlike Israel's belief that Palestinians "crave the lives of Israelis" (as one of its representatives so carelessly and wrongly worded), the truth is the Palestinian people are PEOPLE. They deserve a state of their own, just like Israel believes its Jewish people did. Israel's denial of such right and continuous violation of Palestinian right cannot evoke a sentiment different than the desire to fight for one's rights. Israel knows how Hamas interprets that. So, the Jewish state might as well cooperate with the current government, helping the Palestinian state develop properly, weakening the support for Hamas's violent tendencies.

View user profile

14 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 19th 2009, 19:25

Let us remind ourselves that under the United Nations charter:
“All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”

And that the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights article 15 states that:
"Everyone has the right to a nationality and that no one should be arbitrarily deprived of a nationality or denied the right to change nationality."

The delegation of Iran doesn't quite understand why the Palestinians have been subjugated to polite appeals for their rights under international principles. Why should the Palestinians ask for self-determination if that is something granted by the very United Nations? It's like a bird has to be given permission to flap its wings or like a human being must be conceded to breathe. It makes no sense.

View user profile

15 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 19th 2009, 19:56

If the delegate of Iran is implying that Palestine has the right of return to Israel, then the delegate of Israel must disagree, however eloquently put.

View user profile

16 responses on October 19th 2009, 20:53

To the Palestinian delegate:

The delegates cannot ignore the facts. That since the security fence has been built, Israeli deaths fell from 293 to 26, with suicide bombs wounds (not deaths) from 1,950 to 76. Locations near the security fence have had an intense decrease in terrorist attacks; 26 to 3. 103 to 28 deaths from the attacks. Adding, other walls in history have successfully separated territories, such as the famous Great Wall of China and Peace Walls in Ireland.

The Israeli delegate wishes to emphasize how much Israel aids Palestine. Throughout all the wars and terrorist attacks, Israel still manages to aid P.A. in many ways.

  • Israel helped P.A. dismantle anti-Israel terrorist networks
  • gave arms to P.A. to try and face the Hamas threat
  • From Israeli jails, Israel released 198 Palestinian security prisoners in August 2008
  • Israel granted 188 Palestinians who were caught between the Hamas and Fatah fighting safe refuge in Israel because 9 members of the Fatah were killed
  • In 2007, when floods killed 5 people, Israel sent large floating pumps into the Gaza Strip to help lower the sewage levels, and men seriously wounded were taken to Israeli hospitals
  • Also, in 2008, the Israeli army helped 85 Fatah Palestinians escape an attack of the Hamas, and agreed to give around 150 Palestinians safe passage to the Jewish state.

And these incidents are just a few of the many times Israel has taken an interest in it's neighbors.

The idea of at two-state has been agreed by the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, who said in June, 2009, that, "In my vision of peace, in this small land of ours, two peoples live freely, side-by-side, in amity and mutual respect. Neither will threaten the security or survival of the other.... If we receive this guarantee regarding demilitarization and Israel's security needs, and if the Palestinians recognize Israel as the State of the Jewish people, then we will be ready to reach a solution where a demilitarized Palestinian state exists alongside the Jewish state." This means that Netanyahu accepts that the peace can be attained through a demilitarized Palestine and Jewish state living alongside each other.

Also, Mahmoud Abbas, President of Palestinian Authority, said "I believe that the road map is the only international reference that is available now to resolve the Middle East question and the Palestinian-Israeli struggle. It contains everything in order to solve this question right from the beginning to the end including the Palestinians' independent state. I believe that we are -- after the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, we should go back to this plan so that we can implement it to arrive at his [President Bush] initiative to establish the independent Palestinian state, which is viable, contiguous, live side-by-side with the state of Israel," in 2005, which clearly states how a two state solution is the only way to peace as well.

Many other leaders have reached the same conclusion, and although there may be a few issues yet to resolve, this solution seems to be a good step into stopping the never-ending conflict.

View user profile

17 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on October 31st 2009, 09:11

It seems that the topic has changed and Israel has forgotten to address the previous question by the Palestinian representative. What did the Israeli Prime Minister mean by "natural growth" of settlements?
Certainly, it doesn't show intent to gradually remove them; rather, it looks like a synonym for expansion.

