1

STUDY GUIDE FOR THE MUN SESSION LETTER FROM THE CHAIRPERSON Dear Delegates It gives me immense pleasure to usher in a new set of MUNers with the upcoming session. I hope all of you are aware of the fame, knowledge and stardom that awaits you, IF you are chosen as an MUNer, But this also requires hardwork, dedication, perfect balance, a terrific personality and above all - ruthless talent. Through my experiences as an MUNer Both in India and abroad and as a Delegate and an Executive Board member, I have learnt one thing about the art of MUNing You must be supremely confident when you speak, but there is a fine line between confidence and over confidence. Lets get down to the session now; the agenda is the situation in the Middle East with special emphasis on Israel - Palestine and Iran Iraq. Remember to not deviate from the agenda at any point in time. These are extremely delicate topics and I expect you to handle them with some maturity. You must be exceptionally well researched; All facts, events and happenings must be on your tips. This study guide has been given ONLY to give you a start, THIS IS NOT your research. Also, research running into thousands of pages does not assure success, but good quality research does. Rannu Maam and me eagerly look forward to this session. I will Chair this session with no expectations from you, But please for your own well being, avoid making frivolous statements, If you think this is a joke, wait till I tell you what a joke is. I hope you realize the gravity of the situation, come up with innovative solutions and show me that DPS Rohini has some talent. Best of luck, Chetan Chawla Head Boy and President, Model UN and Debate Society

( Background Guide Credits Sajal Mendiratta, Sheeba Sagar and Trisha Roy) POSITION PAPER ALL DELEGATES PLEASE NOTE YOU HAVE TO MAIL YOUR POSITION PAPERS TO THE ID dpsrmunsociety@gmail.com BY 13 January positively. Failing to SUBMIT THE POSITION PAPER WILL MEAN IMMEDIATE EXPULSION FROM THE COMMITTEE.

What is a position Paper?

The foundation of Model United Nations conference preparation is the position paper. Literally speaking, a position paper is a one page, single spaced discussion about one of your topics, and your countrys position regarding the issue. Outside this definition though, the position paper is often vital to your understanding and approach of your conference topics

A Position Paper is a brief summarize of a country's policy and interests concerning the topics on the Agenda. It should contain a clear statement of the countrys position on the topic and clear reasoning, also suggesting a plan of action concerning the issues under consideration. The Position Paper should be a product of the delegates own research and should be concise and substantial. In the first part of your Position Paper you should briefly address the issues on the Agenda, the relevancy and the scope of the problem. You should mention the major players, the current developments concerning the issues under discussion, the action UN has taken in this respect, whether by specialized agencies, regional bodies or non-governmental organizations, the most significant resolutions that have been passed, international treaties and provisions for future action. In the second part you should specify the official position of the country you represent in respect to the issues under consideration. It should include brief statements about where your country stands on the issue in question, past statements on the topic by representatives of your government, especially if these mention the significance of the issues on the Agenda to your country, specific suggestions that your country will support in providing a solution for the issues in question. You should also make reference to the role UN has assumed to confront this issue. You do not need to go into detail about your negotiating positions.

FOR YOUR HELP HERE IS A SAMLE POSITION PAPER, which won at the prestigious La Martniere Calcutta MUN

FEDERAL REPUBLIC of GERMANY COMMITTEE: Human Rights Council AGENDA: Human Trafficking and use of children in armed warfare AUTHOR: Chetan Chawla Human trafficking is a barbaric transnational phenomenon. Over the decade, 15 million children have been trafficked for use in armed conflicts and over 20 million maimed as a result of war. The Federal Republic of Germany believes that this problem can be combated through international cooperation and henceforth attaches immense importance to the agenda. Germany is a party to various bilateral and multilateral conventions against human trafficking and the rights of children and their use in armed warfare. Germany has Ratified -The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict in 2004, The ILO Convention no. 182 on the Worst Forms of Child Labor, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on 23 April 2003, The Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, The convention on the rights of the child, the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the 1977 Additional Protocols I and II to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Endorsed The Paris Commitments and Principles. Germany has proven itself a leader in many aspects of the fight against trafficking in persons, before, during, and after the 2006 World Cup scenario. Its ranking by the U.S. State Department Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP) as a Tier 1 country signifies Germany's compliance with the Trafficking Victims Protections Act of 2000 (TVPA). One important step the German government has taken is collecting and publishing data related to trafficking cases since 1994. The Committee on the Rights of the Child noted with appreciation that Germany provides training to military personnel and the participants of peacekeeping missions, on human rights, including the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Optional Protocol. Germanys

