DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
melnyk
HTML https://melnyk.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: First Mandatory Post
*****************************************************
#Post#: 28--------------------------------------------------
Mville_Syria
By: RoyaBella Date: March 23, 2012, 10:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
First Mandatory Post: Syria
1. Who has the right to possess the land of Israel and
Palestine? Explain using historical/cultural/political reasoning
that reflect your country's position and beliefs. (Together)
From a historical perspective, Syria has traditionally sided
with Palestine in an effort to gain control of the Palestinian
movement, and to place Syrians in powerful bureaucratic
positions.
Presently we believe in the two state solution.
"Syria recognizes a Palestinian state within the June 4, 1967
borders and East Jerusalem as its capital, and on the basis of
the preservation of Palestinian legitimate rights,"
It is the best solution in terms of rights to possess land. It
also recognizes cultural and historical differences in Israel
and Palestine. Palestine was originally just for Palestinians
but once Israel was placed in Palestine that is what caused so
much conflict, and Israel having more land than Palestine seems
unjust because it was originally Palestinian territory which is
possibly why they still are threatened their homes were taken
from them and given to other people.
In terms of Settlement, Israelis should not be allowed to
continue occupying Syrian land captured in the six day war. Our
President Bashar al-Assad has stated that Israel would need to
withdrawal from lands occupied in 1967 to achieve peace with
Palestinians and Syrians.
From an international and political standpoint, these lands are
still considered illegal and thus Israelis should move out of
these settlements. For example Barack Obama has said that the
United States "does not accept the legitimacy of continued
Israeli settlements."
As such, Syria is the legitimate owner of Golan Heights and has
the right to possess Golan Heights, which is currently under
Israel.
Ultimately Palestine should rightfully have ownership of the
land as stated their is evidence which clearly shows that Israel
shouldn't have this much land because it was rightfully
Palestine's. Not stating that Israel should be kicked out but it
should be fair for whom had it first and who should have now
ownership of the land, there should be some type of settlement.
2. Should the international community recognize the statehood
of Palestine? Justify your response. (Roya)
In Syria's perspective it is believed that the international
community is recognizing the statehood of palestine, because
their has been such conflict between Israel and Palestine,
everyone is aware and is trying to find a common goal. The
International community are actually trying to benefit
themselves but also accommodate what is going on within
Palestine depending on the country and whether or not they are
allies with Palestine and looking for the best interest of the
community.
The current situation of Palestine trying to get independance
and becoming part of the UN can be argued but that brings up
issues with Israel causing them to want independance also and
now is the issue of weather it should be one nation or two
nations within an area of land. Since we are allies with
Palestine we are going forward for their best interest and we
support them in their decisions.
But to get something to happen the international community must
agree on a common goal on and what should be done because the
countries Palestine can not solve it on their own we must
intervene to prevent any possible damage to occur in Palestine.
It is an ongoing issue because nations are bias in their own
ideologies and don't all agree on one goal which ultimately
should be the issue of Palestine's statehood. The community is
concentrated in their own nations prospering rather than solving
one issue and moving on, in this situation no one will agree
because of the high power ego's in the situation.
3. What is your country's position regarding Iran's nuclear
program? How should the program be addressed? (Eliza)
In Syria’s opinion, we believe in ”the peaceful nature of
[Iran’s] nuclear program”.
We do not doubt that our close ally intends on using their
nuclear weapons for purely economic means. We support their
advances in technology for the purpose of generating
electricity. Furthermore we applaud their initiative to produce
electricity without dipping into their valuable oil supply.
The recent increases in Iran’s ability to produce nuclear fuel
does not mean that Iran will create a nuclear bomb. This is not
our sole opinion. American intelligence states that Iranian
leaders have not decided to use nuclear fuel as a weapon.
The United States and the European Union should reduce economic
sanctions placed on Iran as this will lead to increased
retaliatory action and unnecessary military action.
Furthermore, these sanctions will ultimately lead to increases
in oil prices (as Iran may cuts off oils sales to european
countries), thus harming the already delicate global economy.
These sanctions have been put in place to weaken Iran
economically, but global reliance on Iranian oil is far to great
to allow the sale of oil to end entirely.
To conclude, in Syria’s opinion the increased investment by
Iran in their nuclear program is not for the purpose of the
military but for the economy. Current economic sanctions placed
on Iran are thus unnecessary and should be removed.
Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi
HTML http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/iran/nuclear_program/index.html
*****************************************************