View user profile

18 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on November 1st 2009, 22:51

Maybe the delegate of Iran was implying that Palestinians have a Right of Return. However, the PNA delegate affirms it, as does UNGA resolution 194 (article 11).
Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date
The PNA delegate would appreciate if Israel explained under what grounds she ignores the validity of this UN decision.

View user profile

19 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on November 2nd 2009, 18:20

Considering that all General Assembly resolutions are not a part of international law and are unbinding. About 'natural growth'; destroying all settlements at once would also create another movement of immigration and chaos, and since moving entire towns would take months, even years, it is impossible to simply evacuate everyone from settlements.
Also, improving relations between the Israelis and Palestinians could also prove useful if they interacted in a civilized way, in society. Cutting them off from each other completely would prove ineffective because battles might insue in later years. Mixing both cultures would make room for change and create realtionships between both countries. Also, Israel has given Palestinians millions of dollars, but Israel has buisnesses and billions of dollars put into those territories that it cannot let go of easily. The answer should be gradual, because if we rush things and make giant changes, a small thing going wrong could cause extreme damages. And, Israel has full intentions of a compromise, and has made many steps toward a solution that everyone is happy with.

View user profile

20 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on November 2nd 2009, 19:21

well, the apartheid wall certainly is a good approach to mixing both cultures. It is a way to separate settlers from the palestinians as well which means that they don't promote the positive interaction Israel claims as part of its purpose. Furthermore, “Israeli settlers frequently carry out attacks against Palestinians and their property in the West Bank, including causing damage to their water facilities” (Amnesty International) and B'Tselem reported a 75% increase in Israeli settler violence against Palestinians in 2008 in relation to 2007. So, Israel, don't try to make these illegal expansions look beneficial.

Second, it is one thing to destroy the settlements, another to stop its growth. "Natural growth" does not mean allowing the settlements to remain where they are; rather, it implies allowing expansion. All the PNA delegate wants to know is what degree of expansion Israel determines as "natural".

View user profile

21 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on November 2nd 2009, 21:24

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said it would allow the natural growth of settlements within existing settlements, for instance, if a school is shut down because of health issues, then another can replace it. Most of the pictures attached to the text include Israelis rebuilding their demolished homes.

Examples are: A Jewish settler stands on the unauthorized outpost of Havat Gilad south of the West Bank city of Nablus. Or, A Jewish settler rebuilds his outpost after Israeli policemen demolished it on June 3, 2009 in Ramat Migron, east of Ramallah.

These have nothing to do with Israel expanding its territory because the Israeli law inforcers demolished them, and some Israelis were yet to let go.

Israeli's carry out attacks against Palestinians?

In 2007, around 1511 mortar bombs were fired, compared to 2006's 55 fires. They were aimed at IDF forces and Israeli communities near the Israeli-Gaza border.

There has been 152 Petrol bombs shot from the West Bank in 2009. Also in 2009, there has been more than 206 rockets and mortars just fired from the Gaza Strip.

When the Operation Defensive Shield started in 2002, and when the first section of the Security Wall was completed in August 2003, 296 suicide attacks were prevented.

In 2000 through 2008, 544 Israelis have been killed just by Palestinian suicide bombers, the majority of them before the Security Wall was put into action.

Last edited by israel_andrea on November 2nd 2009, 21:25; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : stupid font)

View user profile

22 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on November 3rd 2009, 14:35

