Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East

Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East

Question of: Measures concerning the Nuclear Proliferation in the Middle East

World War II introduced one of the greatest evils in human history: the atomic bomb. Since then, countries have increased their technology and nuclear capability and today we find many countries that have such weapons. The Cold War was marked by a nuclear arms race between the Soviet Union and the United States. With the end of the Cold War a campaign for demilitarization has been advocated by the UN and the International Atomic Energy Agency, established in 29 July 1957. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that came in force in the 1970s to limit the proliferation of nuclear weapons and control its use is also a key element in this debate. The treaty today has 189 signatories, including most countries in the Middle East with the exception of Israel. According to the treaty only the United States, China, Russia, France and United Kingdom, the five permanent members, have the right to have nuclear weapons however in reality this is not the case.

The Middle East has been a region of turbulence for over a thousand years. The Crusades, the many invasions of Jerusalem, Holy Wars and more recently the creation of Israel are among some of the many turbulent events that have occurred in this region. The Middle East is dominated by the Muslim religion, and since the creation of Israel in 1948, wars and unrest have only increased. The Islamic Revolution has also inspired a great anti-Americanism in nations like Iran and have generated since then decades of fierce relations with the US. The situation would be less alarming and dangerous if it was not for the presence of nuclear threat in the region. It is strongly assumed that Israel do possess nuclear weapons although not admitting this publicly. In addition, Iran has been developing nuclear programs without full openness to the international community. Iran’s unwillingness to comply with full IAEA inspections and difficulty of being open to international community has generated great fear among the world. President Ahmedinejad allegations and radical views has been one of the many worries in the Middle East.

More recently, in the General Assembly held on September 21, 2010, in spite of Obama’s peaceful approach of the situation and allegation that the US is open to diplomacy, the Iranian president responded with much fierceness by absurdly accusing the US of terrorist acts in its own state. The situation in the Middle and the doubtfulness of the Iranian nuclear program are far from being resolved and what is needed is a pragmatic approach that can both tackle the proliferation of nuclear arms in the Middle East but at the same time find consensus between conflicting states. The goal is to diminish the presence of a nuclear threat and to create a nuclear safe zone in a region that already suffers much turbulence.

Getting started:

http://www.nytimes.com/info/iran-nuclear-program/
http://www.cfr.org/publication/16811/irans_nuclear_program.html
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9822/israels_nuclear_program_and_middle_east_peace.html
http://www.cdi.org/terrorism/menukes.cfm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11402101

Delegates, remember that this is a very sensitive issue and therefore should be seen in a political, economic and social perspective!

Tips- Keep in mind:
Gulf War, Iraq invasion, islamic revolution, "strike Israel out of the map", "american hegemony" etc...

Good Luck,

Natalia

First the delegate of China would like to point out that the People's Republic of China not only respects the NPT, but also supports it.

The Iranian nuclear program is in fact treating several nations around the world and the uranium enrichment program has gone too far. However the measures and approachs taken by the international community as a whole have shown to be ineffective towards the issue. As Jiang Yu said, "China has always believed that sanctions and pressure cannot fundamentally resolve the issue, and dialogue and negotiation are the best ways." Sanctions did cause an immediate impact in the Iranian government but it didn’t reach the main target. Sanctions have worked years ago; but overtime have shown to fail (such as Myanmar, Cuba...) the sooner we realized it failed in Iran, the sooner we will be able to move on and find new solutions for this problems.

The delegate of the Islamic Republic of Iran would like to, yet again, reassure the international community that its nuclear program is peaceful; all enriched uranium is being used for energy and civilian research.
There has been much concern on our views on Israel, and although we maintain that our perspective is legitimate, such views will not be translated to a direct military conflict. What we do charge is the constant attacks against our nation, for words from our leader are called upon time and time again as arguments against our development, while real actions such as Israel's Mossad stealing british passports to carry out assassination remain uncondemned.
Let us not forget that while Iran has been an original signatory of the CTBT and has participated actively in the process of preparation for the implementation of such agreement, Israel has refused to sign this treaty, that bans all nuclear tests. Without nuclear tests, it is extremely difficult for nuclear weapons to be developed.

Iran wishes to remind all delegates that we are the ones that come in peace.

Pakistan believes that Middle Eastern countries, including Iran, can possess nuclear energy. In the beginning of 2010, Pakistani National Assembly Speaker, Fahmida Mirza, said " Pakistan supports Iran's independence and progress in all the areas, especially in utilizing peaceful nuclear energy." Iran should not have to subject to sanctions because other countries are worried about nuclear weapons. Terrorism is a threat to stability, and is putting everyone on edge, but all countries have righs to nuclear energy, as it has many positive benefits.

Delegation of Iran,
The false reassurances of peace presented by the delegate of Iran leave Israel in no state of tranquility starting with the fact that at the beginning of this month, General Hasan Firouzabadi of Iran let the world know that Israel would receive a “dreadful retribution” if their was a “need” to target the Zionist regime, he went on to assure us that “Our developed weapons can hit any part of the Zionist regime.” Also, like Israeli ambassador Michael Oren reported, Hizballah has posted 16,000 rockets in South Lebanon (that borders Israel), the quadruple amount ranged in Israeli border four years ago (which is in violation of UN resolution 1701). Firouzabadi has publicly indicated Tehran’s readiness for the Middle East’s nuclear war which contradicts the delegate’s verdict on Iran’s nuclear intentions. Regarding the CTBT, realize that like Israel, Iran has signed the treaty however not ratified it, this matter should be reviewed by the country of Iran regarding their own decision of assignation before accusing Israel of not complying.

The delegate of France has stated that sanctions are a "way for further dialogue and negotiation". Brazil is interested in knowing how those sanctions can really be proven effective since, as the delegate of China clearly said, sanctions will never work for they never affect the target (government in this case), but the innocent and poor population. If sanctions have some purpose, it is to create more tension between countries and never will it encourage dialogue. France must know there are better and more efficient ways to get a government to cooperate.

First of all, Israel remains unwilling to sign the NPT.

Last week at the UN meeting in New York City, Egypt's delegation questioned Israel reguarding it's commitment to nuclear non-proliferation program.

As you all know, Israel is widely known to pay no more than lip-service to the objective of a nuclear weapon free Middle East. It is extremely important that, in this MUN, we take important measures to increase Israel's level of commitment and participation in this program, and finally making them sign the treaty.

According to my source (see below): "Israel operates a policy of 'nuclear ambiguity,' refusing to confirm or deny having atomic weapons - but has not signed the treaty and is believed by analysts to posses between 200 and 300 nuclear warheads. [...] U.S. President Barack Obama urged all countries, including Israel, to sign the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or NPT. "

On Tuesday September 21st, Israel's Atomic Energy Commission chief Shaul Chorev said:
"Israel is the only state that has been singled out, and is called upon to take a decision which is against its best national interests" and
"It is against Israel's interests to join a global anti-nuclear arms treaty and the UN atomic watchdog is overstepping its mandate in demanding it to do so"

It is extremely important to debate this issue, and insist on their signature. That is the only way we can maintain and enforce peace and unity in the world.

Besides it is extremely dangerous, for a nation such as Israel, who is involved in so many cultural, religious and political issues, to hold possession of nuclear weapons.

Cheers

(Sources:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0922/breaking50.html
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/09/israel-refuses-join-nuclear-nonproliferation-treaty/)

Japan looks for peace and the control of Nuclear Proliferation.

DELEGATE OF FRANCE, THANK YOU! YOU COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER! The matter here is, we are only hoping to let the issue solve for itself. The United States of America encourages the implementation of sanctions on Iran, for it includes raising high stakes for the state. The consequence of the sanctions have to be bigger than the benefit the government would have acquired if carrying on the operation it desires. Therefore, what better way to stop the proliferation of these nuclear weapons than prohibiting Iran to acquire its main factor to produce enriched uranium? The level of cooperation regarding the international community is of great importance to prove to Iran it is a threat to the entire world if it gains nuclear weapons. "That pain will not be very intense if only some of their major trading partners participate in the sanctions." In order to "nip it on the bud", meaning to end the source of evil, Iran SHOULD be sanctioned; affect the government to make it work, even if it affects the people. However, when the Islamist government feels the worldwide pressure, it will seize the operation. Better to prevent it than to have Iran futurely bombing nations.
Santions alone won't solve the issue, there has to be military force (even if little) to insure the continuity of the operations. It would, in fact, degrade the capacity of Iran producing nuclear weapons at a much faster rate. If Iran's intentions were mainly regarding its economy, it wouldn't have an uranium enrichment program, for it would be much cheaper to simply to export nuclear fuel from abroad.
Take Serbia for example, during the period of 1991-95, and analyze the effectiveness of santions.
Please delegate, keep in mind we are dealing with world peace, and any action should be preventive!

We find such sanction already in action and further ones proposed by the delegate of France absurd. Our enriched uranium to less than 5%, consistent with fuel for a civilian nuclear power plant. Iran was forced to resort to secrecy after US pressure caused several of its nuclear contracts with foreign governments to fall through. This proposed idea of "long term arrangements" by the Security Council are entirely unreliable, and would deprive our Republic of its inalienable right to peaceful nuclear technology. We stand by our rights. Furthermore, Iran is extremely concerned with the potential monopolization of nuclear fuel production. Such monopolizations directly lead to overabuse of power and military threats.

Returning to the topics of sanctions mentioned by France, some facts are necessary to be exposed - the effects of sanctions in Iran include expensive basic goods and an aging and increasingly unsafe aircraft fleet. Since the U.S. forbids aircraft manufacturer Boeing to sell aircraft to Iranian aviation companies, "According to reports from Iranian news agencies, 17 planes have crashed over the past 25 years, killing approximately 1,500 people."
A 2005 report, presented at the 36th session of the International Civil Aviation Organization, reported that the U.S. sanctions had endangered the safety of civil aviation in Iran because it prevented Iran from acquiring parts and support essential for aviation safety. It also stated that the sanctions were contrary to article 44 of the Chicago convention (to which the US is a member). The ICAO report said aviation safety affects human lives and human rights, stands above political differences, and that the assembly should bring international public pressure on the United States to lift the sanctions against Iran. We the Islamic Republic of Iran ask the United States to take the lives of civilians in consideration.
Even members of the European Union have been critical of most of the U.S. trade sanctions against our country.
The United States is playing by a "double standard" in its foreign policy. While teh US has vigorously worked against the Arab League boycott of Israel, it has been promoting a worldwide boycott of Iran.

Sanctions are NOT the way to peaceful resolutions.

The delegate of France is completely right when it says it takes a long time to see the impact of sanctions, such a long time that we have never seen any results coming from them anywhere in the world. They have been proven ineffective since no "peace" comes from it, but only even more tension. Now Brazil is not saying it isn't worried with what's going on in Iran and what they may or may not be plotting, the only thing Brazil can't agree with France and the U.S is the method they have chosen to deal with the situation. Brazil believes in being patient, but effective at the same time and that's why our representatives have had various meetings with Iran's government to try and sign agreements, which has already happened! It's better to keep peaceful relations with other nations and keep them close to you than to create a fearful environment where no country trusts each other and threats is all we hear about. But coming back to what the french delegate said about the necessity of sanctions...Can the delegate be so selfish? "Yes, the population will suffer, (the country is in war, there is no other scenario) but it will also be hard for Iran to carry on much longer with its untrustworthy nuclear program." Have we come to such moment where weapons are given more priority than human life? What does the delegate mean by there is no other scenario? So there's no hope in saving the people's life, there is no urge in aiding them? If the U.S's and France's main priority now is diminishing Iran's power and forcing it to become a failed state, then sanctions may be the best solution, but as long as Brazil defends the safety and well-being of the world's citizens, above all, we'll never abide with such ideology.

And on further note, since when have sanctions been considered the "most diplomatic response available"?
If someone were to look up diplomacy in a dictionary it'd bring the definition: the conduct by government officials of negotiations and other relations between nations. And a negotiation includes a mutual discussion.

Delegate of Egypt,
Those Middle Eastern nations that have singed the NPT (Iran, Syria, Libya, and Iraq) have severely violated the obligations presented by the treaty; therefore these four examples show us the NPT is not capable of addressing the security challenges in the Middle East where the treaty suffers such abuse.
As Jeremy Issacharoff, the Foreign Ministry’s deputy director-general for Strategic Affairs stated, “Israel is not isolated on the issue, and there is a significant degree of understanding for Israel’s security position.”
The delegate of Israel believes the actual threat comes from those states that do posses nuclear weapons under the disguise of NPT membership.
Last Friday, the IAEA general assembly requested in a resolution that Israel accede to the NPT and IAEA inspections. This resolution, brought up by Arab states was one similar to many others in the past that have been rejected by a majority vote with the help of all the European Union Nations and those other countries that understand Israel’s delicate position. Iran and the same Arab nations of course requested that this resolution be presented again next year which the delegate finds hypocritical because a country like Iran so desperate for Israel to sign a document would lead one to believe that that nation would in the first place actually respect it before encouraging it.

Delegates, because a nation is a party to the NPT does not mean it posses no threat to the international security, a document means nothing if it is in constant violation.

FranceSC_Gabriella wrote:

Delegate of China, the French Delegation would like to point out that sanctions are a way for further "dialogue and negotiation" since these sweet and peaceful initiatives are not that easy to happen. French President Nicholas Sarkozy said that the United Nations should adopt “strong measures against Iran to persuade Iranian leaders to engage in meaningful discussion about their nuclear program [...] to hesitate or to prevaricate in the face of such an issue would carry with it a great weight of responsibility. The only aim of sanctions is to lead Iran to the negotiating table.”

Delegate of France, please don't be ironic, there are nothing sweet in sanctions. Sanctions are not only drastic, but something that must be used with great knowledge. By sanctioning countries (multilateraly) we are excluding a country from the internatinal community, increasing the gap between them and the world. That for instance Cuba, sanctions in Cuba have been going since Fidel Castro and Che Guevara were able to end the injust american imperialism of the 1900's. Years have passed, and still people die with lack of medicine. Now France is against the sanctions in Cuba, and so is most of the world, because its causing a negative impact in the citizens and the government. However it took years and lives, for countries to realize that sanction were no good, and that other approachs were better for the country. In the minds of a few, sanctions might still be reasonable in Iran's case but truth is, it's not.

Iran is also in a delicate position would Israel not agree? It has been threatened by a country known to attack civilians first make up excuses later, a country with the largest military budget worldwide that has invaded his neighbor and openly criticizes Iran, and half of the industrialized world, is that a smaller threat or least sensitive position? It is only the support of China and Russia that prevent further sanctions or military actions. Iran has never invaded his neighbors, the only close call to war after being invaded by Saddam and the gulf war was in 1998 when they nearly went to wars with Taliban. However how many wars has Israel gone in to in the recent past? 7 it does not matter if they can create excuses, but It shows how dangerous Israel is. The wars the united states were involved in are to numerous to count.
However Iran is considered a threat because they don't bow down and say yes sir take our oil, or defend Palestinians? The delegate of Iraq is in favor of Iran signing the NPT and allowing inspection if and only if Israel will disband its nuclear program, allow inspections, and disposes of all nuclear weapons it is found to posses. This also includes the USA cutting back on military aid to Israel and the lifting of all sanctions once it is signed.

Could the delegate refer back to this threat from Israel towards Iran… please clarify this accusation. Delegate, defending our nation and our civilians is not an excuse for war, it is a commitment. These wars Israel has gone to in the recent past as the delegate points out, were preemptive stages against our numerous Arab neighbors who (most) share the common belief that Israel should be exterminated-the very same nations that attacked us on the eve of our independence.

Delicate delegate? Israel is one of the-if not THE country that feels most threatened in the world. No other country shares our security positions- which can justify possession of nuclear weapons and military aid. Asking Israel to disarm will not get you anywhere because Israel won’t, not until there is a comprehensive peace agreement in the Middle East. Delegate, if you strip Arab nations of weapons, there would be no more violence in the Middle East, if you remove Israel’s, there would be no more Israel.

Delegate of Israel, does the delegate actually knows why Arab nations show some sort of dislike toward the Israeli government? It's not because of religion diference but the lack of ethics in the foundation and the current government of Israel. And most importantly, how come Israel feels threatens when its government holds nuclear weapons? And please delegate, don't even try to argue against the fact the Israel has nuclear weapons because there are officials documents that prove Israel's guilty. The prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu chicken out and canceled its meeting in Washington because of guilty and the international pressure towards the facts. Because truth is, if Iran is a nuclear threat, Israel is a much bigger one. Seriously, China won't take in consideration any syllable Israel speaks against Iranian or any other Middle Eastern state nuclear program, when, possibly, one of the biggest nuclear threats to the world is Israel. If the respect of China, and probably the whole international community, means anything to Israel's government, the only think Israel can do at this point is come clean.

Just for some clarification, delegates, because it seems some are confused in relation to what the NPT actually stands for. Three decades after its entry into force in 1970, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) has nearly 190 States as Parties.
The IAEA is not a party to the Treaty but is entrusted with key roles and responsibilities under it. Under the NPT, the IAEA has specific roles as the international safeguards inspectorate and as a multilateral channel for transferring peaceful applications of nuclear technology, for example:

NPT Article III: The IAEA administers international safeguards to verify that non-nuclear weapon States party to the NPT fulfill the non-proliferation commitment they have made, “with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.”
NPT Article IV: The Agency facilitates and provides a channel for endeavours aimed at “the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.”
In practical terms, the IAEA also is seen as having roles in connection with verification of nuclear-weapon-free zones and in the context of verifying ex-nuclear weapon material.

Delegates of Iran and Brazil, please be careful with your words, for the delegate has presented further proof of sanctions’ effectiveness worldwide with the Serbia example. Yes, Brazil, let’s all chill in Ipanema beach and wait for all the nuclear weapons to self-destroy. The diplomatic ties created between Brazil and Iran were NOT regarding the proliferation of nuclear weapons. In fact, brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has stated that if Iran’s President Ahmadinejah will have to endure harsh consequences if it actually seeks such weapons: “"I will go there and talk face-to-face to Ahmadinejad. If he says he will build (arms), he'll have to pay the price for his move," Lula said at a steel conference in Sao Paulo without giving details.” Brazil seeks to support food supplies exports to Iran, and not weapons of mass destruction. There’s being direct criticism and opposition towards the close ties with Iran and Brazil, as not only Western, but worldwide diplomats find it dangerous and unnecessary. Brazil’s Foreign Minister Celso Amorim stated that Brazil was not pro-Iran, it was only in favor of future negotiations regarding global issues. Brazilian government is purposely exposing itself to international spotlight through inappropriate matters. The country even stated that Brazil and Iran were in “identical development model.” Be careful with your ties, Brazil. DELEGATE OF BRAZIL, THE ENTIRE WORLD CANNOT ENTER INTO AGREEMENT REGARDING AN ISSUE THAT WILL ENDANGER A COUNTRY’S GOVERNMENT, SINCE SUCH COUNTRY WOULD NOT ABIDE TO ITS RULE.

Delegate of Israel? "Israel is one of the-if not THE country that feels most threatened in the world"

What one might wonder is how a country with its own enclosed 'clique' of U.S.-Israel Joint Economic Development Group (JEDG) can feel that threatened and with nuclear weapons hidden inside their corrupt soil might feel this threatened, while a nation like ours that is judged by prejudice is accused of all of the 'nuclear wrongs'. You yourself have stated, delegate, that you want to protect your nation. We do not even SEEK nuclear weapons to protect our nation, we protect them by other legal means. We simply want nuclear energy, which we want to achieve by our PEACEFUL nuclear program. Don't even try to prove it otherwise, because it is the bare truth -- we do not seek weaponry.

Israel, one might not say the same about you.

Delegate of the U.S,

First of all, irony will take us nowhere, we're dealing with serious issues here and trying to make jokes about Brazil's beauties doesn't show either professionalism nor maturity from your country's side.

Second, in Brazil's previous post it clearly stated "now Brazil is not saying it isn't worried with what's going on in Iran and what they may or may not be plotting, the only thing Brazil can't agree with France and the U.S is the method they have chosen to deal with the situation." Just like the delegate pointed out, our government has shown commitment in punishing Iran if it is really producing weapons, the only thing we can't agree on are the methods that your country has chosen to defend. What Brazil can't understand is why the U.S has decided to become so aggressive towards Brazil and its interest in solving world issues when we both want the same thing. The delegate has tried to create a polemic post against Brazil when it has in fact just clarified the same position that Brazil was already defending. "Brazil’s Foreign Minister Celso Amorim stated that Brazil was not pro-Iran, it was only in favor of future negotiations regarding global issues."

So please U.S, the next time try to be more reasonable and mature instead of just trying to make funny comments

First, the delegate of China seconds every word of Brazil's post.



The delegate of China would like to directly congratulate Brazil's efforts to solve this issue, that seems to be the only ones solving this issue. No wonder BRIC is the future!

Delegate of Brazil, the delegation of the USA wasn't trying to make fun of the situation, even more to show itself imature. On the contrary, it seems only the delegation of the USA and France are willing to actually solve the issue. All there is in these posts are complaints and more complaints, and no suggestions that will actually solve the issue. Its not a matter of destroying a country's government, as it may seem to all of you opposing the idea. Its only that the USA feels an obligation to maintain world peace. If sanctions are imposed in Iran, the damages won't be as big to its people, since Brazil and other countries already stated their eagerness to export food supplies to the Islamist government. All countries present are letting themselves be blinded by the hatred they hold towards the USA. let's put it behind us and proceed with the proposed solution, which WILL work. And none of you will know it
unless you give the chance to prove it.

Delegate of China, be careful not to display personal opinions rather than the decisions established by your government. Although China currently achieves 12% of its oil through Iran, the USA and the Chinese administration are about to close negotiations regarding these nuclear proliferation issue. it's true that China may be scared of what Iran can do once it possesses nuclear weapons, and for that it should not wait to approve the sanctions, as it was proved in a meeting between Obama and the Chinese gov. "American officials portrayed the Chinese response as the most encouraging sign yet that Beijing would support an international effort to ratchet up the pressure on Iran and as a sign of 'International unity' on stopping Iran’s nuclear program before the country can develop a working nuclear weapon." This is yet another proof that the entire international community is willing to stop with the nuclear proliferation and afraid of its possible results. Don't forget to finish your research, Val. It's important to stick to the facts, since China IS, in fact, in favor of Iran sanctioning.