Efforts to promote the implementation of the Guidelines on Children and Armed Conflict adopted by the European Unions General Affairs and External Relations Council in December 2003 and Contributions to projects for the rehabilitation and reintegration of child soldiers in several countries experiencing conflict or in post-conflict situations drew wide acclaim from the international community. Germany has constantly rendered financial support to multi- and bilateral activities aimed at protecting and supporting children who have been affected by armed conflict. The German Government made amendments to the Youth Welfare Act and the Immigration Act of 2005, which recognizes the recruitment of child soldiers as a form of persecution on the grounds of which refugee status can be granted. In November 2006 ,The Task Force on trafficking in Human beings was established. Which is based on the obligations of Council of Europe Convention.Adhering to the Geneva Convention of 2000 the compulsory recruitment age to join the armed forces is 18 in Germany. The Basic law in Germany makes the offense punishable by up to 10 years' imprisonment. The Federal Ministry for Families, the Elderly, Women, and Youth heads an inter agency working group to combat trafficking and to aid victims of trafficking. The federal and state governments, as well as private donors, subsidized more than 30 counseling centers for victims of trafficking that are run by NGOs. The centers provide shelter, counseling, interpreting services, and legal assistance. Victims who are illegal residents receive basic health care for acute illness or pain according to the Benefit Rules for Asylum Seekers. Germany believes that recruitment of children below the age of 18 by dissident armed forces or other organized armed groups is punishable and that such practices be made criminal and all countries have a mechanism in place to scrutinize the enforcement of such laws against offenders. In addition, All states should fund NGOs and other international human rights organizations for rehabilitation of refugees and victims of human trafficking and should develop counseling centers like those in Germany. The issue of recruitment of child soldiers and trafficking in persons does not only affect individuals but it affects the entire international community. At the turn of the decade, it is imperative for all states to join hands and free the world of practices that threaten Humanity.

What is an MUN?

An MUN stands for MODEL UNITED NATIONS. It is a conference, which is exactly like the United Nations. The UN discusses some critical international issues; At MUN also we debate about issues, which affect the world. There are different committees in an MUN like General Assembly, Security Council, and Human Rights Council etc. Which you must have studied about in previous classes. Each committee has one agenda relating to the area of its jurisdiction, eg. SC will discuss war; HRC will discuss human issues etc. Each committee has 1 representative from those countries, which have representation in the council. Eg, If you have Canada, then you are the person representing the Canadian government. It is your duty to ensure that you do everything in accordance with the foreign policy; you are like the prime minister of the country youve got. You will never say that my country is guilty, instead defend yourself. You are not students, you are delegates, you are not Indians, but in an MUN , you become a person of that nationality as the country assigned. Over all, MUN is a fantastic experience, which only some very lucky few people get to experience. Some of the brightest and best children in the country are MUNers. SOME RULES AND PROCEDURES, WHICH YOU WILL FOLLOW AT AN MUN Now, Delegates, at MUN we will follow formal rules and procedures. Firstly, NO PERSONAL PRONOUNS, You will not say I, You will say Delegate of Canada (If youve got Canada) or Delegate of Algeria (if youve got Algeria). You will NOT say you, me, he, she, I etc. You will say delegate of so and so country. At an MUN, The Char is like god. They do everything, they can ask you questions, they dictate which delegate will speak, they pass comments, they can suspend anyone, gag anyone, they have ultimate powers.

Now, The chair first declares the committee debate open, then there is a thing called SPEAKERS LIST, Delegates will raise their placards and the chair will recognize a few delegates randomly. When you come on the speakers list . You have to give a speech of 60 seconds ON WHAT YOUR COUNTRYS STAND IS ON THE AGENDA. - Hide quoted text Eg I am delegate of Argentina, My topic Terrorism, I will sayA very Good Morning to the executive Board. Terrorism is a phenomenon of dangerous magnitude, which affects each and every individual. Only international cooperation can put an end to terrorism. The Delegate of Argentina would like to inform the committee that Argentina has a very hard stance against terrorism. The National Investigative Agency identifies any suspected terrorist activities and reports them. There are a number of measures in place............................................... Argentina wants the international community to Argentina has a number of laws against this like.. and has ratified UN conventions on the agenda like.. So this is how you will go about the speech. The speech needs to include all the above points and DO NOT COPY PHRASES FROM THE ABOVE SPEECH. THIS IS JUST A SAMPLE, NOT A FORMAT. THERE IS NO FORMAT FOR THE SPEECH. Now, after the speech, you will answer questions from other delegates. The chair can ask you a question any time. And the delegate CANNOT refuse to answer. So you need to be prepared with stuff on other countries as well. Now, like there are sub topics of a chapter, an agenda also has sub topics, these are discussed in a moderated caucus, any delegate can raise a moderated caucus, after which the committee will vote on it. If passed, then the committee will discuss that for the next 10 minutes. Those who raise new, interesting, never heard before facts will earn a lot of points. Now, You have to be thorough with solutions on the agenda. We will ask each delegate to suggest some solutions on the agenda. WHAT MAKES AN MUNer WIN? 1. DOMINANCE You should dominate and shine out of all the other delegates. Raise controversial new points, ATTACK OTHER DELEGATES and their policies, Raise new aspects, Try to involve yourself maximum times in a moderated caucus

2. RAISE VALID POINTS AND DEFEND YOURSELF If some one asks you a question, do not say I dont know, answer and defend it well. Answer nicely and impressively. Give lots of facts and laws in your country. 3. Quality of speech 4. Quality of questions and attacking abilities and aggressiveness, dont sleep, always be active.

5. Quality of RESEARCH. THIS IS MOST IMPORTANT. YOU SHOULD HAVE

RESARCH ON 1. YOUR COUNTRY 2. OTHERS COUNTRIES 3. THE AGENDA ON THE WHOLE. LIKE CAUSES, EFFECTS, SOLUTION, HOW IT IS DONE, WHY IS IT DONE, WHAT FACTORS CONTRIBUTE TO IT, WHO DOES IT ? EVERYTHING.
Now, Reports need to be given to the chair for any allegation or statement of important nature. Please pay attention to this as submitting an allegation with reports fetches lots of marks.

Reports from
1. UN 2. REUTERS 3. BBC
Are accepted ONLY. Please carry as many controversial reports from the above sources as possible. And please be very thorough with the research.

Israel-Palestine
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or Arab-Israeli conflict, or whatever name it goes by, is perhaps one of the more sensitive issues that is discussed. From the historic British dominance in the Middle East, and the more recent US influence and control over the region, the Anglo-American goal is simply to be able to dominate the Middle East due to

the vast oil reserves and the Wests economic dependence upon it. Prior to the discovery of oil, one of the main reasons for involvement in the Middle East had been religious (Christianity, Judaism and Islam all have roots in the Middle East) and on the natural arable land. During the Cold War, the Soviet excuse may have been used on numerous occasions to justify involvement there, but in modern times, it has alway been for oil Hence, the support for the Jewish people and the state of Israel has been due to the interests of oil and to ensure an ally is there in the region. It is also no surprise that some other nations in the Middle East are also amongst the largest recipients of US military aid, like Turkey and Egypt. What makes this a particularly sensitive issue oftentimes, is due to the horrendous suffering the Jewish people suffered in (Christian) Europe during World War II, to the extent that (in the United States, anyway), any criticism of Israeli policies towards the Palestinian people and other Arabs, lends well to an automatic, unfavorable label of anti-Semetic. In the United States as well, the Jewish community is well established and has influence over many aspects of US foreign policy in the Middle East. In fact, some commentators suggest that US Zionism is more extreme that that seen in Israel itself. Sure, the Jewish people suffered terribly during World War II and there is no one (apart from ultra Right Wing neonazi types) that would deny that. However, that can also not be a reason not to criticize Israeli actions where warranted. Hence, this sub-agenda will look at the on-going conflict in light of the fact that mainstream media (in the US and UK particularly) has been fairly one-sided. This is not some sort of anti-Jewish or anti-Israel sentiment, rather, a look at some of the issues from additional wider perspectives. We need to investigate a variety of resources from those critical of Israeli leadership and American policy including resources from American Jews, and others, prominent in political discourse of foreign policies.

HISTORY
When the United Nations was founded on 24 October 1945, the territory of Palestine was administered by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, under a Mandate received in 1922 from the League of Nations. Among the issues that the Mandatory Power had to deal with, particularly after the end of the Second World War, was the question of a proposed Jewish home in Palestine. (In November 1917, the British Government, in the so-called Balfour Declaration, had declared itself in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, on the understanding that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.)The Arabs resented the Jews coming in to take their land. Led by Grand Mufti Hajj Amin El Husseini, they rioted repeatedly and later revolted, creating a history of enmity between Jews and Arabs in Palestine. Britain stopped Jewish immigration to Palestine. Following the Holocaust, in which 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis, pressure on Britain increased, to allow

Jewish immigration to Palestine. In 1947, the UN partitioned the land into Arab and Jewish states. The Arabs did not accept the partition and war broke out. The Jews won a decisive victory, expanded their state and created several hundred thousand Palestinian refugees. The Arab states refused to recognize Israel or make peace with it. Wars broke out in 1956, 1967, 1973 and 1982, and there were many terror raids and Israeli reprisals. Each side believes different versions of the same history. Each side views the conflict as wholly the fault of the other and expects an apology. Occupation, Land & Settlements Israel has occupied the West bank and Gaza Strip (about 2,200 square miles) since the 1967 6-day war, and has built settlements with a population of about 220,000, mostly in the West Bank. Palestinians demand withdrawal from all of the land conquered in the 1967 and evacuation of the settlements. Israel continued to expand settlements throughout the peace process that began in 1993 and continues to do so today. In the final status negotiations at Camp David and Taba, Israel offered to turn over 97% of the land in the West Bank and all of Gaza, as well as Arab sections of Jerusalem. This offer was turned down by the Palestinians. Palestinian State Originally formed to regain all of Palestine for the Palestinian Arabs, the Palestine Liberation Organization signaled that it would accept a two state solution in 1988. The Oslo accords were supposed to have led to a peaceful resolution of the conflict, but continued Israeli settlement and Palestinian violence and incitement degenerated into open conflict in September 2000. Mainstream Palestinians demand a state in the West Bank and Gaza. Right wing Israelis are opposed to creating a state, because, they claim, it would be a base for terror groups. In final status negotiations, the Israeli government agreed to a demilitarized Palestinian state with limited control over its borders and resources - a state minus. The Palestinians have won a commitment for a state from the UN, and from US President Bush. The Road Map peace plan is intended to result in a Palestinian state. The Oslo Accords and the Road Map are opposed by Palestinian extremist groups like Hamas and by Zionist extremists. Refugees About 726,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled their homes in 1948 in the war that followed the creation of Israel, and additional Palestinians fled in 1967. There are now about 4 million Palestinian refugees. Many of them live in crowded refugee camps in poor conditions in the West Bank and Gaza, in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. Palestinians demand that these refugees should have the right to return to their homes in Israel under UN General Assembly Resolution 194. Israelis note that an almost equal number of Jews fled Arab lands to Israel in 1948. Israelis oppose return of the refugees because that would create an Arab Palestinian majority and would an end to Israel as a Jewish state. Most Palestinian groups, including the Fateh, agree, and openly proclaim

10

that resolution of the refugee issue by granting right of return would mean the end of Israel. Water The land has always had a scarcity of water. The Israel National Water Carrier has made possible a high population density and standard of living. The carrier pumps water from the Sea of Galilee and carries it to areas in the center and south of Israel as well as for Palestinian areas. In one day it delivers the volume of water used in all of 1948, but it is not enough. The aquifers that supply Israels central area lie in the West Bank. The Jordan river flows through territory that would be part of Palestine. Both sides need water for survival and development and want to ensure an adequate water supply from the limited resources available. Israel has reserved for its own use a large percentage of the water in West Bank aquifers. Jerusalem Jerusalem was to have been internationalized under the UN Partition plan. Both sides have claims on the eastern part of Jerusalem. Jerusalem was the ancient capital of Judea and site of the Jewish holy temple, of which only the Western Wall remains (right). It is also the site of the Al-Aqsa mosque (left) - regarded by many as the third holiest site in Islam. Jewish and Arab neighborhoods are closely interwoven and would be difficult to separate. .

Current Issues in the Israel-Palestine conflict

Hamas - HAMAS is the Islamist political party, founded in 1987 and has its origin from the Muslim Brotherhood, which won the general legislative elections of Palestinian Authority in January 2006 defeating FATAH. It also has a military wing which is considered as a terrorist organization by the European Union , the United States, Canada, Israel and Japan meanwhile it is not considered as a terrorist organization by Russia, Switzerland and Turkey. According to the Hamas Charter(1988), its aim is to establish an Islamic Palestinian State replacing Israel and the Palestinian Territories. In elections held in January 2006, the Hamas movement won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council and formed a government. This was eventually expanded into a unity government that included the Fatah, until June of 2007. The Hamas refuse to recognize the right of Israel to exist or to make peace with Israel. Recognizing Israel A majority of Palestinians want the radical Hamas movement which won an upset victory over the Fateh in PLC elections in January, 2006 to recognize Israel and negotiate peace. Hamas officials say they recognize that Israel exists but also state that they will never recognize the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state, and will never make peace with Israel. European and American leaders pledged not to negotiate with Hamas and not to provide aid to the Palestinians until Hamas agreed to disarm and

11

recognize Israel. Hamas spokesmen sent mixed signals, but vowed never to recognize Israel and never to give up their claim to all of Palestine, though a majority of Palestinians apparently want them to follow the path of peace. Palestinian Unity and Quartet boycott The Quartet countries have officially boycotted the Hamas led government until they agree to recognize Israel and end violence. The boycott has been circumvented to allow provision of funds for salaries directly to Palestinian employees. In March of 2007, Hamas and Fateh concluded a unity agreement in Mecca, allowing for formation of a unity government with a vague platform. Palestinians called on Western governments to recognize the new government and end the boycott. Quartet members will talk to nonHamas members of the new government. Israel insisted it would maintain relations only with Mr. Abbas, who is President and not part of the government. Collapse of the Palestinian authority In June of 2007, following growing anarchy in Gaza, Hamas militants attacked Fatah/Palestinian authority positions in Gaza, including military posts, government buildings, and hospitals, and drove the Fatah out of the Gaza strip. Palestinian PM Mahmoud Abbas dissolved the unity government and announced he would form a different government based in the West Bank. In the West Bank, Fatah militants arrested Hamas officials and Hamas fighters. At present (June 16) there are two separate governments in the Web Bank and Gaza. This makes the future of any peace process very uncertain. Truce and violence Mahmoud Abbas tried to convince Palestinian militant groups to declare a truce and refrain from attacking Israel, while Israel declared that it would refrain from assassinations and hunting down wanted terrorists except in emergencies. The truce was kept imperfectly (June 2007) and flickered on and off. Israel continued to arrest wanted Palestinians and people on their way to terror attacks in the West Bank, while Palestinians continued to fire Qassam rockets (see below) from Gaza. Israeli reprisals in Gaza killed civilians as well as armed terrorists. Security PLO has declared again and again that he will not use force against armed groups. At the same time, he has insisted that the law will be enforced and that the PNA would not permit chaos and independent actions by armed groups. The year 2005 however, was plagued by attacks of Fatah and Hamas factions against Palestinian institutions, as well as a suicide attack apparently instigated by the Syrian branch of Islamic Jihad. Provisional State versus Final Status The quartet roadmap calls for considering a Palestinian state within provisional borders as an option, which is favored by Israelis and the United States, while Abbas is insisting

12

on final status status negotiations and claims he does not want a state with provisional borders. Qassam Rockets - Beginning in 2001, Palestinian groups in the Gaza strip have been firing Qassam rockets, initially at Israeli settlements in the Gaza strip and later at civilian targets inside Israel. The town of Sderot has been subject to a daily barrage of Qassam rockets in 2007. The security barrier (Apartheid Wall) A security barrier being built inside the West Bank cuts off Palestinians from their lands and from other towns, and destroys olive groves and other property according to Palestinians. The route of the fence has been changed several times under international pressure. Today (October 2005) it includes about 7% of West Bank territory on the Israeli side of the barrier. An International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory ruling declares the barrier to be in violation of international law. Since the barrier was built, Israeli casualties decreased dramatically, and the IDF claims that it is vital to preventing terror attacks. An Israeli Supreme Court ruling declared that the fence is not illegal in principle, but that the route must be changed to optimize the balance between security and humanitarian concerns. Prisoners Israel holds thousands of Palestinian prisoners, of whom about 500 were released in February of 2005, and an additional group of over 450 are to be released soon. Palestinians want release of all prisoners, especially women and minors. Israel is unwilling to release prisoners who have served less than two-thirds of their sentence and those who were directly involved in attacks (blood on their hands). Disengagement The Israeli Government decided to unilaterally withdraw from the Gaza Strip and from 4 settlements in the West Bank, evacuating about 8,000 settlers. After the death of Yasser Arafat, it partially coordinated the move with the Palestinians. Disengagement was completed without major incidents by September of 2005, but was followed by considerable chaos within Gaza. Safe Passage and open borders Palestinians living in Gaza have very restricted access to the outside world. A safe passage for Gazans to the West Bank was supposed to have been implemented under the Oslo accords but never came into being. Israel favors a rail link, while Palestinians want a motor road. Most border crossings between Gaza and Israel have been closed since disengagement. The Rafah border crossing with Egypt was supposed to be closed at one point, but Palestinians overwhelmed the guards and Hamas exploded a portion of the barrier, allowing Palestinians to cross freely for a brief time before the crossing was closed again. Israel wanted the crossing to remain closed for several

13

months, and wanted to open a crossing at Kerem Shalom in Israeli territory, which unlike Rafah, would be partly under Israeli control. In the fall of 2005, however, the Rafah Crossing was opened under European Union, Egyptian and Palestinian supervision, with Israeli remote monitoring via TV cameras. Israel promised to implement safe passage but did not do so. Even so, the crossing is open only intermittently. In the West Bank, numerous checkpoints restrict the movement of Palestinians. Israeli Outposts - Under the roadmap, Israel had undertaken to evacuate illegal outposts set up by settlers with government knowledge, but without formal approval, after March 2001. There are estimated to be about 28 such outposts by the government. Peace Now estimates there are 53 such outposts. In all, there are over 100 outposts, including those erected before the cutoff date. The Sasson report released March 9, 2005 catalogued extensive misuse of government funds for building settlements, though most of the information had been known beforehand. Israeli PM Ariel Sharon promised once again to evacuate the outposts. No substantial progress was made, however, as late as June 2007. Peace Proposals Official peace plans include the quartet roadmap, and the Arab League initiative for Arab-Israeli peace. Various informal initiatives for solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have been proposed. The most popular is the Geneva Accord, under which Israel would return approximately the territories outside the current route of the security fence, and cede parts of Jerusalem to the Palestinians, and Palestinian refugees would return to the Palestinian state, but not to Israel. The Ayalon Nusseibeh Agreement incorporates similar principles but is much less detailed. No informal accord has been approved by Israeli or Palestinian governments.

BLOC POSITIONS
The Palestinian Israeli conflict is the single issue that has generated the largest number of United Nations resolutions, the Palestinian problem has loomed large on the international scene, even though Palestine can be described as a small territory, and the Palestiniansthe indigenous Arab people of Palestine a relatively small population. In 1967, the former Soviet bloc countries cut diplomatic ties with Israel as a consequence of the June War of that year. Indeed many Third World governments expelled the Israeli diplomatic missions from their capitals and offered their premises to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), internationally recognized in 1974 as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Since the end of the cold war, most countries have restored diplomatic relations with Israel. New nations born out of the collapse of the Soviet Union fostered relations with Israel and the PLO alike.Only Israel, the United States, and a few U.S. allies, clients, and dependencies continued to deny

14

recognition of the Palestinians as a people with the PLO as their legitimate representative.

Questions to be answered
In what way the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people should be assured? Is the Right of Return proper and just? How the control over Jerusalem should be maintained? Should the Israeli settlements in West Bank be illicit? If yes, how it can be effectively ceased? How the security of Israel should be guaranteed and all kinds of terrorist attacks prevented? What should be done to fairly distribute resources in the region, especially water?

IRAN-IRAQ
Iraq and Iran have had a long history of conflict fuelled by religious differences between the Sunni Muslim Iraqi government and the mainly Shiite Muslim Iraqi population and the Shiite religious government of Iran. Sunnis form the overwhelming majority in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Yemen, Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey, Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia. Shiites form the majority only in Iran, Iraq, Bahrain, and Azerbaijan, but they constitute sizable minorities in Afghanistan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen. Islam has no codified laws per se. It has various schools of law. While Sunni doctrine is more rigidly aligned in accordance with those various schools, its hierarchical structure is looser and often falls under state, rather than clerical, control. The opposite is true in Shiitism: The doctrine is somewhat more open to interpretation but the clerical hierarchy is more defined and, as in Iran, the ultimate authority is the imam, not the state. The answer must also take account of the inexplicable: Religious differences are, ultimately, as impossible to settle as metaphysical questions. Peaceful societies depend on what mechanisms or institutions they have developed for channeling those differences into non-violent conflict. One of the factors contributing to hostility between the two powers was a dispute over full control of the Shatt al-Arab waterway (known asArvand Rud in Iran) This waterway is the confluence between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers and forms the southern border between Iraq and Iran. Iran claimed the border was the middle of the river while Iraq claimed the border was on the Eastern bank giving them complete ownership of this navigable waterway. at the head of the Persian Gulf, an important channel for the oil exports of both countries. In 1937, Iran and Iraq signed a treaty that settled the long-standing dispute, which dated back to the Ottoman-Persian wars of the 16th and 17th centuries over the control of the Shatt al-Arab. In the same

15

year, Iran and Iraq both joined the Saadabad Pact (The Treaty of Saadabad (or the Saadabad Pact) was a non- aggression pact signed by Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan on July 8, 1937.), and relations between the two nations remained good for decades afterwards. In 1955, both nations joined the Baghdad Pact(The Central Treaty Organization (also referred to as CENTO, original name was Middle East Treaty Organization or METO, also known as the Baghdad Pact) was adopted in 1955 by Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey, and the United Kingdom.) The 1937 treaty recognized the Iranian-Iraqi border as along the low-water mark on the eastern side of the Shatt al-Arab except at Abadan and Khorramshahr where the frontier run along the Thalweg (the deep water line) which gave Iraq control of almost the entire waterway; provided that all ships using the Shatt al-Arab fly the Iraqi flag and have an Iraqi pilot, and required Iran to pay tolls to Iraq whenever its ships used the Shatt al-Arab. The Iraqi regime's dissatisfaction with Iran's possession of the oil-rich Khuzestan province (which Iraqis called Arabistan) which surfaced in 1959 that had a large Arabicspeaking population was not limited to rhetorical statements; Iraq began supporting secessionist movements in Khuzestan. In April 1969, Iran abrogated the 1937 treaty over the Shatt al- Arab, and as such, Iran ceased paying tolls to Iraq when its ships used the Shatt al-Arab. Iraq threatened war over the Iranian move, but when on April 24, 1969 an Iranian tanker escorted by Iranian warships sailed down the Shatt al-Arab, Iraq being the militarily weaker state did nothing. The Iranian abrogation of the 1937 treaty marked the beginning of a period of acute Iraqi-Iranian tension that was to last until the Algiers Accords of 1975. Shatt al-Arab waterway. Another territorial dispute was over the Shatt al-Arab waterway. Persia/Iran and Iraq (and, before the creation of Iraq, the Ottoman Empire) had long vied for control of the Shatt al-Arab. The Iranian cities of Abadan and Khoramshahr and the Iraqi city and major port of Basra are situated along this river. The 1975 Algiers Accord between the two countries supposedly settled the dispute, but when the war began, Iraq revived its claims to complete control of the waterway. Unlike Iran, which has a long coastline with a number of Persian Gulf ports, Iraq only has very limited access to the Gulf, making the Shatt al-Arab economically and strategically critical to that country. In 1980, Hussein released a statement claiming to abrogate the treaty that he signed, and then he invaded Iran. Political Chaos in Iran Following the overthrow of the Shah and before Khomeini had taken power the political scenario in Tehran was chaotic, with many different factions vying for power. Also, what was previously the Iranian Military was greatly degraded due to the fact that much of the officer corps fled Iran during the Islamic Revolution.

16

Because of all the above factors, Iraq saw a very good opportunity to strike Iran while it was still down, effectively establishing Hussein as the pre-eminent leader in the Persian Gulf and perhaps so discrediting the Iranian Government as to bring about its ultimate downfall. Irans nuclear threat A nuclear-armed Iran would embolden Iran's aggressive foreign policy, resulting

in greater confrontations with the international community. Iran already has a conventional weapons capability to hit U.S., Israel and allied troops stationed in the Middle East and parts of Europe. If Tehran were allowed to develop nuclear weapons, this threat would increase A nuclear-armed Iran would likely spark a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that would further destabilize this volatile and vital region. Interrupted access to essential energy supplies could threaten the viability of the American and world economies. Israel is most at risk as Iran's leaders have repeatedly declared that Israel should "be wiped from the map." America's moderate Arab allies, such as Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, and others are already alarmed at Iran's aggressive regional policy and would feel increasingly threatened by a nuclear-armed Iran.
Besides sanctions placed on Iran by the United Nations, sanctions on Iran have been placed by the United States and the European Union as well . The EU has placed sanctions on Iran that restrict trade in equipment with Iran that could be used for Uranium enrichment in Iran. The US sanctions prohibit almost all trade with Iran, making some exceptions only for activity "intended to benefit the Iranian people", including the export of medical and agricultural equipment to Iran, sending humanitarian assistance and trade in "informational" materials such as films and publications China and Russia and the Non-Aligned Movement have opposed all sanctions against Iran and advocate Irans inalienable right to peaceful nuclear technology. Iran has defended its right to peaceful nuclear technology by citing the NPT according to which every country party to the NPT had an alienable right to peaceful nuclear technology. It has consistently voiced its support for a Nuclear Weapon Free Zone(NWFZ) in the Middle East. Quoting a statement by the President of the Atomic Energy Organization Of Iran and Vice Presient of Iran , H.E. Reza Aghazadeh in 2002 , It is now an accepted fact that among factors strengthening the Non-Proliferation Treaty

17

(NPT), is the establishment of Nuclear Weapon Free Zones (NWFZ) in the world and it is very encouraging to note that a few such NWFZ, have aready been created in different regions of the world. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

In 2009, the IAEA Board of Governors adopted a resolution that implemented the safeguard agreements set forth in the NPT by the Security Council resolutions 1737 (2006), 1747 (2007), 1803 (2008) and 1835 (2008). With this resolution, the Board of Governors both Reaffirms that members of the NPT, including Iran, have a right to develop peaceful nuclear technology, but also Stating the concerns brought about by Irans failure To abide by the sanctions set by the UNSC and the fact that Iran continues to defy the resolutions relating to Nuclear proliferation.This would suggest that although the IAEA plays an important role in monitoring Irans nuclear activities, it is not assured of the peaceful nature of Irans nuclear program due to failure to cooperate by Iran. Despite the rising number of sanctions being placed on Iran, it is making significant progress in the field of nuclear technology. Iran announced a nuclear fuel breakthrough and test-fired a new radar-evading medium-range missile in the Gulf on 01 January 2012. In the wake of these developments, the United States placed a new sanction on Iran dealing with banks. Iran has reacted strongly and condemned all the sanctions placed on it and also accused Western nations such as United States and its neighbour , Israel of spying and cyber warfare to damage its nuclear plants. It has repeatedly threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz which is a key route in transport of oil. In December 2011, VicePresident Mohammad Reza Rahimi warned that "not a drop of oil will pass through the Strait of Hormuz" if sanctions are widened. In 2010, a mysterious virus called the Stuxnet was detected in the system of the nuclear power plant at Bushehr .Though the state or party behind the attacks couldnt be determined,Iran accused Israel of cyber warfare as the worm has earlier been tested by Israel. In 2009 and 2010, Iranian nuclear scientists were mysteriously murdered and kidnapped and the United States was held responsible by Iran . In 2010, a nuclear scientist , Shahir Amiri returned to Iran from Washington and said he was abducted by the United States and forced to lie about Irans nuclear program.

BLOC POSITIONS

18

The Gulf is an area of extreme strategic as well as economic importance of the world. 70% of Japanese, 50% of West European, and 7% of American oil imports came from the Persian Gulf in the beginning of the 1980s. Also, both countries policy of attacking tankers involved neutral as well as ships of the belligerent states, in what was called the Tanker War. The United States supplied arms to Iran from before the war began. The materiel supplied included state of the art aircrafts left over from the Shahs reign. However, due to the Iranian Hostage Situation, as well as Irans attack on some American- flagged Kuwaiti tankers, the US turned against Iran. However, it is not clear whether the US conflict with Iran was necessarily pro-Iraq. The American ambiguity towards the war was summed up by Henry Kissingers statement that its a pity they both cant lose. Iraq also had support from the USSR since before the war, receiving military equipment and supplies as well as war advisors. The USSR was Iraqs greatest arms supplier during the war. Iraq also received aid from France. France, however, generally supplied higher technology equipment than the USSR, though of lesser quantity. Iraqs main financial backers were the rich Persian Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates. Iran received a lot of aid from the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea who frequently acted as a middleman between the communist bloc and Iran. Iran also received aid from China and Libya. There were, however, many countries whose political alliances during the war were totally ambiguous. Portugal, Spain, and Yugoslavia helped both countries during the war. Both countries also received non-military aid from Turkey. Turkey was the only country that opposed the US trade embargo on the two countries, and thus was the only source of international goods to the two countries. As a result both countries became somewhat dependent on Turkey economically.

Relevant UN Action
At the beginning of the war itself, the UN called for a cease-fire between the belligerents. However, it was completely unheeded. Iraq remained inside Iranian territory at the time. However, Iran was disillusioned from the UN a little later, when they refused to provide Iran with assistance. Iran felt that the UN was slightly biased towards Iraq. This is partially true as the US prevented the UN condemning Iraq. The international community surprisingly overlooked Iraqs use of chemical weapons as well. The UN released a statement that chemical weapons were used. However, they did not directly condemn Iraq, in spite of the fact that Iraq had clearly broken the Geneva Protocol of 1925.

QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
-How can long lasting peace be achieved in the region? -How can the respective countries be brought to justice for their various unethical war practices? Should the UN take action regarding the use of chemical weapons?

19

-In context to this war,how can further conflicts in the Middle East, be prevented? -Due to their global importance, how can the oil resources of these countries be protected from mutual attack as well as from usurpation from foreign countries with vested interests? -Can a suitable water sharing agreement be reached regarding the Shatt al-Arab waterway so that it does not become a catalyst for conflict once more?
-Establishment of a Nuclear Weapon Free Zone in the Middle East