Palestinian Authority
The USA cannot deny the Israel post on the attacks taken against Israel before and after the Separation wall. Actually, rather than calling it a Separation WALL, it more plausible to refer to the “WALL” as a SEPARATION FENCE. Calling it a wall, makes it seem like the Apartheid Wall or the Berlin Wall, which separates people according to their cultural beliefs and background rather than as a form of protection against possible terrorist attacks. The separation fence is a form of keeping Israeli borders, however the US understands that the Israeli government is going beyond and expanding its territory with the wall and adjusting illegal settlements in the area. The US has recognized such action and is pressuring Israel into the total stop of such settlements. But, above this, the separation fence protects Israel from the Hamas and keeps terrorists from rummaging their land. The US has the same protocol, in its Mexico-Texas borders, and promotes it’s right to decide who enters or not it’s land. Such right is to be practiced by Israel and the separation FENCE is a just a way of maintaining such separation solid.
Palestine has to understand that as open Israel might seem to negotiations, it is in fact in danger of a Hamas-led attack at any second and that it needs to protect its people. The Hamas has clearly state that it wished the destruction of Israel and that it did not recognize Israel as a state, but in fact as robbers of land and destroyers of the sanctity of the Muslim culture in Jerusalem. With these statements, Israel has the right to feel threatened just like any nation would! Even though the refugees are former residents and they too deserve the attention from the Israeli government, other Palestinians are part of the Hamas and may be planning an attack as soon as they step foot into Israeli territory. Palestine cannot urge total Israel cooperation considering the presence of a terrorist group in the same territory.

View user profile

23 Re: CREATION OF A PALESTINIAN STATE on November 3rd 2009, 17:50

-If we start to count casualties on both size, it will be a waste of time at this point. The purpose of the PNA delegate's previous post was not to say Israeli's carry out attacks against Palestinians, which they do, but rather to emphasize the negative impact of the Israeli settlers.
-Now, the Israeli government has previously stated that: its policy is to
prohibit new settlements but permit expansion of existing settlements to accommodate "natural growth."

That does not mean the same thing as the "maintenance" policy the delegate has described.
-Anyhow, the settlements are illegal according to the Geneva Convention.

-Again, if the purpose of the Apartheid Wall were protection only it would be built along the borders. Every nation has the right to protection but Israel is using this as an excuse for de facto annexation.There is reason the ICJ ruled it illegal.
As it is, the wall harms Palestinians, dividing their communities, hampers their right to self-determination and annexes Palestinian territory.
If the PNA delegate is not mistaken, the USA's fence was built on the right borderline, was it not, for defense not annexation: that is a fence: it protects borders. What Israel built is a wall, though for the sake of pretending it is merely for defensive purposes the USA delegate will continue to call it a fence... even though the Israeli delegate calls it a wall. Terminology is, we may agree, hardly the question at hand.

View user profile

24 yeah on November 3rd 2009, 20:41

Palestinian delegate,

The Israeli delegate also doesn't wish to count numbers and point fingers, and since there is NO way to find who drew first blood, arguing seems futile. Israel's goal, however, was to describe how it is immpossible to maintain the 'enemy' figure because there have been so many ups and downs. One side pushes the other, they pull each other's hair, and after a while, no one knows who started the fight. But no country is willing to become vunerable just to give a chance for peace. For if they do, thye could be shot down and destroyed. That is the fear that looms over every country that has a conflict with another.

Also, The reason the Green Line is in parts of the Palestinian territory is because the Green Line crosses several dirt roads, used to work illegally, carry out terrorist acts, or steal cars, which is nearly impossible to patrol. Jewish and Arab Israelis living near the Green Line support the fence (wall, divider, hedge, barricade, barrier, etc.), because they don’t want suicide bombers, thieves and vandals coming through. The fence reduced need for military operations of Israel in the territories, and stops so many troops from intervening in Palestinian towns on account of terrorists. Compared to the Berlin Wall, it does not deny separate one group of people/nation or deny freedom to either side. The fence is not used to keep people in, but to keep terrorist out of Israel. For cities near the wall, the Cabinet agreed to a plan to build 11 passages throughout the barrier to smooth movement to and from the cities.

The Israeli delegate would like to switch keys a little by asking, which offers has Palestine made to end this conflict? Have they dared to compromise? True, they may be seen as 'victims', but at what point does the victim become the monster. Where civilians blow themselves up in the hopes of killing an Israeli? Where Palestinians are angered by an Israeli leader going to one of their shrines in peace, and start a nation-wide movement that kills many Israelis? The Israelis may have blood on their hands, but the Palestinians are not clean either!

View user profile

Sponsored content

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum