Study Guide of General Assembly: "Palestinian Request For Full Membership Status in United Nations"

Study Guide of General Assembly
Palestinian Request for Full Membership Status in United Nations
JAKARTA MODEL UNITED NATIONS 2012

Creating Sustainable Development through Young Generations Action
July, 9th 13th 2012

www.jakartamun.org | jakartamun@gmail.com | @JakartaMUN
Organized by:
Indonesian Student Association For International Studies (ISAFIS) www.isafis.org | isafis_sec@yahoo.com | @ISAFIS_official
Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Creating Sustainable Development through Young Generations Action Jakarta, July 9-13 2012
Distinguished delegates, Welcome to Jakarta Model United Nations 2012! It is my distinct honor to be your USGS. My name is Egalita Irfan. Currently I am majoring in International Relations batch 2010. This year is my first involvement in Jakarta MUN. Previously, I have worked as Co-Director in Indonesia MUN 2012 and currently I am the President of General Assembly in UI MUN Club. This years JMUN holds the theme of creating sustainable development. The general idea of sustainable development does not exclusively cater to environment awareness, but also to any other things that contributes to shape the ideal future; to have a better world we can live in. With this spirit, we expect all the delegates to be actively involved in the discussion as well as contributing as much ideas as possible to find the best solution for the problems in each committee. This study guide is composed so that it helps you to do your researches that would be relevant in the later discussion. The Board of Dais has spent so much time in making sure that this study guide fulfills the high standard of international MUN. Therefore, we expect delegates to do extensive research before the conference day. Remember that the biggest challenge you will face is not only representing a country that you may be unfamiliar with, but also making sure that your voice is heard and acknowledged, and to do this, you need to have pool of knowledge to be shared. One of the very basic steps in achieving your goal as a delegate is by communicating, negotiating and debating with other participants. Try to convince them, explain your stance, persuade others, or even create concessions between yourself. Your communication skills would be tested at this point and you would understand the true meaning how diplomacy works, which is the whole purpose of why this event is held. Remember that MUN is a gateway for you to meet new people and make friends. So I encourage you to talk with your fellow delegate as well as the Board of Dais. If you have any question, do not hesitate to contact me or your Director. We are looking forward to see you in Jakarta this July.
Egalita Irfan Under Secretary General for Substantive Jakarta Model United Nations 2012 egalita.irfan@gmail.com / @egalita
Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |2

Dear Delegates, It is a great pleasure for me to welcome you to the General Assembly of Jakarta Model United Nations 2012. My name is Hana Hanifah, and I will serve as your Director in this wonderful committee, along with Aditya Alta, Gineng Sakti, and Zidny Ilman as my beloved Assistant Director. To briefly introduce myself, I am now a sophomore at University of Indonesia, majoring International Relations. Currently, I am involved in some student activities in University of Indonesia, including English Debating Society and UI MUN Club. Last year, I served as Assistant Director of Security Council in Indonesia MUN 2011. Having political and international issues as daily subject, I am deeply interested to gain more knowledge on those issues, both theoretically and empirically. Having been chosen for this councils Director is a blessed for me because I will have the chance to witness discussion and debate between more than a hundred brilliant students from all around Indonesia, and hopefully, some other countries too. Therefore, it is such a misfortune for you to miss this once in a lifetime chance to directly engage with this interesting discussion. We have been put our best effort in composing this study guide. We did researches, discussion, reading, and most of time typing the best material we could find to help you deal with the issue that we have chosen for you. We are now proudly present our study guide, which hopefully will give you a clear background and basic idea to guide your future research. Having the issue of Palestinians Membership Status in UN and this study guide to assist you, we hope for a dynamic and productive discussion with new ideas where everyone can actively participate. We hope that in the end of the conference, we will produce a comprehensive resolution. We do really hope that our hard work will be paid off by witnessing the enjoyment and the excitement of all delegates of General Assembly. Please do not be hesitant to contact me if you have any inquiries regarding the conference. I will be very delighted to serve you as your conferences director. See you in Jakarta! Warmest regards, Hana Hanifah Bastaman Director, General Assembly Jakarta Model United Nations 2012 hanahanifah.bastaman@rocketmail.com / @hanabast fb group: Jakarta MUN 2012 GA (http://www.facebook.com/groups/304645682955013/) Email to submit position paper: ga.jmun2012@gmail.com

Study Guide
GENERAL ASSEMBLY
Topic Area: Palestinian Request for Full Membership Status in United Nations

I. Introduction
As many have realized, the core problem in Palestines effort to have the nation recognized as sovereign states is the opposition coming from, mainly, the US and Israel. The opposition of those two is rooted from Palestines decision to turn around from having bilateral negotiation as the sole effort for peace and independence, into appealing for UN membership. The question now would be: Why Palestine chose to have a full membership of UN in order to secure the chance to be a sovereign state? To mention any, there are three reasons for the decision. First, and probably the main reason, there is an impasse in peace talks.1 The negotiations for peace between Palestine and Israel, mediated by the US, have been stalled since last year over the issue of Israeli settlement building.2 Second, a unilateral recognition of Palestines status has been proven inadequate. In 1988, the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, unilaterally declared a Palestinian state based on 1967 border. The declaration brought approximately 100 recognitions from Arab, Communist, and non-aligned states.3 However, the recognitions cannot easily solve the problems as Israel, backed by its allies, keeps claiming its territory from Palestine. Third, a full membership of UN is seen as having a much greater impact than the former effort given that UN is the overarching world body and a source of authority on international law.4 It is also alleged that because the US is assured to veto any Palestines appeal to Security Council, Palestine has prepared another alternative to the aforementioned one. The alternate option would be to appeal for a non-member observer state, an upgrade from the current status.5 This option, just like the original one, has the consequence of US and Israel interpreting it as Palestines plan to escape from the peace negotiation.
II.
About General Assembly
1. History After the incident of World War, international community feels the urge to establish a global institution in order to prevent conflict in the future and generate order through statesmanship and diplomacy in anarchic global affairs. First used in the Declaration by United Nations of 1 January 1942, it was United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt who coined the name United Nations when representatives of 26 nations meet and pledged to fight together against the Axis Powers during the Second World War. United Nations was established after the failure of the League of Nations, which was conceived with similar concerns during the First World War, and established in 1919 under the Treaty of Versailles in order to promote international cooperation and to achieve peace and security.6
As reported in http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13701636. Accessed in January 20, 2012, 3.13 AM. 2 As reported in http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15527534. Accessed in January 20, 2012, 3.19 AM. 3 Ibid. 4 Loc. cit. 5 Ibid. 6 Accessed from http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/history/index.shtml, February 20th 2012.
1

In 1945, representatives of 50 countries met in San Francisco at the United Nations Conference on International Organization to draw up the United Nations Charter. The Charter was signed on 26 June 1945 by the representatives of the 50 countries. Poland, which was not represented at the Conference, signed it later and became one of the original 51 Member States. The United Nations officially came into existence on 24 October 1945, when the Charter had been ratified by China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States and by a majority of other signatories.7 Established in 1945 under the Charter of the United Nations, the General Assembly occupies a central position as the chief deliberative, policymaking and representative organ of the United Nations. Comprising all 193 Members of the United Nations, it provides a unique forum for multilateral discussion of the full spectrum of international issues covered by the Charter. It also plays a significant role in the process of standard-setting and the codification of international law.8 General Assembly, along with Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Secretariat, and the International Court of Justice, Source: http://search.wn.com/?template=cheetah-searchis the principal organ of the adv/index.txt&action=search&results_type=news&search_string=the United Nations. UN General %20united%20nations%20general%20assembly&language_id=1&so Assembly (UNGA) is the only rt_type=-pub-datetime&corpus=current&search_type=expression universally representative body among the other principal organs. According to the Charter of the United Nations, the functions of UNGA is to discuss, debate, and make recommendations on a range of subjects pertaining to international peace and security, including disarmament, human rights, international law, and peaceful arbitration between disputing nations. UNGA also elects the nonpermanent members of the Security Council and other bodies such as the Human Rights Council. It appoints the secretary-general in regards to Security Councils recommendation. UNGA considers reports from the Secretariat, Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, and the International Court of Justice, assesses the financial conditions of its member states, approves the UN budget, and also works with the Security Council to elect the judges of the International Court of Justice. General Assembly is the only part of the United Nations that represents all 192 member states, where each of which has one vote. Other than that, in General Assembly, the UNs nonmember observer states, which include the Vatican and the Palestinian
7
Ibid. from http://www.un.org/en/ga/about/background.shtml, February 20th 2012.
8Accessed

Authority, all have the right to speak at the meeting, however cannot vote on resolutions. In UNGA, resolutions need a two-thirds majority of member states who attend the meeting to be passed. The assembly's president changes with each annual session based on the vote conducted by all member states before the session held. UNGA has the power of censuring states for violating UN Charter principles. In the 1960s for example, the assembly refused to seat the South African delegations because the country was practicing apartheid, in violation of both Security Council resolutions and principles of international law. 2. Mandate According to the Charter of the United Nations, the General Assembly may:
Consider and make recommendations on the general principles of cooperation for maintaining international peace and security, including disarmament; Discuss any question relating to international peace and security and, except where a dispute or situation is currently being discussed by the Security Council, make recommendations on it; Discuss, with the same exception, and make recommendations on any questions within the scope of the Charter or affecting the powers and functions of any organ of the United Nations; Initiate studies and make recommendations to promote international political cooperation, the development and codification of international law, the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and international collaboration in the economic, social, humanitarian, cultural, educational and health fields; Make recommendations for the peaceful settlement of any situation that might impair friendly relations among nations; Receive and consider reports from the Security Council and other United Nations organs; Consider and approve the United Nations budget and establish the financial assessments of Member States; Elect the non-permanent members of the Security Council and the members of other United Nations councils and organs and, on the recommendation of the Security Council, appoint the Secretary-General.
Pursuant to its Uniting for Peace resolution of November 1950 (resolution 377 (V)), the Assembly may also take action if the Security Council fails to act, owing to the negative vote of a permanent member, in a case where there appears to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression. The Assembly can consider the matter immediately with a view to making recommendations to Members for collective measures to maintain or restore international peace and security. While the Assembly is empowered to make only non-binding recommendations to States on international issues within its competence, it has, nonetheless, initiated

actionspolitical, economic, humanitarian, social and legalwhich have affected the lives of millions of people throughout the world. Each Member State in the Assembly has one vote. Votes taken on designated important issues, such as recommendations on peace and security and the election of Security Council members, require a two-thirds majority of Member States, but other questions are decided by simple majority. In recent years, a special effort has been made to achieve consensus on issues, rather than deciding by a formal vote, thus strengthening support for the Assemblys decisions. The President, after having consulted and reached agreement with delegations, can propose that a resolution be adopted without a vote.9 3. Membership Based on Article XIV General Assembly Rules of Procedure regarding Admission of New Members to the United Nations, the regulation for new members submission is as follow: Applications Rule 134 Any State which desires to become a Member of the United Nations shall submit an application to the Secretary-General. Such application shall contain a declaration, made in a formal instrument, that the State in question accepts the obligations contained in the Charter. Notification of applications Rule 135 The Secretary-General shall, for information, send a copy of the application to the General Assembly, or to the Members of the United Nations if the Assembly is not in session. Consideration of applications and decision thereon Rule 136 If the Security Council recommends the applicant State for membership, the General Assembly shall consider whether the applicant is a peace-loving State and is able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter and shall decide, by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting, upon its application for membership.
9
Ibid.

Rule 137 If the Security Council does not recommend the applicant State for membership or postpones the consideration of the application, the General Assembly may, after full consideration of the special report of the Security Council, send the application back to the Council, together with a full record of the discussion in the Assembly, for further consideration and recommendation or report. Notification of decision and effective date of membership Rule 138 The Secretary-General shall inform the applicant State of the decision of the General Assembly. If the application is approved, membership shall become effective on the date on which the General Assembly takes its decision on the application.10 The criteria for admission of new members are set out in the United Nations Charter, Chapter II, Article 4, as follows:11 1. Membership in the United Nations is open to all other peace-loving states which accept the obligations contained in the present Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able and willing to carry out these obligations. The admission of any such state to membership in the United Nations will be effected by a decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.
2.
A recommendation for admission from the Security Council requires affirmative votes from at least nine of the council's fifteen members, with none of the five permanent members voting against. The Security Council's recommendation must then be subsequently approved in the General Assembly by a two-thirds majority vote.12 Some of the 51 original members were originally not considered sovereign state based on the Montevideo Convention when they joined the UN. These countries, which are then gained full independence later after they become UN members, are:
Belarus (then the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Ukraine (then the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) were both constituent republics of the Soviet Union, until gaining full independence in 1991.
Taken from http://www.un.org/en/ga/about/ropga/adms.shtml, accessed in February, 1st, 2012 at 09.33 AM. 11From "Charter of the United Nations, Chapter II: Membership". United Nations. Accessed from http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter2.shtml in February 2nd 2012. 12 From "About UN Membership". United Nations. Accessed from http://www.un.org/en/members/about.shtml in February 2nd 2012.
10

India (whose territory at that time, before the partition of India, also included the present-day territories of Pakistan and Bangladesh) was under British colonial rule, until gaining full independence in 1947. The Philippines (then the Philippine Commonwealth) was a commonwealth with the United States, until gaining full independence in 1946. New Zealand, while de facto sovereign at that time, "only gained full capacity to enter into relations with other states in 1947 when it passed the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act. This occurred 16 years after the British Parliament passed the Statute of Westminster Act in 1931 that recognized New Zealand's autonomy. If judged by the Montevideo Convention criteria, New Zealand did not achieve full de jure statehood until 1947."
III.
Background of The Problem

1. Who is Palestinians? a. Geography
Palestine lies on the western edge of the Asian continent and the eastern extremity of the Mediterranean Sea. It is bound to the north by Lebanon and Syria, to the west by the Mediterranean Sea, to the south by the Gulf of Aqaba and the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula, and to the east by Jordan.13 The disputed area between Israel and Palestine was known before as Canaan, after the people who shared cultural tradition from the Mesopotamia and the civilization of the city of Elba. The Canaanites, who belonged to the northwest Semitic peoples of northern Mesopotamia and Syria of which the Jews were also a part of, were inhabited nearly fifteen hundred years, controlled Palestine west of Jordan River and parts of Phoenicia (coastal Lebanon) and Southern Syria.14 Palestine, which was an ancient land, at that time had been part Source: http://tinyurl.com/c5taqso, accessed in May 12th 2012. of the Ottoman domain for about four centuries, falling within the region known as Syria and composed of three sanjaks or districts. The three districts are Jerusalem, Christianity, and Islam.15
Accessed from http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/pdf/pdf2009/Geography.pdf in February 5th 2012. 14 Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab Israeli Conflict: A History With Documents,(Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2004), p. 1. 15 United Nations, UN Report on Palestine Social, Economy and Political, (USA: UN, 2005), p. 3.
13

b. History The history of Palestine can be traced back into the birth of the Zionism itself which dreamt about the creation of a home for Jewish from all around the world. Since the beginning, the creator of Zionism knew that this dream could only be realized by mass migration and acquisition of the Palestine; and this also means an inevitable confrontation with the Palestinian. It began since the Jews believed that their God, Yahweh, had chosen them to be His people, who are superior to and exclusive from all other peoples.16 This monotheism is the one that triggered the distinct identity and led to the separation between Israel and Palestinians. The names Israel and Palestine itself derive from two peoples who entered what was now the disputed region in the same time, in the twelfth century before the Christian era. The Jews, who at that time called themselves Bnei Israel (The People or Tribe of Israel), believed that God had given them the land. On the other hand, Palestine refers to the Philistines, people of Greek origin who settled in the coastal plains of the area at about the same time the Jews took over the hill country in the interior. After about two hundred years, the Jews united to defeat the Philistines and other people in Palestine, who were notably the Canaanites. In 1000 B.C. the Kingdom of Israel established.17 Since the establishment, the Kingdom of Israel was always maintain its domination over the people of Philistines, until the revolt of the Maccabees, which was supported by the Roman Empire, Palestine was incorporated into the Roman Empire as an autonomous unit and granted the right of political and religious autonomy as long as their rulers acknowledged Roman suzerainty. It was prosperous until the Eastern Roman Empire accepted Christianity and created system of laws that discriminated the Jewish community, and triggered a revolt. The unstable social and political condition in the area at that time, ease the invaders of Arab from the desert brought their influence of new religion called Islam, which then led to another conflict of cultural and religion discrimination.18 The defeat of Ottoman Empire in the First World War led to the allocation of Ottoman Arabs territories to the victorious Allied Powers. An opportunity aroused after the Balfour Declaration announced in 1917 by the British which stated that they will allow and support the establishment of Jewish homeland in Palestine. When the British acquired Palestine as their mandate in 1922, their previous commitment finally starting to take effect in the field. Soon riots became a frequent problem for the British until they finally decided to stem the flow of the Jewish immigrants. When the British finally ceded the territory to the UN in 1947, the problem was already a serious one. The persecution of the Jews during World War II and the devastation of Europe itself added more reasons for the Jews to leave their home and immigrate to their new home as fast as possible to build a new and promised life. This situation made the Jews population quickly outnumbered their Palestinian counterpart in Palestine and leads to a new perspective to solve the problem by the UN, thats the partition plan. Even this plan was initially strongly opposed by Palestines Arabs
Charles D. Smith, Ibid, p. 1. Charles D. Smith, Ibid, p. 2. 18 Charles D. Smith, Ibid, p. 5 6.
16 17

neighbors that culminated in the war of 1948 between Arab states and the newly created Israel. The outcome was a massive annexation of the former Palestinian territories by Israel that made a massive exodus of 750,000 that lived on the wrong side of the border. The six days war of 1967 saw the annexation of the rest of the Palestine which formerly administered by Jordania and Egypt after the war of 1948 and added further 500,000 men of Palestinian exodus. Now it estimated that the number has expanded into a staggering 5,000,000 men. Neither the Palestinian nor Israeli government has the full will to compromise with their adversaries actually. Many of the negotiation and resolution made by international communities were rendered useless. Thats solution still has not solved any major problem faced by the conflicting parties, even the negotiation concerning the issues of humanities still find a stalemate in the process. It seems that mutual understanding and trust must be created first between the two governments before conducting any further negotiation. c. Social and Economic Condition Since occupied by the Israeli, the structure and performance of the Palestinian economy change drastically. Some of the changes are the decreasing share of agriculture among the society of Palestinians and Israeli, industrial stagnation, deficits in trade and payments, unstable marketing condition, increasing unemployment, large-scale labour migration, financial disarray and uncertainty, and a continuing drain on the Palestinian natural-resource base caused by the relatively high levels of private consumption fuelled mainly from non-domestic source of income. Since 1998, numerous economic and other measures have been used to stabilize the conflict within the area. Report showed a growing militarization of decision-making of the Israeli Civil Administration in the occupied area in applying unpopular policies or measures which affecting Palestinian economic activity. The measures are taken because the Israeli believes that those measures will be effective tools to reduce Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation.19 Even though the policies are rather expensive, Israel insisting in maintaining the measures to effectively preserve order in the occupied territory. The measures regarded as collective punishment on villages, towns, refugee camps, and the whole occupied territory against a specific individual and sectors of the population, which was the Palestinian. The measures, which included the imposition of fines, taxes and levies, withdrawal of operating licenses, and restriction in farming, industrial, and property management, has led to other social problem, such as harassment and systemic discrimination and physical abuse toward the Palestinians. Some of the practices and measures applied by the Israel are: Demolition of homes, expropriation of land and acceleration of steps to establish new Israeli settlements and outposts in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, including East Jerusalem;
19
United Nations, Ibid, p. 15.

Restrictions on the movement of Palestinian laborers from the occupied territory to Israel, including a computerized pass system of magnetic identity cards to screen workers entering Israel; Tightening of controls on trade between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and on the export of Palestinian manufactured and agricultural goods to Israel in retaliation against the voluntary Palestinian boycott of imports from Israel; Increasingly stringent measures against Palestinian agriculture and fishing, including the uprooting of orchards, bulldozing of agricultural land, destruction of crops and bans on fishing off the Gaza coast; Widespread tax-collection campaigns involving raids, curfews, roadblocks and other military action, resulting in heavy fines, inflated tax assessments, attachment of bank accounts and confiscation of identity papers and property; Administrative and procedural obstacles affecting direct export of Palestinian agricultural products to European Economic Community (EEC) markets and local and export marketing of agricultural produce; Increased control over the activities of international organizations assisting Palestinian economic and social development, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs) providing material and financial support to the Palestinian people.20
Since the Palestinian uprising in 1987 known as intifadah, some changes occurred in the economy of the Palestinian in the occupied territory. Palestinians effort to improve the condition triggered by the desire to be self-reliant and to detach themselves from the Israeli economy. Some of the Palestinian institutions and communities implemented elaborated strategies to survive the crisis. The strategies are primarily aimed to boost self-reliance in agricultural and industrial production, investment and marketing, restructuring domestic production base, and loosen the dependency toward the Israel economy and occupation authorities. Solidarity among indigenous and community were strengthened in the area and activity of economy, especially agricultural and industry, in order to increased the participation of the Palestinian in the occupied territory.21 d. Political Status Until today, Palestinians legitimate political status is still rather controversial. The efforts to create the state of Palestine, which will be build on the West Bank of the River Jordan and Gaza on the Mediterranean coast, always been frustrated by the ongoing conflict with Israel and disputes over the status of Palestinians refugee. The independence of Israel in 1948 left the British mandate of Palestine separated between Israel, Trans-Jordan and Egypt. The Palestinian national movement gradually united in
20 21
United Nations, Ibid, p. 16. Ibid.

the West Bank and Gaza, supported by Jordan and Egypt, and also regroups in refugee camps in some Arab states. The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) created as the leading umbrella group before the Six-Day War in 1967. Under Yasser Arafat, the PLO won international recognition as the representative of Palestinian people, culminating in the Oslo Accords with Israel in 1993. Palestinian National Authority was then established under the regulation of the Accords, as an interim body to run parts of the West Bank and Gaza, but not eastern Jerusalem. The Palestinian National Authority functions as an agency of the PLO, which represents Palestinians at international bodies. It is led by a directlyelected president, who appoints a prime minister and government which must have the support of the elected Legislative Council. Its civilian and security writ runs in urban areas (Area A) under the Oslo Accords, with civilian but not security control over rural areas (Area B). Israel, however, still have full control over the bypass roads, Israeli settlements and the Jordan Valley. In the PLO, the Fatah faction ran the authority until 2006, when Hamas won in Legislative Council elections. Uneasy co-existence between Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and a Hamas-led government degenerated amid violence between Fatah and Hamas armed wings, culminating in Hamas seizing power in Gaza in June 2007 and President Abbas dismissing the government. Since then, the two Palestinian authority areas run by separate factions. The West Bank by Fatah, and Gaza by Hamas. Egypt became the mediator between the two, but still struggling to unite them until today.22 2. Domestic Dispute Hamas and Fatah inability to create a unified Palestine government could be seen as the root of all Palestine national and international problems. Their failure to honor the result of 2006 Palestine national election resulted in long-term national and international disputes and conflicts. Domestically, both sides failure has created more turmoil and increased tension both in the Gaza strip and in the West Bank. Internationally, the 2006-2007 Palestine internal conflict has split international supports for Palestine in two between Hamas and Fatah. Hamas and Fatah six years of dispute began in September 2006 following national election of January 2006 which resulted in Hamas victory over Abbas-led Fatah. The talks between Hamas and Fatah regarding their national cooperation soon started after Hamas government led by Ismael Haniyeh sworn in March 2006. The process started soon afterward, but the talks eventually found a stalemate when both could not make a join stance regarding their view of Israel. The failure during the parliamentary talks proved to be disastrous in national level for Palestine. Firstly, parliamentary quarrel has evolved into open-street fighting between Hamas and Fatah. Following the September 2006 stalemate in parliamentary talks, street fighting soon erupted that moment in Gaza strip between both sides supporters. Fatah supporters in Gaza outran Fatah bases and Fatah supported avenged by doing same thing against Hamas
Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14630174, accessed in March 14th 2012.

22

bases in the West Bank eventually leaving Hamas with full control over Gaza and Fatah with its West Bank territory in June 2007. Secondly, disaster stroke against Palestine long-dreamt and build national stability. Seen chaos has erupted and realized that the effect could even more dangerous for Palestine bid for independence, Abbas, leader of Fatah, tried to take a more neutral solution. In December 2006, Abbas proposed a new election as a solution for the ongoing crisis, but the proposal was put aside since in February 2007, the reappointed Haniyeh government agreed to start a new talk with Fatah. Once again, Hamas and Fatah failed several month later to make a join stance against Israel and fighting between them soon started again. The Palestine national (mainly in Gaza) stability itself has collapsed following Israel attacks in March 2007 and January 2008 against Hamas-held Gaza strip. With that, common goods import, production, and distribution for Gaza are strained; adding even more problems for Hamas which already tirelessly tried to maintain Gaza stability and order. In final point, both factions could steadily lose reputation and in long-term could add more problems for their quest for independence and stability if both could not overcome their quarrel. Fear has grown within Hamas and Fatah regarding their failure to create a unified Palestine leadership in spite of January 2006 national election. If Palestinian finally lose their belief with them, their fall would not be in doubt anymore and even the Israel might get the advantage they have dreamt for years. Hamas and Fatah inability to put aside their differences and Hamas (which accused as terrorist organization by the West) win in January 2006 national election seemed as a disaster for Palestine foreign relations. International supporters began fading away and their opponents diplomacy seemed more than able in exploiting Palestine national chaos. Firstly, they were unable and eventually failed to make a join national stance regarding country of Israel. Realizing conflict started to grow in Palestine parliament and government, Israel shown an exploiting move by cancelling or postponed its negotiations and peace talks with Palestine which caused even more severe problems and hatred between Hamas and Fatah leaders. For short-term, the Palestine internal conflict growth into an alarming level even for country with low security and stability standard like Palestine. Secondly, different stances and actions taken by both sides against Israel brought more reprisal from the latter. Fatah which could accept Israel as a state that lived side by side with Palestine could not accept Hamas objection to Israels right to exist. Final split between the two in parliament followed by resumed Hamas rocket attacks against Israels settlements which triggering harsh counter attack by well trained and well equipped Israel armed forces. Thirdly, United Nations (UN) and The United States of America (USA) implemented more sanctions as their response following Hamas which they considered as a terrorist organization victory in January 2006 election. Hamas with its harsh stance towards Israel and its supporter victory caused fears and also to some extent caused Palestine government started losing sympathy from other countries. Although it seems that all odds were against Palestine that time, strict reprisal actions mainly taken by Israel authorities in reality brought a new hatred towards Israeli government. With new sanctions imposed and implemented by Israel, international stance once again split between the pro which dominated by Muslim populated country and the contra mainly regarding international stance in humanitarian, independence, and sovereignty issue. Whatever international stances are, in final point, relations with other countries was actually endangered by the absent of a unified Palestine national government. Both Hamas

and Fatah have their own international supporters which could be combined into one powerful pressure forces in a negotiation with Israel, but such opportunity has elapsed following their split. In fact, their split only brought more trouble for Palestine since both international supporters now helping each one against the other fellow Palestinian while only made Israel could not be happier. At February 2012, Hamas and Fatah finally reached an agreement to form a new unified Palestine national government. Hamas and Fatah seemed to have acknowledged their needs for a reconciliation following wave of the so-called Arab Spring if they wish to maintain their power in Palestine. Opposition as was predicted aroused soon from Israel government which of course realized the danger that might facing them once Hamas and Fatah joined their power. Not only could be judged as the end of the beginning for Palestinian bid for independence, the February 2012 agreement that marks the end of hostilities between Hamas and Fatah could hopefully also be seen as the beginning of their cooperation to end Israels occupation that would eventually lead into the realization of an independent Palestine.
3. UN Position Toward the Problems of Palestinians History of hostile relations between Palestine and Israel has long occupied the United Nations with debates, resolutions, and negotiations surrounding the issue. The UN has plunged itself into the conflict even from the early times of its establishment. The earliest UN contribution to the issue was the UN Partition Plan of 1947 which first established the borders segregating the Jewish parts and Arab parts of the land. Since then, the UN has been such a regular mediator in Palestine-Israel relations. Nevertheless, Palestinian problems are not merely those involving Israel. There are several issues of Palestinians that gain international attention for their out-of-border significance. Thus, the UN sometimes finds itself involved in these issues as well. One of Palestinians issues other than those involving Israel which gains UN attention is refugees. Refugee problems began to rise following the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict. At the end of the war, the area of Gaza Strip and West Bank were respectively occupied by Egypt and Jordan; leaving a huge amount of Palestinians that were not allowed to stay in the region of Israel yet unwelcomed by Arab states in the surrounding area that were unwilling to provide citizenship for the Palestinians. This refugee problem continues to strike until now provided the unfinished series of problems in the region. Regarding this, the UN manages the problem of Palestinian refugees through two agencies: United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). UNRWA, established by UNGA Resolution 302 (IV) of 8 December 1949, is created specially to assist and aid Palestinian refugees. The working area of this agency is known from its definition of Palestinian refugees; that is person whose normal place of residence was Palestine between June 1946 and May 1948, who lost both their homes and means of livelihood as a result of 1948 Arab-Israeli

conflict.23 UNRWA also defines as refugees the descendants of people displaced by the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict.24 However, as most Palestinians displaced by the 1948 conflict seek refuge in neighboring countries of Palestine (Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt), UNRWA does not include Palestinians who fled far from the region as Palestinian refugees. The same case also applies to Palestinians displaced because of factors other than the 1948 Arab-Israeli conflict. These people are considered as common refugees and administered by UNHCR. Another issue regarding Palestinians which attracts international attentions and thus gains UN concerns is over Palestinian political violence. The term refers to every act of violence undertaken to further Palestinian cause. These acts of violence are mostly brought to existence by Palestinian political factions such as Hamas, Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), Fatah, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and Abu Nidal organization.25 The objectives are often directed toward self-determination and liberation of Palestine. Given the facts that these violence acts often target civilians besides of military, the UN through its Secretary Generals press releases often condemns the acts as terrorism.26 However, UN positions on this issue are often ambivalent. Some UN resolutions approve Palestinians acts as resistance against foreign occupation, and therefore Palestinians are affirmed to use every available means.27
IV.
Membership Status for Palestinians

1. Conflict with Israel Besides the problem of the Palestinian status in international world, there is another basic major problem between Israel and Palestine, the border issue. Historically both countries claimed that they have the right to inherit the vast amount of territory held by both modern countries nowadays. But thats theory
Source: http://tinyurl.com/77qj2ru
UNRWA, Palestine Refugees, accessed from http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=86, on May 3rd, 2012, 10.12 PM. 24 Ibid. 25 Palestinian Islamic Jihad, accessed from http://www.cfr.org/publication/15984/palestinian_islamic_jihad.html#p1, on May 3rd, 2012, 10.09 PM. 26 For example, Press Release SG/SM/8533 PAL/1928 on November 29th, 2002. 27 UNCHR Resolution E/CN.4/2002/L.16, accessed from http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/%28Symbol%29/E.CN.4.2002.L.16.En?Opendocument, on May 3rd, 2012, 10.15 PM.
23

is not going to be implemented by any sides nor would not be supported by the world as an ultimate peaceful solution which they hope would eventually lead to a lasted peace in Middle east since that idea could one only put into reality by the destruction of one of the two countries, Israel or Palestine. Based on that fact, we know that the only solution able to be peacefully done would be a partition plan for the entire conflicting territories between the two conflicting parties. Now since the concept has clear, a new question arose in this conflict about which territories will be held by Israel and Palestine each in the final agreement. This question brought a fierce argument fighting since both parties have different answer for this crucial question. The Palestinian argued that by the time the final agreement being made, all side must recognize their right to govern the entire territory previously held by Palestine just before the start of the six day war in 1967. The realization of the Palestinian will would result in transfer of great amount of territories previously held by Israelis since the end of the six day war and would not be an acceptable solution for the Israel. For the Israel point of view that kind of agreement would be a harsh one for them since that would mean the hand-over of some crucial territories such as the Western Bank, Eastern Jerusalem, and other territories demanded by Palestinian which the Israelis soldiers had paid with their blood in 1967 to unify the land for Israel. On the other side, the Israel offers a relatively smaller territory for the creation of the independent Palestine as their final concession. The Israel offer is based on the fact that Palestine is not yet a legitimate country and that mean Palestine also doesnt have legitimate territory that could be categorized as an annexed territories by foreign power, on this case by the Israel. Consequently, the Palestine demands for a pre 1967 border seems unimaginable since Israel thought it was not a legally backed solution. So we can only see small prospect for the final territorial agreement between both sides in the near future. But such an uncompromised solution is not an acceptable solution for both sides and would likely become roots of a new violence and the emergence of the extremist or radical party in the area which eventually lead to nothing except the reemergence of the old conflict. The earlier account of the conflict rooted back to the late 19th century. On that period, the region of the future conflict between Palestine and Israel was in the authority of the Ottoman Empire. In the 1870s through the 1880s, with the rise of the Jews national movement or the Zionism, a large amount of Jews mainly coming from Europe started to inhabit Palestine on a religious basis of creating a homeland for Jewish people known as the Land of Israel.28 The immigration of Jews to Palestine was initially welcomed by the Ottoman and the local Palestinian Arab. As the volume of the movement became larger and as the effect, small-scale conflicts between local residents and Jews started to exist, Ottoman authority started to feel insecure in a basis that Jews would be more loyal to their previous rulers than the Ottoman itself. During the World War I, due to previous defense treaty made with the Germany, the Ottoman Empire joined the Central Powers. Jews in Palestine, for the
Hattis Rolef, Susan, and Avraham Sela, "Zionism, The Continuum Political Encyclopedia of the Middle East (New York: Continuum, 2002), pp. 928-932.
28

possibility to be released from Ottoman, joined the alignment with United Kingdom, France, and Russia. One of the consequences of this was that the UK declared to favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, but that nothing should be done to prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine. The declaration was known as the Balfour Declaration of 1917. Later, King Faisal I from Iraq stated to conditionally endorse the Balfour Declaration. This led to the rejection of Faisals led Syrian-Arab national movement from the Palestinian Arab population and instead chose to agitate for the Palestine to be a separate state with Arab population. After the World War I and the collapse of Ottoman Empire, the region of Palestine was granted a mandatory status under the administration of UK. Meanwhile, the immigration volume of Jewish continued to heavily increase due to the antiSemitism movement in Europe and the rise of Nazi.29 To highlight, the conflict between Arab and Jews was mainly characterized as of national conflict caused by disputes regarding the ownership of the land of the Palestine. That was until Muhammad Amin al-Husseini incited the Arab population by stating that the Jews were building temple on religious sites of the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque, therefore turning the conflict into a religious one.30 This led to a series of conflicts, including the Hebron Massacre. To overcome the tension between Arab and Jews, the UK authority conducted two solutions. The first was of two-state state solution by establishing two states of Arab and Jews population in the land of Palestine. This first solution was quickly rejected because Arab refused to share land with Jews. The UK then proceeded to the second solution by limiting the amount of Jewish immigrants and the quantity of land sold to Jews. This solution was then implemented. However, because of the holocaust ran by the Nazi, Yishuv (authority of Jewish people in the land of Palestine before the establishment of the state of Israel) began to smuggle Jewish immigrants. Because of these illegal immigrants, the conflicts between Arab and Jews began to arouse once again. During the World War II, the Arab leaders of Palestine aligned with the Axis Powers. Hitler promised Al-Husseini to eliminate the Jews when the war ended and Germany gained victory.31 Along with the war, the joint operation between Nazi and Palestinian Arab had been established. After the war, the newly-established United Nations recommended to split the region into three parts: Jewish state, Arab state, and an international zone consisting Jerusalem. Yishuv agreed to the plan, but the Palestinian Arab leaders rejected it in an argument that the Arab population was the majority of the region yet they got smaller area than the Jews. The rejection also continued the long conflict between Arab and Jews. On May 14, 1948, or one day before the end of British mandate on the region, the state of Israel was declared in the region based on the aforementioned UN partition plan.
M. Berry and G. Philo, Israel and Palestine: Conflicting Histories (London: Pluto Press, 2006), p. 126. Avraham Sela, "al-Husseini, Hajj (Muhammad) Amin, "The Continuum Political Encyclopedia of the Middle East (New York: Continuum, 2002), p. 361. 31 Christopher Browning and Jrgen Matthus, The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939-March 1942 (University of Nebraska Press, 2004), p.406
29 30

After the declaration, the first full-scale war between Arab -consisting of armies from Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq- and Israeli Jews erupted. The war was won by Israel with an armistice agreement over the belligerents. As a result, the area of Israel was enlarged after the annexation of the surrounding area. On the other hand, the region of Gaza Strip and West Bank were respectively occupied by Egypt and Jordan. This war also created one of the most problematic issues in the history of Arab-Israel conflict, namely the large amount of Palestinian refugees that were not allowed to stay in the region of Israel yet unwelcomed by Arab states in the surrounding area that were unwilling to provide citizenship for the Palestinians. The post-war conflicts then continued to break around the borders between Israel and Egypt-Jordan. Later on, it was known that the Jewish community in Egypt contributed as agents in the operation of Israel against Egypt. This and the following raids caused Egypt to react by training and sponsoring Palestinians as voluntary army to attack Israel. Rooted from this voluntary movement, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was established with the goal of creating an independent state of Palestine by armed struggles.32 Raids and hostility against the surrounding Arab states led Israel to take a preemptive war (known as the Six Day War) against Egypt. At the end of the war, Israel successfully took Gaza Strip from Egypt and West Bank, including East Jerusalem, from Jordan. This Israeli action was not considered as a breach of international law because Palestine was never declared itself as a state. Additionally, the status of West Bank and Gaza Strip under Jordan and Egypt was only based on the 1949 armistice borders. Therefore, the border did not provide de-jure status of the regions under Jordan and Egypt. This defeat of Arab states in Six Day War urged the PLO to stop hoping for support in struggle against Israel and instead started over the raid from areas surrounding Israel. PLOs headquarter was also relocated from Cairo into Lebanon. Later on, with the release of Ten Point Program, PLO decided to achieve the goal of establishing an independent Palestine through gradual steps and adopted alternative means, such as diplomatic actions, without compromising the armed struggles as the main tool. From the new headquarter; PLO-led terrorism acts continued the raids against Israel. It was only after Ronald Reagan sent his emissary in 1981 to manage the conflict did the raid begin to cease. The fragile armistice agreement ended when an assassination attempt on Israeli Ambassador took place in Britain in 1982. This led to Israeli invasion of Lebanon by the reason of protecting the northern border of Israel from the terror of PLO. The invasion caused Israel to be heavily criticized, including from within the state itself, after the Israeli troops were indirectly responsible for a massacre of Palestinian civilians. Meanwhile, Yasser Arafat (the then chairman of PLO) and Fatah (Arafat-led political faction of Palestine) were exiled to Tunis along with PLOs main headquarter. In 1987, Hamas was established as a political faction of Palestine using armed resistance as a means toward Palestinian independence. The establishment of Hamas was allegedly rooted from the Palestinian intifada (uprising) in December 1987. A year after, the in-exile PLO authority declared the establishment of
Avraham Sela, "Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), The Continuum Political Encyclopedia of the Middle East (New York: Continuum, 2002), pp. 58-12.
32

Palestinian state. Yet, the self-proclaimed Palestine was never really recognized as sovereign state since it had no eligible territory. In 1993, PLO and Israel began a series of negotiation process taking place in Oslo, known as the Oslo peace process. Arafat also sent a letter to Yitzhak Rabin (the then Israeli prime minister) regarding PLOs official acknowledgement of Israel and renouncement of any terrorist acts. One of the main features Oslo peace process had reached was the establishment of Palestinian Authority (PA), an institution given the authority by Israel to administer the Palestinian communities living in West Bank and Gaza Strip. Nevertheless, the contribution of PA remained controversial since it was alleged to have supported and funded many terrorist movements.33 In 1995, Rabin and Arafat agreed upon the establishment Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The agreement allowed the leaders of PLO to move to the occupied territories. Yet, Hamas and other factions did not give its approval toward the agreement and kept committing terrorist acts, such as suicide bombings. On Israeli side, the peace negotiation process that was seen as merely creating more terrorist acts while leading toward the loss of territory led to the assassination of Rabin by Israeli right-wing extremists. Rabin was then replaced by Netanyahu who disagreed to use the previously-performed multi stage approach in Oslo peace process and instead chose to conduct a more rigid way of seeking tangible goodwill from Palestine. The following agreements and negotiations were proven unfruitful before any conduct of gaining a final status agreement, namely resolutions for every issue surrounding the conflicts. Therefore, the Camp David Summit in 2000 was held in order to reach the so-called final status agreement. However, the summit was also considered unfruitful because Israels offered solution was not accepted by Arafat.34 2. Current Status After a series of unsuccessful negotiations, the second intifada erupted in September 2000 and lasted until today. The then Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, refused to continue the negotiation with PA and even declined to respect any outcome of Oslo process after witnessing the deteriorating relations of the two states. Following the perceived terrorism acts conducted by Palestinians in the occupied territories, Sharon stated his support of the Road Map for Peace offered by the US, EU, and Russia. This led to the establishment of the Quartet on the Middle East (consisting of representatives from the US, Russia, EU, and UN) as an intermediary body of the conflict. Sharon also began to carry out his disengagement plan by performing withdrawal from Gaza Strip and controversially expelled Jewish settlers in Gaza and West Bank. The disengagement plan was welcomed by PA and left-wing factions of Israel, but was heavily denounced by the right-wings.
BBC News, Palestinian Authority Funds Go to Militants, accessed from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3243071.stm, on February 13, 2012, 12.50 PM. 34 Camp David Proposals for Final Palestine-Israel Peace Settlement, accessed from http://www.mideastweb.org/campdavid2.htm, on February 13, 2012, 12.52 PM.
33

Recent developments of the conflict included the rising popularity of Hamas over Fatah. It was clearly seen after the spreading of widely-held news stating that Arafat and Fatah used the international aid raised for the development of Palestine for the well-being of Arafat himself. This and the fact that Hamas was seen as frequently providing social institutions and services for the people of Palestine contributed to the gained popularity. As a result, Hamas won the Palestinian legislative election. However, a new problem sprang since Hamas was notably known as a radical political movement of Palestine refusing to acknowledge and accept the state of Israel and the Oslo process, and committing terrorist acts. After Hamass winning of the election, the US and European countries stopped funding for Hamas and PA before Hamas changed its radical nature.35 As a result, the conflict between Hamas and Fatah started to break. Fatah remained in control of West Bank. Another recent issue surrounding the conflict was the resettlement of Jewish residents in West Bank under Netanyahus second administration. The policy was clearly contrary to the previous disengagement plan. After his policy was criticized by Obama, Netanyahu responded by stating in a speech regarding Israels acknowledgement over Palestine on some conditions: No army; Jerusalem be given to Israel as its capital city; and no right of return for the Palestinian refugees. The speech along with the conditions was clearly rejected by Hamas. It was also until very recently that Mahmoud Abbas (Arafats successor) appealed for a UN membership for Palestine in September 2011 based on the 1967 border. 3. The Need to Enhance the Membership Status Nowadays the Government of Palestine realizes the need of international support in order to gain their long waited independence. Such connection and support from the international community as they realized can only be achieved once they have joined the United Nations (UN) with a full membership status. Therefore for a Source: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39722&Cr=palestin&Cr1 considerable amount of
Public Broadcasting Service, Online NewsHour: Palestinian Authority Strapped for Cash, accessed from http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june06/hamas_2-28.html, on February 13, 2012, 13.05 PM.
35

time they have tried applying the full UN membership because at the moment the Palestine only counted by the UN as an Observer and they need more than that for their own purpose. In order to achieve the status of UN member state, Palestine requires an act that entails the passage of Security Council recommendation followed by a vote with a twothirds majority in the General Assembly. The initial Palestinian statehood was unilaterally declared by the Palestine National Council in 1988 by Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat based on 1967 borders and has been recognized by around 122 countries. Presently, a request of full UN membership as a state status have announced formally by Palestinian officials in the General Assembly arranged in September 2011. 36 In respond to this decision, United States wielded its veto power. Germany and Italy stand opposed to Palestinian state recognition along with the UK and France abstain of Palestinian UN state membership endorsement. On the other side, Ireland, Portugal and Arab League are in favor of the state establishment.37 Also responding to the Palestine decision of initiative, the Israeli government is lobbying the US, EU and Russia in hope of their persuasion to the Palestinians to abandon the UN bid and return for negotiations. According to Israeli security agencies, restarting the peace process could put a stop to the Palestinian UN initiative. Israeli officials have stated their acceptance of pre-1967 lines, by inverse requisite as a starting point for talks under the disclaimer of Israel recognition as a Jewish State.38 As the Israel argued, the Palestinians are in serious breach of the 1995 Oslo Interim Agreement, which set up the Palestinian Authority, the presidency and the parliament, on the understanding that all remaining differences would be resolved through negotiations.39 Two of the main Oslo agreements: The Interim Agreement and the 1993 Declaration of Principles both considered that Israel and the Palestine would negotiate a permanent settlement based on Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, both of which support the principle of Israel withdrawal from territories and its military occupation during the June 1967 war in exchange for just and lasting peace with its Arab adversaries.40 As Article XXXI, Clause 7 of the Interim Agreement reads: Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations. Palestinian pursuit or acceptance of a UN vote on Palestinian statehood for the West Bank and Gaza outside of an Israel-Palestine negotiating context could be interpreted as contradicting the above clause. By having demand of state membership recognition to the UN, Palestine has been internationalizing the issues and assembles the issues on a broader context than just bilateral solutions.
36HuseinIbish 37
and SalibaSarsar, The Long Overdue Palestinian State in New York Times, May 16th, 2011. The Henry Jackson Society, No Path to Peace: Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly, Paper No.5, (September, 2011). 38 Quaker United Nations Office, Palestinian Statehood at the United Nations: A Resource, pp. 2, August 18th, 2011. 39 Leslie Susser, Countdown to a State, Jerussalem Report, May 23, 2011. 40 Jim Zanotti and Marjorie Browne, Palestinian Initiatives for 2011 at the United Nations in Congressional Research Service, pp. 19, (September 2011).

Looking from the UN point of views the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, Robert Serry stated the PA is ready to assume the responsibilities of statehood in the West Bank but state-building efforts are risky by the existence of constant continual political deadlock. 41 Albeit the partial rejection in Security Councils assembly, Palestine has alternative routes to acquire a state status of UN member by implementing institutional reforms and strengthen by diplomatic relations. This characteristic effort has made the backdrop to developments by Prime Minister Salam Fayyads two-year plan Ending the Occupation, Building the State (2009-2011), supported by the Quartet. In April 2011, the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee and the IMF joined the World Bank responded to the developments by stating that the Palestinian Authority (PA) has the institutions and economic policies required of a well functioning state. At the UN, considerations of Palestinian statehood can be seen in the context of broader discussions of statehood, legitimacy and UN membership that have arisen in recent cases as a sub-state entity such as Kosovo and South Sudan, and the recognition of Libyas rebel Transitional National Council.
4. Impacts of New Membership Status What would happen if the United Nations accepted or rejected Palestine as one of their member states? This important question should be taken into account as one of determining factors to decide whether the United Nations should accept or reject Palestines request to become its member states. This question can be considered as a crucial one since the outcome of this particular event could alter the stance and contribution taken or done by many countries before or even more important, the false policy taken regarding this event could at least jeopardize Middle-East regional stability. Israel and The United States of America are two states that lay as the main barrier against Palestinian request. The latter could even prevent Palestine becoming a United Nations member states with the use of its veto right in the United Nations Security Council but only with a terrible consequence for its foreign relations not only it would undermine its pivotal role as a negotiator between Israel and Palestine but also would bring more hatred among the Arabs towards The United States. This devastating effect inflicted upon The United States reputations in the Middle-East could happen since more Arabs may considered The United States as the main barrier for the Palestinian quest for freedom. The decision to use veto right against Palestine could also torn Middle-East apart between the pro and contra The United States-Israel that would eventually alienated them from both countries that many Arab states and people considered as being the product of Zionism. Russian and this time also China backed Arab states could once again enter a conflict against The United States backed Israel, le historie se repete.
41Op.Cit,
pp. 3

On the economic side, The United States of America as the biggest contributor could also fully or partially cut their annual financial contribution off for particular United Nations agency or even its contribution for the United Nations itself if they accept Palestine request to become their member states. The example of this kind of policy can be seen just like what the United States have recently done with their $6080millions annual financial contribution for UNESCO that accepted Palestine as their member states. After that decision was made, The United States instantly implemented their pressure by totally cutting off their financial contribution for UNESCO. With its share of around 22% for the UNESCO total fund, The United States policy made a serious problem for UNESCO, serious enough to wound but not to kill it since the UNESCO itself have experienced same kind of pressure from the same country in the 1980s during the President Ronald Reagan administration. President Barrack Obama also stated that Palestine request is unacceptable since it could remove Palestine from a bilateral negotiation with Israel. The Congress of The United States has also started a discussion about their countrys
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/09/23/world/middleeast/s teps-in-the-palestinian-bid-for-un-membership.html?ref=world, Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |25 accessed in May 12th 2012.

annual financial aid numbering $500millions for the Palestinian Authority if Palestine continuing their bid to become a United Nations member state. Israel ambassador for The United States, Michael Oren, said that Israel and The United States dont have any agreement with Palestine government that trying to achieve a United Nations member states status for Palestine. He stated that the previous agreement between Israel and Palestinians were made by Palestine Authority and therefore the creation of an independent Palestine Government could put all previous agreement in jeopardy. The bid for a United Nations member state status would likely be followed by a reconciliation effort between Fatah and Hamas that The United States considered as a terrorist organization and therefore unacceptable. The point is that Israel and The United States is trying to put Palestine back into a bilateral negotiation as a way to create Palestinian state based mainly on what the Israel wants to see, but considered by many including the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon as an overdue effort. The inflexible Israel government headed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and strongly backed by an extreme right-winger foreign minister Avigdor Liebermann has brought Israel into a more hostile relationship with its neighbors than in the eve of the Yom Kippur war of 1967. Israel is losing sympathy within several last month which undermine all of its previous leaders efforts to make Israelis could live in harmony with a friendly neighbor. The evaporating friendly relationship with Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Iran (or even with Saudi Arabia) could make Israels future seems more uncertain than ever. Despite all the threat it faced, Israel still have confidence with its abilities mainly because of the unflagging support from its ally in the Western Hemisphere, The United States of America. The Israels lobby has been considered as one of the most controversial yet successful in the world and has been proven as one of its main source of power particularly in foreign relation affair. In conclusion, the domino result from this event alone not only could enhance the ones chance to achieve their independence but also could seal the others fate as a country.
5. Domestic Debate within Palestinian in Regards the Issue of UN Membership Status As states responded variedly toward the issue of Palestinians appeal to gain membership of the UN, the same division also occurred in the domestic level of Palestine itself. While the majority of Palestinian people supported the issue, the support itself varied in terms of how a future Palestinian state sees other states. Before going into the specific internal division caused by the issue, we have to bear in our minds that Palestinian people have always been inherently divided. The division internal to the Palestine has such a long history to explain. Therefore, we can not merely take recent internal debates into account without knowing what inherently constitute it. The division internal to the Palestinian people has a political root mainly coming from the political parties that constitute the Palestinian Authority. The nature of inherently different ideals and ways each political party has been committing to cope

with Palestinian issues brings the division into existence. Among many political parties that shape the Palestinian Authority, two stand out: Hamas and Fatah. The two have always been the most popular political party among the Palestinian people and successively won legislative elections, and thus mainly shape the internal division in Palestine. The conflict between Hamas and Fatah is not only political, but also geographical. Since 2007, Hamas has been in power in Gaza with Fatah left to govern the West Bank.42 Nevertheless, the degree of people support has been inclined to Hamas. It is alleged that everyone in Gaza is Hamas supporter, while in the West Bank, not everyone backs Fatah.43 However, Hamas has been categorized by some governments (European Union, United States, Japan, Israel, and Canada) as a terrorist group, referring to radical acts it has always been performing. The accusation inevitably leads to a more severe separation between Hamas and Fatah as it makes reconciliation between the two harder to achieve. It is also alleged that Israel contributes to the division as it has historically separated Gaza and West Bank and strongly opposed to the Palestinian unity deal.44 Shifting toward the UN bid issue, it is quite surprising that most ordinary Palestinians in the occupied territories support the action.45 Although there is less enthusiasm coming from Hamas46, the bid itself doesnt provoke violent clashes between the parties. After a reconciliation deal in 2011, Hamas leaders accepted there was a broad consensus on the establishment of a Palestinian state within 1967 border, though they formally still refuse to recognize Israel.47 From the statement we could see that the two factions could agree upon the territorial issue of a future Palestinian state, but differ in how they would approach the Israeli government. It also implicitly shows that Hamas, given its radical nature, would be intensely different in how it views other factors contributing to the long history of Palestinian-Israeli conflict and how the future state of Palestine would react to them. This could make a critical issue if external actors use the Palestinians UN bid as means to exacerbate the division between the two.
6. Alternative Solutions to Palestinian Membership in the United Nations Israeli-Palestinian negotiations often acknowledged as a non-starter because the continuation of settlements and the inability of international community to generate
BBC, Palestinian Unity Undermined by Geographic Divide, accessed from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17140711, on March 30, 2012, 11.23 PM. 43 Ibid. 44 Ibid. 45 BBC, Q&A: Palestinian Bid for Full Membership at the UN, accessed from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13701636, on March 30, 2012, 11.23 PM. 46 Ibid. 47 Ibid.
42

peace process. The two-state solution is most likely difficult to be achieved. That makes those who believe in the necessity of an end to the occupation and a non-violent political resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict should begin to conceive alternative solutions. Like a Palestinian state in the West Bank with provisional borders, a unilateral disengagement, a confederation of Israel-Palestine-Jordan, or a bi-national one state solution.48 An alternative for a single state or a confederation is one which proposed to be democratic and secular. Not Jewish, nor Islamic, that will stand for justice and equality of all races and religions. It will accept and tolerate each religious community and accord each of them their right to practice and propagate their religion.49 Both Israel and Palestine, as currently conceived, look backward to the 19th century, when states focused on ethnic or religious traits were the norm or at least the ideal. The one-state solution is right for the 21st century which defines a world of individual rights, open frontiers, and international law as a world of self-chosen identities where cross-cultural interaction and learning is the ideal.50 Thus, through the alternatives, Palestinian gain of membership will be clear on its very first point of the states status. While normative framework of ideas is still debatable, the legal framework remains the major concern of reforming Palestinian membership in the United Nations. There is an esoteric maneuver to get around a veto which invokes the obscure U.N. Resolution 377, also known as the "Uniting for Peace" Resolution. In early 1950, the United States pushed through the resolution as a means of circumventing possible Soviet vetoes. A matter can be taken up by the General Assembly. This procedure has been used 10 times so far, most notably in 1956 to help resolve the Suez Canal crisis. The United States called for an emergency "Uniting for Peace" session of the General Assembly, which passed a withdrawal resolution which a simple majority vote is required. Acting through the General Assembly can be useful to circumvent a vetowielding member of the Security Council in the clear international minority, but such a route has its limits. Once a security matter has been brought before the General Assembly, the main hurdle it faces is the requirement to have a two-thirds majority of members present and voting. The necessary backing in the General Assembly might have a moral and political weight sufficient to categorize the use of force as 'legal' even without the Security Councils endorsement. In such a case, the action would certainly be regarded as legitimate.51
48Hillel
Schenker, Alternatives Needed for Now Two States? in The Palestine-Israel Journal, (December: 2012). 49Rifat Kassis, A One Democratic State Might be The Solutions in International Seminar on the Palestinian Struggle and Globalization, (2003). 50Tony Judt, Israel: The Alternatives in New York Review of Books, (October: 2003). 51Thomas Weiss, The Illusion of United Nations Security Council Reform in Washington Quarterly, (2003).

V. About UN Membership
1. General Information about UN Founded in 1945, United Nations is an international organization created by 51 countries after the Second World War, committed to enhance cooperation and coordination between nations in order to maintain international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations and promoting social progress, better living standards and human rights. United Nations is empowered with its founding Charter, the UN Charter, to take necessary action on a wide range of issues by providing forums and conferences for its current 193 member states to exchange their views in their designated bodies and committees, such as General Assembly, the Security Council, UNESCO, WHO, and many other. United Nations was created with 4 main purposes: To keep peace throughout the world; To develop friendly relations among nations; To help nations work together to improve the lives of poor people, to conquer hunger, disease and illiteracy, and to encourage respect for each others rights and freedoms; To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations to achieve these goals.52 Since its first created in 1945, UN now is becoming more inclusive, trying to reach every actors effected by global problem, including people and grassroots organization. The Organizations participant is increasing each year, and its significance grew stronger as its proven to be efficient in handling almost all international issue. Its influence is getting larger due to the fact that the organization is now trying to reach the people, and other aspect of living, such as environment and technology. United Nations is closer to be the worlds strongest organization. 2. Membership Rules and Regulations a. Type of Membership Basically, there are only two types of membership in UN, which listed as follows: Member States
Member States are the officially recognized member of the United Nations, which can only be the status of nations or states. Other actors that are not states are not going to be privilege with this status. Under the UN Charter, every member states are given the right and obligations as a sovereign states to not only participate in the organization, but also to contribute to create peace in the world. Membership in the Organization, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, is open to all peace-loving States that accept the obligations contained in the United Nations Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able to carry out these obligations. States are
52Accessed
from http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/index.shtml on March 30, 2012.

admitted to membership in the United Nations by decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. Permanent Observers
Non-Member States of the United Nations, which are members of one or more specialized agencies, can apply for the status of Permanent Observer. The status of a Permanent Observer is based purely on practice, and there are no provisions for it in the United Nations Charter. The practice dates from 1946, when the Secretary-General accepted the designation of the Swiss Government as a Permanent Observer to the United Nations. Observers were subsequently put forward by certain States that later became United Nations Members, including Austria, Finland, Italy, and Japan. Switzerland became a UN Member on 10 September 2002. Permanent Observers have free access to most meetings and relevant documentation. Many regional and international organizations are also observers in the work and annual sessions of the General Assembly. Nonmember states and entities and intergovernmental organizations can be recognized as permanent observers. Currently, Palestine is still recognized as permanent observer, along with the Holy See, African Union, European Union, International Criminal Court, and Organization of the Islamic Cooperation. b. How to Apply and Decision Making Process The recognition of a new State or Government is an act that only other States and Governments may grant or withhold. It generally implies readiness to assume diplomatic relations. The United Nations is neither a State nor a Government, and therefore does not possess any authority to recognize either a State or a Government. As an organization of independent States, it may admit a new State to its membership or accept the credentials of the representatives of a new Government. Membership in the Organization, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, is open to all peace-loving States which accept the obligations contained in the [United Nations Charter] and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able to carry out these obligations. States are admitted to membership in the United Nations by decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. The procedure is briefly as follows: 1. The State submits an application to the Secretary-General and a letter formally stating that it accepts the obligations under the Charter. 2. The Security Council considers the application. Any recommendation for admission must receive the affirmative votes of 9 of the 15 members of the Council, provided that none of its five permanent members China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America have voted against the application. 3. If the Council recommends admission, the recommendation is presented to the General Assembly for consideration. A two-thirds majority vote is necessary in the Assembly for admission of a new State.

4. Membership becomes effective the date the resolution for admission is adopted. At each session, the General Assembly considers the credentials of all representatives of Member States participating in that session. During such consideration, which routinely takes place first in the nine-member Credentials Committee but can also arise at other times, the issue can be raised whether a particular representative has been accredited by the Government actually in power. This issue is ultimately decided by a majority vote in the Assembly. It should be noted that the normal change of Governments, as through a democratic election, does not raise any issues concerning the credentials of the representative of the State concerned.53 3. UN Position toward Palestinians Membership a. Current Status and Request Understanding the United Nations responses on Palestinian membership comes with a basic necessity of knowing the recent status of Palestine. It appears that the UN itself along with its organizational bodies have various views toward the Palestine status. The current relationship of Palestine and the United Nations, as defined through a series of General Assembly resolutions, is as an entity having received a standing invitation to participate as an observer in the sessions and the work of the General Assembly and maintain permanent offices at Headquarters.54 Since 1946, non-member states of the United Nations that were members of one or more specialized agencies have applied with the U.N. Secretary-General for the status of Permanent Observer. This practice originated with the application of Switzerland in 1946 for access as a Permanent Observer.55 It has been suggested that the General Assembly adopt a resolution on the status of Palestine in the United Nations that would change its observer status from entity to non-member state. In respond to this, the Security Council tends to maintain the status quoby not casting a full vote on Palestinian membership because United States certainly yielding its veto power which denies the fundamental progress of Palestinian bid. While the General Assembly and Security Council providing the ground condition of Palestinian membership as an observer and respond to the Palestinian bid in a tendency of maintaining the status quo, the United Nations organizational bodies have reformed their initial views to escalate the status of Palestine in a way of well functioning state. In April 2011, the IMF responded to the developments by stating that the Palestinian Authority has the institutions and economic policies required of a state.56 The FAO also react positively towards the escalation of Palestines status
Accessed from http://www.un.org/en/members/about.shtml on March 30, 2012. Nations, About Permanent Observer: Non Member States and Entities accessed from www.un.org/en/members/nonmembers.shtml at 23:40, April 8, 2012. 55 Jim Zanotti and Marjorie Browne, Palestinian Initiatives for 2011 at the United Nations in Congressional Research Service, pp. 4, (September 2011). 56Ibid, pp. 19.
53 54United

through their collaboration on food security in Gaza and the West Bank.57 In a legal term, the collaboration could only be occured to a state, which implies the significant presence of Palestine to FAO as the UNs organizational body.The significance of Palestine as a state even strengthened by the approvement of full membership by the UNESCO. Many of the organizational bodies, inspite of understanding the consequences in funding cut by the United States and its allies, has provided the escalation of Palestine membership through their point of interdependence. The organizational bodies are the practical fields of the United Nations, by their approvement of Palestinian significance, it has proved the necessity of Palestines role in broader international society. The neglection of a well functioning state bodies that already existed is nearly impossible because it operates the ground foundation of state-to-state relations through economics, science and technology development, environment and some other technical aspects. The step they decided has left us a consideration of the presence Palestines direct effects on global relations. The UNs organizational, differently from the UNs political bodies, has seen the direct effects are undeniable. The effects of Palestinian institutional bodies are clearly real and therefore the neglection of its presence is restraints towards the global relations. In the context of future projection, strengthening the direct effects on institutions would tend to lead the escalation of Palestines political status. The neglection of its political status could not be done any longer because the interdependence of state-tostate and global relations would require a ground of legal framework. As the implications, by assumption of the Palestinian institutional development and strengthened by effective diplomations, the respond of UN organizational bodies status escalation would also has broader coverage. It would make a linear progress towards the escalation of Palestinian political status by establishing the peer pressure based on international societys necessity of Palestinian roles. b. Dispute in UN The question of Palestine gives the United Nations (UN) one of the most complicated problem in modern history. The problem becomes so severe because both main sides who involved in this case, Palestinian and Israeli, are fighting not only for territorial ambition, but also motivated by deep religion and cultural hatred among each societies. Moreover, the condition becomes steadily worsened by the constant use of violence by both sides to implement their own will. Many negotiations and resolution were fruitless since the constant harassment by one side were intentionally used as a justification to break-down the on-going negotiation and continues their own action which they saw fit enough to solve their problem by their own way.
57John
Quigley, The Statehood of Palestine: International Law in the Middle East Conflict, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 169.

September 2011 can be considered as a huge leap towards the realization of their dream. At that month, Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, has submitted the application form to the UN Secretary General, Ban-Ki Moon, for Palestine to become one of UN full member state. Mahmoud Abbass appeal to United Nations for Palestinian membership raised unavoidable impact of dissonance over how states Source: act upon the bid and the vote http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39863&Cr=Palestin&C r1 that follows it. A debate of whether a membership is what really needed to settle the long-drawn conflict between Palestine and Israel remains to be the preoccupation of United Nations for an unknown period. Although the final decision whether to accept the Palestinian or not as a full UN member still not yet taken but as early as the application form was submitted there had been a serious opposition to this by Israel and the United States. They both have tried some measures to deter the Palestinian authority to submit their application and once it failed the UN as one out of five UN Security Council members which hold the veto right even said the possibility to use that right to reject what the Palestinian wants. The United States closest ally in the Middle East, Israel, meanwhile shares a same perspective with the United States government as their Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the final conclusion could only be achieved by a direct bilateral negotiation between two sides not by any UNs resolutions. As Abbas formally asked the United Nations to admit Palestine as a full member state in September, two streams of opposing arguments began to exist and the UN Security Council started closed-door negotiations over the bid.58 One side is those states that are likely to support and give votes for Palestine. Among 131 countries that have recognized Palestinian state59, the 22-member Arab League has given the bid its full backing. Moreover, among the 15 members of Security Council six have already thrown their weight behind the bid, seven have not revealed their decision, while Colombia says it will abstain.60 In order to pass, the bid needs supports of nine members of the council.61
Al Jazeera, UN Debates Palestine Statehood Bid, accessed from http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/09/201192615542764330.html, on February 21, 2012, 09.51 PM. 59 Ibid.. 60 Ibid. 61 Ibid.
58

The other is those states which are supposed to use their votes to block the bid. To our expectation, the United States and, of course, Israel are a few to mention. The United States has said that it will block the move.62 US President Barack Obama said that the UN bid is an unrealistic shortcut that will not produce real and lasting peace on the ground between the two sides.63 It indeed provides a critical condition for the bid to pass since the United States, as a permanent member of UN Security Council, has the right to veto the bid. The debate (and the predicted veto) in the council is not expected to last (and happen) in a short period, therefore a conclusion to the matter is yet to come. Nevertheless, Abbas has said earlier that he enthusiastically expected the council to finish debating for the bid in weeks, not months.64 The United States and Israel, as opposing parties to the bid, said that direct peace talks are the correct way for Palestinians to pursue peace.65 To Israel, it is also alleged that a successful bid would bring Palestine to accession of International Criminal Court in an attempt to pursuit war crimes charges at the Hague and, therefore, lead to a possible rising tensions in the West Bank.66 However, to Abbas, this action was taken because of the impasse in peace talks.67 In case the bid eventually fails to pass as some already expected, another alternative for Palestinians (besides going back to the peace talks) is to submit a resolution to the General Assembly, although the option will not result in full membership.68 Nevertheless, the possibility of the resolution to pass would be much bigger because there is no veto and it only needs a simple majority to pass. A resolution to the General Assembly could therefore contain an appeal for the status of non-member observer state, a promotion from the current Palestines status as observer. Another entity wielding the status of non-member observer state is Vatican. Another actor whose stance is primary to the ongoing debate is the Middle East Quartet, consisting of United Nations, European Union, United States, and Russia. The Quartet has been known to serve as an intermediary body to the conflict. The Quartet stated that it wanted to see comprehensive proposals and renewed peace negotiations. The proposals are expected within three months on territory and security, and substantial progress within six months. However, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad AlMalki has rejected the proposals and insisted that they are not sufficient since the proposals do not call for a settlement freeze and Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines.69 Therefore the prospect of becoming a UN full member seems not so clear for Palestine. The Palestine government optimistically remarked that they could secure the nine UNSC states yes-vote for their membership and they also confidently stated that they could secure the two-third support from 193 members of the UN general assembly
Haaretz, Abbas: UN Debate on Palestinian Statehood Bid Will Take Weeks, Not Months, accessed from http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/abbas-un-debate-on-palestinian-statehood-bid-willtake-weeks-not-months-1.386504, on February 21, 2012, 09.51 PM. 63 Al Jazeera, loc. cit. 64 Haaretz, loc. cit. 65 Ibid. 66 BBC, Q&A: Palestinian Bid for Full Membership at the UN, accessed from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13701636, on February 21, 2012, 10.07 PM. 67 Ibid. 68 Ibid. 69 Haaretz, loc. cit.
62

once they passed the initial voting process by the UNSC. But as they realized the potential threat by the United States government, they have also made-up a back-up plan. With the Vatican as their example, the Palestine planned to submit their application as a Non-Member Observer State instead of their current status as an Observer entity. Such an improvement in status would mean so much for the Palestinian struggle in obtaining international recognition as a sovereign Palestine country. Despite some of the advantage ones would get by joining the international community, the Palestine would eventually make previously held Oslo conference and some other bilateral negotiations seems to be unworthy anymore because they have tried to bring the creation of the solution help by other parties in the world. And that is actually one of the points stated by Israelis Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, when he heard about the Palestinian plan about joining the United Nations even before any soluble agreement could be made between Israel and Palestine, and that is eventually will lowered Palestine credibility in making another agreement with Israel.
VI.
Current Condition
On March 2012, jets and explosions were starting to rumble again in Gaza, indicating an endless conflict between Israel and Palestine. Israel had forces and settlers in Gaza from 1967 until 2005, but has since maintained control over most of the strip's borders, its airspace and coastline, and has blockaded the territory. Israel did, however, pulled out from Gaza in 2005. But the historical hatred that grew from the ancient time between the two its not something that can be change in a night. The separation of territory between West Bank and Gaza as part of Israel policy in 2005 has made the political division between Hamas and Fatah endure longer, even until today. On February 2012, new deal in Qatar appointed Mahmoud Abbas to head unity government ahead of elections for the unity of two separated territory. Abbass popularity to bring unity for Palestinian increased as he submitted the request for full membership status to UN. On April 2012, the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor has rejected Palestinian Authority request to recognize the courts jurisdiction and thus blocked the effort to have the war crimes tribunal based at The Hague to investigate the 2008-2009 Gaza war. The prosecutor stated that it was up to relevant bodies in the UN or ICC member countries to determine whether Palestine qualified as a state. The recognition of Palestine as a state is the only way for it to be included in Rome Statute and become the member of ICC. The Office of the Prosecutor announced it could not act on the Palestinian declaration in 2009, which unilaterally recognizing its jurisdiction, because Article 12 of the Rome Statute established that only a "state" could confer jurisdiction on the court and deposit an instrument of accession with the UN secretary general. Although Palestine has been recognised as a state in bilateral relations by more than 130 governments and certain international organisations, including UN bodies, the

current status granted by the General Assembly to the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) is that of "observer", and not "non-member state". Israel has been constantly opposed the effort made by Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority president, to get full recognition by the United Nations Security Council, which begun in September 2011. In November 2011, Israel carried out a threat to suspend the transfer of about $100 million in tax payments to the Palestinian Authority, as a response to the Palestinians membership efforts at the United Nations and the pursuit of power-sharing with Hamas. On November 30 however, Israel finally agreed to transfer the money in response to strong pressure from American and international world. On early January 2012, a renewed effort to continue the peace talks begun, and ended shortly on late January, with little progress reported. Even though Mr. Netanyahus government has accepted the international proposal to return to peace negotiations, the evidence show that the process of peace negotiations is still a long way to go. Progress made by the Palestine as it was recognized as the 195th official full member of Unesco on October 2011, with 107 to 14 vote, and 52 abstentions. This step, however good for the Palestinian, has cost the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization one-quarter of its yearly budget the 22 percent contributed by the United States (about $70 million) plus another 3 percent contributed by Israel. Some countries considered this as a step back from the progress of peace talks, because they believes that the peace process must be initiated from both parties and not to be intervened by Unesco. Until today, Palestinian still hold its destiny on the air for there is no certain decision yet made by the UN body to deal with this issue.
VII. Timeline of Significant Event

November 29, 1947 : U.N. (United Nations) voted for the creation of Israel May 14, 1948 May 15, 1948 April 3, 1949 October 29, 1956 December 4, 1956 : Israel independence officially declared : Beginning of Arabs-Israeli war of 1948 : Armistice was signed, bringing war of 1948 to an end : Beginning of the Suez Campaign by Israel, UK, and France : U.N. Emergency Force (UNEF) arrived to supervise the truce
December 23, 1956 : UK and France completed the withdrawal of their forces March 8, 1957 June 5-10, 1967 : Israel completed their withdrawal : The Arabs-Israeli war of 1967, better known as the six days war Resulting in U.N. Security Council resolution 242

1967 territory 28 August 1967 peace September 1970 Jordan October 6, 1973 October 24, 1973 : Black September, breaking-up relations between Palestine and : Beginning of the Yom Kippur war between Egyptian-Syrian coalition and Israel : Armistice signed, resulting in U.N. Resolution 338 : Israel began the construction of their settlement in their new : Khartoum Summit until September 4, 1967 Resulting in three notes; no recognition, no negotiation, and no
November 19, 1977 : Anwar Sadat became the first Arabs leader to visit Israel September 17, 1978 : The Camp David Accords signed by Egypt and Israel comprising two main points; the autonomous rule by Palestinian in the West Bank and Gaza strip also the creation of peace agreement within three months between Egypt and Israel March 26, 1979 : Peace treaty signed between Egypt and Israel
June-September 1982: 1982 Lebanon War, resulting in deportation for Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) members from Lebanon May 14, 1989 : Israels peace initiative, including the creation of the Palestine interim self-rule for five years period before the creation of the final agreement : Madrid Peace Conference, a three days conference, began between Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon; resulting with no agreement
October 30, 1991
September 13, 1993 : Oslo Accord signed by Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat, employed land for peace strategy in the process September 14, 1993 : Israel-Jordan Common Agenda was signed, outlined the impending peace between Israel and Jordan May 4, 1994 : Gaza-Jericho Agreement, resulting in the creation of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and outlined the initial Israel Defence Forces (IDF) withdrawal from the Gaza strip and the West Bank : The Washington Declaration signed by King Hussein of Jordan and Yitzhak Rabin. Officially ended the two countries hostility
July 25, 1994

October 26, 1994 : Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty, formally normalized the two countries relations, culminating in the creation of diplomatic relation between them
September 28, 1995 : Oslo II signed, supersede the previous Gaza- Jericho Agreement; deals with many aspects including transition to the Palestinian Autonomy January 17, 1997 : Hebron Agreement signed, orchestrating the IDF withdrawal from Hebron, the last Palestinian city under Israelis control located in the West Bank : Wye River Memorandum, an agreement made between Benjamin Netanyahu and Yasser Arafat about how to implement Oslo II of 1995
October 23, 1998
September 4, 1999 : Sharm el-Sheikh memorandum, addressing the delay for the implementation of the Oslo Accords created by the Palestinian failure to fulfill security obligation in their controlled territory. Israel and Palestine also set a deadline for the complete the peace talks before September 13, 2000 July 11-25, 2000 : Camp David Summit between Ehud Barak, Bill, Clinton, and Yasser Arafat; although failed to achieve any significant outcome, the meetings Tri-Lateral Statement delineating the principles of future talks
January 22-27, 2001 : Taba Conference held as follow-up to the Camp David Summit; although still failed to reach any significant agreement, the two countries made a Joint-Statement which gave both of them hope for a solution in the near-future March 28, 2002 : The Arab Peace Initiative stated in the Beirut Summit. Israel remarked the bid as encouraging, but a direct negotiation must be held with Palestinian also : Bushs Vision for the Middle-East outlined the possibility of creating an independent Palestinian state in the near-future : Roadmap for Peace made resulting in the appointment of Palestinian Authority (P.A.) Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas; this roadmap was supervised by International Quartet (USA, European Union, Russia, and U.N.) : Peace Summit at Aqaba, Sharon and Abbas met in Jordan to reaffirm their commitment to the roadmap
June 24, 2002 April 30, 2003
June 4, 2003

December 18, 2003 : Fourth Herzliya Conference; Israeli Prime Minister Sharon proposed a plan for Israel unilateral disengagement from Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria in exchange for peace February 8, 2005 : Sharm el-Sheikh Summit I; Sharon, Abbas, President Mubarak of Egypt, and King Abdullah of Jordan met to announce the implementation of Israelis disengagement
August 15-23, 2005 : Israel pulled-out all of its citizen and IDF (Israel Defense Forces) members from Gaza and West Bank unilaterally July-August 2006 April 1, 2007 June 25, 2007 : Second Lebanon War; launched by Israel to put Hezbollahs harassment to an end : Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert welcomed the Arab Initiave of 2002 and worked together with Arab states to revise the plan : Sharm el-Sheikh Summit II; Olmert, Abbas, Mubarak, and King Abdullah II discussed the containment of Hamas in Gaza Strip and to strengthen Abbass Fatah Party in the West Bank
November 27, 2007 : Annapolis Peace Conference; President Bush announced an agreement made by Israel and Palestine to work toward a peace pact by the end of 2008 June 19, 2008 August 26, 2009 : Israel-Gaza (which controlled by Hamas) truce for six months period took effect : Salam Fayyad, P.A. Prime Minister, issued plans to create a defacto independent Palestinian state within two years; Israel stated that they would prevent unilateral declaration for Palestinian state : Palestinian rivals Hamas and Fatah sign reconciliation pact, the pact provides for the creation of a joint caretaker Palestinian Government before the national election held
May 4, 2011
September 20, 2011 : P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas sought for full U.N. membership October 31, 2011 : Palestine became 195th full member of the UNESCO; USA and Israel pulled it annual $70 million contribution
November 11, 2011 : Palestinian statehood bid stalled after U.N. Security Council fails to vote; President Abbas next move remained unclear, but P.A. could go straight to the General Assembly where they could get an Observer Status, matching that possess by the Vatican January 25, 2012 : Israeli-Palestinian exploratory talks ended without progress in Jordan. Israels settlements building in the occupied land remains as a major problem

VIII. Bloc Positions
United States The United States policies has been marked by the envision of a Palestinian state establishment through a negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, counter Palestinian terrorist groups, and establish norms of democracy within the Palestinian Authorities. In spite of its role on accommodating peaceful dialogues between the Israel and Palestine through some treaties and agreements such as Oslo Accord 1993, Hebron Protocol 1997 and Wye River Memorandum 1998, United States is holding a definite support to Israel based on their perception of fundamental establishment of the Jewish State.70 The support is constructed based on military assistance along with the financial endorsement. Insisting its cooperation, United States allowing funding which enables Israel to purchase advance defence equipment and military industry development through the purchase of F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and the development of Iron Dome short-range missile system.71 They are also covering the Israels economics by importing $21 billion of Israeli goods and services which makes up to 10% of Israels GDP. United States do their policies insistently to any of their adverse sides endorsing the recognition for Palestine. UNESCO admission on Palestine as a state in the late of October 2011, was responded swiftly through the fundings cut of the agency. 72 It would menace to oppose any actions at the UN Security Council including, if necessary, vetoing as their steps of maintaining the initial envisions of bilateral solutions. Canada has been actively supporting USA in pressuring other governments to oppose the Palestinian bid for full membership in UN. Latin American, however, is expressing its support along with Russia and China. Arab League The Arab League has certainly held its support to the Palestinian membership in the UN and being a very helpful alliance in providing the Palestines financial and political back up. In 2001,the Arab League called on Arab governments to sever political contacts with Israel until the Jewish state ended military action against Palestinians.73They then arrange to bolster the political back up through some diplomatic actions such as their request for emergency meeting in UN Security Council
70Ken
Booth and Tim Dunne, The United States and Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in Worlds in Collisions: Terror and the Future of World Order, (Palgrave, 2002), pp. 4 71 Alison Weir, US Ambassador: Support for Israel Drives All US Policies accessed from http://www.ifamericaknew.org/us_ints/po-israel.html at 21:05, February 28, 2012.
72Colum
Lynch, UNESCO votes to admit Palestine; US cuts off funding accessed formhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/unesco-votes-to-admit-palestine-overus-objections/2011/10/31/gIQAMleYZM_story.html at 21:53, February 27th 2012.
73Timelines
on Arab League accessed from http://timelinesdb.com/listevents.php?subjid=424&title=Arab%20League at 23:47, February 29, 2012.

in 2008 for a binding and enforceable resolution condemning Israel and halting its military attacks on Gaza. Theyalso had been the very first side, calling on its member states to offer more financial aid to the Palestinians in response to a report of the United States $200 million assistance withdrawal.74Despite their favor to the Palestine, they managed to conduct a condusive atmosphere of peaceful dialogues between the Israel and Palestine through some legal frameworks. The Arab League has endorsed Beirut Declaration in March 2002, offering recognition of Israel in exchange for a Palestinian state and the coming to power in the West Bank of a moderate and effective government.75 Russian Federation Russia was among the very first states to recognize Palestine as a state since the proclamation of Palestine in 1989. The Soviet Union at the time recognized the statehood of Palestine by providing a full fledged instrument of diplomacy through the existence of the Palestines embassy in Moscow. 76 Thus, from the basic frameworks, Russia has no difficulties or objections for backing the Palestinian statehood. Russias goodwill of advocating the Palestine was then signed in the shape of Memorandum of Consultation between the Foreign Ministries of Russia and Palestine in December 2009.77 The European Union The European Union is holding stance to build up a two-state-solution for Palestine and Israel. The EU is managed to have the agenda of economics and political cooperation on Palestine through the legal basis of Euro-Mediterranean Interim Association Agreement on Trade and Cooperation.78In doing so, the EU has prioritized judicial and electoral reform, the holding of open, fair and free elections, the transparency of public finances and the restructuring of the civil service and the security sector.Through the Eurpoean Comission, the European Union has been a significant donor to the Palestinians financial assistance. In order to mitigate the impact of the boycott on the Palestinian people in 2006, the EU ever adopted the Temporary
74Arab
League Calls for More Palestinian Aid accessed from http://www.virtualjerusalem.com/news.php?Itemid=4915 at 19:08, February 29, 2012. 75Stephen Walt, Swin Against the Tide: Recognize Palestine at the UN accessed from http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/09/14/swim_against_the_tide_recognize_palestine_at_the_un at 21:10, February 27, 2012. 76Kenneth Rapoza, Russia Voting for Palestinian State at the UN Next Week accessed from http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/09/23/russia-voting-for-palestinian-state-at-un-nextweek/ at 1:49, March 1, 2012. 77The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, Transcript of Remarks and Response to Media Questions by Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov at Joint Press Conference Following Talks with Palestinian National Authority Minister of Foreign Affairs RiadMalki, Moscow, December 9, 2009 accessed fromhttp://www.mid.ru/brp_4.nsf/0/BC9EC34FA2702D65C325768800407AE3at 2:03, March 1, 2012. 78European Comission Set to Help Palestinian Economy with Full Opening of EU Market accessed from http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=580 at 2:51, March 1, 2012.

International Mechanism to provide basic services and emergency aid. In recent years, the European Union sought to have a larger role in peace process through developing a set of instruments and policies such as the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership, EU Special Envoy and the EUs participation in the Quartet.79 African Countries
South Africa, along with Russia, China, Lebanon, India, and Brazil, has committed to support the Palestinian bid for full membership in UN. Nigeria and Gabon, though hedging publicly, were also expressing its support for Palestinian full membership status in the UN. Ethiopia is also supporting the notion by having clear policy to support Palestinian full membership in UN, regardless its close relations with Israel. With this, it is almost clear that majority, if not all, African countries will support the membership status for Palestinian in UN. Asia-Pacific Countries Considered as one of the most influential country in the region, China has been one of the leading countries to support the Palestinian membership in UN. Many countries in Asia and Pacific support the bid, and committed to support each other to help Palestinians wishes granted. Middle Eastern and Central Asian countries switched their vote in order to ease the Palestinian effort to be recognized as official member in the UN. India is also showing its support to the Palestinian bid for full membership in UN.
IX.
Proposed Solutions
1. Renew Effort for More Peace Talks between Israel and Palestine, and Enhanced the Peace Building Process Within the Palestine Territory Considering the poor humanity condition in the Palestine territory, this is the least that the international society can do to ease the problem faced by the people within the territory. Renewed commitment must be made by the two parties in order to secure the territory from more conflict. The absent of conflict is the top priority to stabilize the ongoing dispute between two parties, and it is a crucial step to begin a peace building process in the territory. The inhabitants of the territory, who have been suffered the most from the conflicts, must become top prioritize. 2. Recognize Palestine as Full Sovereign State One way to solve the dispute between Israel and Palestine is by recognizing Palestine as full sovereign state, who can control its own territory and can exercise its jurisdiction in its recognized territory. It is crucial for the two parties involved in the conflict to have equal ground, so that both can exercise its rights equally and can exercise its influence in
79European
Union Center of North Carolina, Europes Role on the Palestinian-Israeli Conflicts, (Chapel Hill: The European Union Center of Excellence University of North Carolina, 2008), pp.3-4.

order to solve the problem fairly. It is important for Palestine to be recognized as full sovereign country so that it can have better bargaining position in solving the problem. Palestinian should not be bullied just because it has lower status than its counterpart. 3. Granted Palestines Request for Full Membership Status in United Nations Although still controversial, it is not impossible to recognize Palestine as one of the member state of the United Nations. Seeing the prospect of having equal ground and better influence power to persuade other countries to fulfill its interest in multilateral forum, the recognition of Palestine as a member state will help them pursue their own destiny by affecting every decision making process in UN. It will also be beneficial for Palestine because by regarded as full member, it is automatically recognized as a state, and thus having full access to other international institutions that can support the process of problem solving between Israel and Palestine. 4. Exercise All Necessary Measure to Protect the People in the Territory and UN to Actively Intervene in the Peace Talks As one of the most influential institutions, United Nations must exercise its power to protect the people in the disputed territory, to show its commitment to fulfill its goal. Peacekeeping troops must be placed to secure the people, if necessary. Sanctions and new mechanism must be imposed under the authority of UN to deal with the implementation of the result of peace talks between two parties. UN must be the broker and the main supporter of the peace talk process, in order to secure the attention of more countries to deal with this problem. UN must give assistance to Palestine in the state building process, if later Palestine is recognized as full sovereign country.
X.
Qarmas
1. Should GA grant the full-membership status to the Palestinians or maintain the current status instead? Why cant GA grant the fullmembership status if changes are not eligible options? To what extent Palestinians status can be changed? Why is it limited? Or if changes are possible, why do Palestinians deserve the full-membership status? How Palestinians correspond to the criteria of a full member? 2. What are the legal implications of the status of Palestinians? Should Palestine regarded as a full sovereign state too? What mechanism will be used to establish a new government in Palestine? What are Palestinians rights and obligations regarding its status to access any international institutions and how should UN respond to that? 3. How should UN respond to Palestinians and Israeli conflict? What are possible implications of the membership status of Palestinians to the

conflict and how should UN respond to that? Will it help to ease the conflict if Palestinians granted with a full-membership status of UN and why? 4. How should UN respond to terrorists status in Palestine? Should it be recognized as a part of Palestinians? What are its rights and obligations regarding Palestinians membership status in UN?

Suggestions for Further Research
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14630174 http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/specialsession/9/docs/unffmgc_rep ort.pdf http://www.unsco.org/Documents/Special/UNs%20Report%20to%20the%20AHLC% 2013_April_2011.pdf Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab Israeli Conflict: A History With Documents, (Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2004). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13701636
Bibliography
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13701636 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15527534 http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/history/index.shtml. http://www.un.org/en/ga/about/background.shtml. http://www.un.org/en/ga/about/ropga/adms.shtml. "Charter of the United Nations, Chapter II: Membership". United Nations. Accessed from http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter2.shtml in February 2nd 2012. "About UN Membership". United Nations. Accessed from http://www.un.org/en/members/about.shtml in February 2nd 2012. http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/pdf/pdf2009/Geography.pdf Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab Israeli Conflict: A History With Documents,(Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2004). United Nations, UN Report on Palestine Social, Economy and Political, (USA: UN, 2005). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14630174. UNRWA, Palestine Refugees, accessed from http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=86, on May 3rd, 2012, 10.12 PM.

Palestinian Islamic Jihad, accessed from http://www.cfr.org/publication/15984/palestinian_islamic_jihad.html#p1, on May 3rd, 2012, 10.09 PM. Press Release SG/SM/8533 PAL/1928 on November 29th, 2002. UNCHR Resolution E/CN.4/2002/L.16, accessed from http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/%28Symbol%29/E.CN.4.2002.L.16.En?Opend ocument, on May 3rd, 2012, 10.15 PM. Hattis Rolef, Susan, and Avraham Sela, "Zionism, The Continuum Political Encyclopedia of the Middle East (New York: Continuum, 2002). M. Berry and G. Philo, Israel and Palestine: Conflicting Histories (London: Pluto Press, 2006), p. 126. Avraham Sela, "al-Husseini, Hajj (Muhammad) Amin, "The Continuum Political Encyclopedia of the Middle East (New York: Continuum, 2002). Christopher Browning and Jrgen Matthus, The Origins of the Final Solution: The Evolution of Nazi Jewish Policy, September 1939-March 1942 (University of Nebraska Press, 2004). Avraham Sela, "Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), The Continuum Political Encyclopedia of the Middle East (New York: Continuum, 2002). BBC News, Palestinian Authority Funds Go to Militants, accessed from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3243071.stm, on February 13, 2012, 12.50 PM. Camp David Proposals for Final Palestine-Israel Peace Settlement, accessed from http://www.mideastweb.org/campdavid2.htm, on February 13, 2012, 12.52 PM. Public Broadcasting Service, Online NewsHour: Palestinian Authority Strapped for Cash, accessed from http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june06/hamas_2-28.html, on February 13, 2012, 13.05 PM. HuseinIbish and SalibaSarsar, The Long Overdue Palestinian State in New York Times, May 16th, 2011. The Henry Jackson Society, No Path to Peace: Potential Consequences of Palestinian Unilateral Actions at the United Nations General Assembly, Paper No.5, (September, 2011). Quaker United Nations Office, Palestinian Statehood at the United Nations: A Resource, pp. 2, August 18th, 2011. Leslie Susser, Countdown to a State, Jerussalem Report, May 23, 2011. Jim Zanotti and Marjorie Browne, Palestinian Initiatives for 2011 at the United Nations in Congressional Research Service, pp. 19, (September 2011).

BBC, Palestinian Unity Undermined by Geographic Divide, accessed from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17140711, on March 30, 2012, 11.23 PM. BBC, Q&A: Palestinian Bid for Full Membership at the UN, accessed from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13701636, on March 30, 2012, 11.23 PM. Hillel Schenker, Alternatives Needed for Now Two States? in The Palestine-Israel Journal, (December: 2012). Rifat Kassis, A One Democratic State Might be The Solutions in International Seminar on the Palestinian Struggle and Globalization, (2003). Tony Judt, Israel: The Alternatives in New York Review of Books, (October: 2003). Thomas Weiss, The Illusion of United Nations Security Council Reform in Washington Quarterly, (2003). http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/index.shtml . United Nations, About Permanent Observer: Non Member States and Entities accessed from www.un.org/en/members/nonmembers.shtml at 23:40, April 8, 2012. Jim Zanotti and Marjorie Browne, Palestinian Initiatives for 2011 at the United Nations in Congressional Research Service, (September 2011). John Quigley, The Statehood of Palestine: International Law in the Middle East Conflict, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010). Al Jazeera, UN Debates Palestine Statehood Bid, accessed from http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/09/201192615542764330.html, on February 21, 2012, 09.51 PM. Haaretz, Abbas: UN Debate on Palestinian Statehood Bid Will Take Weeks, Not Months, accessed from http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/abbas-un-debate-on-palestinianstatehood-bid-will-take-weeks-not-months-1.386504, on February 21, 2012, 09.51 PM. Ken Booth and Tim Dunne, The United States and Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in Worlds in Collisions: Terror and the Future of World Order, (Palgrave, 2002). Alison Weir, US Ambassador: Support for Israel Drives All US Policies accessed from http://www.ifamericaknew.org/us_ints/po-israel.html at 21:05, February 28, 2012. Colum Lynch, UNESCO votes to admit Palestine; US cuts off funding accessed formhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/unesco-votes-to-admitpalestine-over-us-objections/2011/10/31/gIQAMleYZM_story.html at 21:53, February 27th 2012.

Timelines on Arab League accessed from http://timelinesdb.com/listevents.php?subjid=424&title=Arab%20League at 23:47, February 29, 2012. Arab League Calls for More Palestinian Aid accessed from http://www.virtualjerusalem.com/news.php?Itemid=4915 at 19:08, February 29, 2012. Stephen Walt, Swin Against the Tide: Recognize Palestine at the UN accessed from http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/09/14/swim_against_the_tide_recognize_palestine_ at_the_un at 21:10, February 27, 2012. Kenneth Rapoza, Russia Voting for Palestinian State at the UN Next Week accessed from http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/09/23/russia-voting-for-palestinian-state-atun-next-week/ at 1:49, March 1, 2012. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, Transcript of Remarks and Response to Media Questions by Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov at Joint Press Conference Following Talks with Palestinian National Authority Minister of Foreign Affairs RiadMalki, Moscow, December 9, 2009 accessed fromhttp://www.mid.ru/brp_4.nsf/0/BC9EC34FA2702D65C325768800407AE3at 2:03, March 1, 2012. European Comission Set to Help Palestinian Economy with Full Opening of EU Market accessed from http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=580 at 2:51, March 1, 2012. European Union Center of North Carolina, Europes Role on the Palestinian-Israeli Conflicts, (Chapel Hill: The European Union Center of Excellence University of North Carolina, 2008).

Rules of Procedure
JAKARTA MODEL UNITED NATIONS 2012

Creating Sustainable Development through Young Generations Action
July, 9th 13th 2012

www.jakartamun.org | jakartamun@gmail.com | @JakartaMUN
Organized by:
Indonesian Student Association For International Studies (ISAFIS) www.isafis.org | isafis_sec@yahoo.com | @ISAFIS_official

Rules of Procedure
THE SUBSTANTIVE COMMITTEE STAFF
The staffs of Jakarta Model United Nations have distinct roles and responsibilities at conference. Delegates may find that the substantive staff at Jakarta Model UN takes on a more active role than what they have been accustomed to at other Model United Nations conferences. The primary job of the staff is to work with the delegates in achieving the goals of the committee, which is to produce a resolution in particular, and be productive as a conference as a whole. The staff of each committee includes a Director, a Moderator, and Assistant Directors. In the Jakarta Model UN, the Director is the substantive expert, supported by Assistant Directors, and the Moderator is the procedural expert; together, they share the duties of running the committee, rather than being coordinated by only one committee chair or dais.
Directors The committee Director is the substantive expert of the committee. At Jakarta Model UN, the Directors choose their committees topic areas respectively to the greatest challenge that the committee is facing at the moment, they prepare the study guides, and do extensive amounts of other pre-conference substantive preparation. The Director oversees submission of all documents to be discussed. All draft resolutions and amendments in committee must be approved and signed by the Director to be presented to the committee as a whole. Before accepting working papers and draft resolutions, the Director is allowed to suggest changes if he or she feels that the Questions a Resolution Must Answer (QARMAs) are not sufficiently addressed or if it is similar in content to other submissions. Please note that the Director may not approve of all written submissions and may suggest appropriate changes before accepting any draft documents. Another important role of the Director is to oversee debate. As the substantive leader of the committee, the Director also has the discretion to rule on all points and motions brought before the committee. The Director may periodically comment on the direction of debate and suggest alternative courses of action. Committees sometimes overlook important issues within a topic area, and Directors are encouraged to bring these to the attention of the delegates. As for committees with crises, the direction of crises is determined entirely by the course of debate. Statements made by Directors are not meant to steer debate along a predetermined crisis plan, although Directors are encouraged to guide delegates when debate appears to have strayed from the topic at hand. Any questions about substantive issues should be raised with the Director.
Moderators The Moderator performs the procedural role for which the traditional chair at other MUN conferences would be responsible. While the Director is the substantive expert, the Moderator is the procedural expert who runs the committee when it is in formal session. The Moderator has a full understanding of the rules of procedure, and it is his or her responsibility to facilitate the committees work by ensuring that the sessions run smoothly. However, the Director retains the ultimate power to rule any motions dilatory. In some smaller committees, the moderator may also field some of the substantive issues that Directors typically handle. Under certain extreme situations, the Moderator is allowed to suspend certain rules of procedure to streamline debate. Any questions about procedural issues should be raised with the Moderator.

Assistant Directors Before the conference, the Assistant Directors prepare the updates to the committee study guide. During the simulation, their job is to aid the Director by answering delegates questions, monitoring blocs during caucus, and by providing sounding boards for delegate ideas, solutions, and concerns. If the committee is producing a large amount of paperwork at some point in the course of debate, Directors will rely on the Assistant Directors to work directly with delegates on preparing and suggesting revisions to draft resolutions. The Assistant Directors also help keep track of the Speakers List, votes, and other procedural matters. Delegates should feel free to approach the Assistant Directors at any time with questions about the substance or procedure of the committee.
Pages At Jakarta Model UN, there will be a group of committee staffs who are appointed by the board of directors to assist the delegates in delivering or passing the notes to the dais or to the fellow delegates. Pages will not be involved in any substantive debates, either in moderated caucus or in unmoderated caucus.
GENERAL RULES
RULE #1 - SCOPE: These rules for the General Assembly, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, European Union, and Security Council simulations are self-sufficient, except for modifications provided by the Secretariat, which will be considered adopted in advance of session. No other rules of procedure are applicable. If the Director provides alternate rules based on the nature of the committee, those rules will always take precedence over these in the event of a conflict.
RULE #2 - LANGUAGE: English will be the official and working language of the conference. The Directors decision on this matter will not be subject to appeal.
RULE #3 - DELEGATIONS: Each member will be represented by one delegate in General Assembly, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, European Union, and Security Council, and recognized for one delegate one vote on each committee. Observer states are considered non-members (see Rule 5 and 6 below).

RULE #4 - CREDENTIALS: The credentials of all delegations have been accepted upon registration. A credential is defined as the permission granted to a delegate or delegates to represent a particular country in a particular committee. Actions relating to the modification of rights, privileges, or credentials of any member may not be initiated without the consent of the Secretary-General. Any representative to whose admission a member objects will provisionally be seated with the same rights as other representatives, pending a decision from the committee staff.
RULE #5 PARTICIPATION OF MEMBERS: Delegates are obliged to attend and to participate in all consecutive conferences and social events held by the committee staff. Delegates who are not showing respect to the rule of attendance will not be entitled for acknowledgement and will not be eligible for the award given.
RULE #6 - PARTICIPATION OF NON-MEMBERS: Representatives of Observers will have the same rights as those of full members to witness the whole process of the simulation. Representatives of Observers will not uphold the same right to participate, to vote, or to take part in working papers and resolution making process.
RULE #7 - STATEMENTS BY THE SECRETARIAT: The Secretary-General or a member of the Secretariat or Executive staff may at any time make either written or oral statements to the committee.
RULE #8 - POWERS OF THE COMMITTEE STAFF: The committee Moderator will declare the opening and closing of each meeting. The Moderator will accord the right to speak, announce decisions, rule on procedural points, and ensure and enforce the observance of these rules. The Moderator may temporarily transfer his or her duties to another member of the committee staff. Committee staff members may also advise delegates on the possible course of debate. The Director may interrupt committee proceedings to allow for a presentation, guest speaker, or expert witness speaker. Ruling on all motions is subject to the discretion of the committee staff. In the exercise of these functions, the committee staff will be at all times subject to these rules and responsible to the Secretary-General.
RULE #9 - APPEAL: Any decision of the Moderator or Director, with the exception of those matters that are explicitly stated to be unappealable, may be appealed by a delegate.

Appeals only refer to procedural motions, not substantive decisions. A motion to appeal must be made immediately after the decision of the committee staff is made. The delegate will be recognized for thirty seconds to explain his motion and there will be no further debate on this matter. The Moderator or Director may speak briefly in defense of the ruling. The appeal will then be put to a vote, and the decision of the dais will stand unless overruled by two-thirds of the total membership. A No vote on the appeal indicates support of the dais ruling; a Yes vote indicates opposition to that ruling. The following rules may never be appealed by a delegate: a. Directors approval of a draft resolution. b. Moderators decision to rule a moderated or unmoderated caucus out of order (Rule 14 and 15). c. Moderators decision to refuse a right of reply (Rule 24). d. Moderators decision to rule a motion for suspension or adjournment out of order (Rule 16). e. Moderators decision to refuse Clarificatory Points on a draft resolution. f. Moderators decision to rule a motion for a roll call vote out of order. g. Moderators decision to rule a motion for a caucus dilatory or to end a moderated caucus early.
RULE #10 - QUORUM: The Director may declare a Committee open and permit debate to proceed when at least one-quarter of the members of the Committee are present. A member of the Committee is a representative who is officially registered with the United Nations in that committee or with the given body. The presence of a majority of the members will be required for a vote on any resolution. A quorum will be assumed to be present unless specifically challenged and shown to be absent. A roll call is never required to determine the presence of a quorum.
RULE #11 - COURTESY: Delegates will show courtesy and respect to the committee staff and to other delegates. No talking and utilizing electronic devices such as portable computer or mobile phone is allowed in the committee room. The Moderator will immediately call to order any delegate who fails to comply with this rule.

RULES GOVERNING THE DEBATE
RULE #12 - AGENDA: The first order of business for the Committee will be the consideration of the Agenda: A motion should be made once the committee has come to order to put a topic area first on the agenda. The only topic areas that may be proposed for the agenda are those listed in the preparation materials. The Director may modify these topic areas at his or her discretion. If a committee only has one topic, the agenda is automatically set to this topic. A for-against Speakers List with no comments will be established to debate the motion; speakers for will speak in support of the topic area suggested, speakers against will speak in favor of the other topic area. A motion to close debate on setting the agenda will be in order after the committee has heard at least two speakers for the motion and at least two against the motion. In accordance with the normal procedure described in Rule 16, the Moderator will recognize two speakers against the motion to close debate, and a vote of twothirds is required for closure of debate on the agenda. If the Speakers List on setting the agenda is exhausted, debate will automatically be closed even if a motion to close debate would not normally be in order. When debate is closed, the committee will move to an immediate vote on the motion. A simple majority is required for passage. If the motion fails, the other topic area will automatically be placed first on the agenda. After debate is closed and voting procedures on the first topic area are concluded, debate will automatically begin on the second topic area; no motion is necessary.
RULE #13 - DEBATE: After the Agenda has been determined, one continuously open Speakers List will be established for the purpose of general debate. This Speakers List will be followed for all debate on the Topic Area, except when interrupted by procedural motions or the introduction of a draft resolution. Speakers may speak generally on the Topic Area being considered and may address any draft resolution or working paper currently on the floor. An open floor denotes that the committee is in formal debate.
RULE #14 - UNMODERATED CAUCUS: The purpose of the unmoderated caucus is to facilitate delegates deliberating their ideas and interests through delegates-to-delegates conversational approach. Unmoderated caucus can also be utilized to form a bloc or interest group in order to formulate working papers or draft resolutions. The maximum time for unmoderated caucus is 20 minutes. A motion for an unmoderated caucus is in order at any time when the floor is open, prior to closure of debate. No need to specify a purpose is needed. The delegate making the motion must specify a time limit for the caucus. A majority of members is required for passage. The Moderator may rule the motion dilatory, and this decision is not subject to appeal.

RULE #15 - MODERATED CAUCUS: The purpose of the moderated caucus is to facilitate substantive debate at critical junctures in the discussion. Moderated caucuses are not allowed during setting the agenda. In a moderated caucus, the Moderator will temporarily depart from the Speakers List and call on delegates to speak at his or her discretion. A motion for a moderated caucus is in order at any time when the floor is open, prior to closure of debate. The delegate making the motion must briefly explain its purpose and specify a time limit for the caucus, as well as the time limit per speech. A simple majority vote is required for passage. The Moderator may rule the motion dilatory, and the decision is not subject to appeal. No motions are in order during a moderated caucus. If no delegate wishes to speak during a moderated caucus, the caucus shall immediately end. The Moderator may end a moderated caucus early at his or her discretion.
RULE #16 - CLOSURE OF DEBATE: When the floor is open, a delegate may move to close debate on the substantive or procedural matter under discussion. Delegates may move to close debate on the general topic, or debate on the agenda. The Moderator may, subject to appeal, rule such a motion dilatory. When closure of debate is moved, the Moderator may recognize two speakers for and two speakers against the motion. Closure of debate requires the support of twothirds of the committee. If the committee is in favor of closure of debate, the Moderator will declare the closure of the debate and move the committee to immediate voting procedure. If a given speakers list is exhausted, debate will automatically be closed.
RULE #17 - SUSPENSION OR ADJOURNMENT OF THE MEETING: Whenever the floor is open, a delegate may move for the suspension of the meeting (suspending all committee functions until the next meeting and could only be done at the end of the last session), or for the adjournment of the meeting (postponing all committee functions for break time of the conference). The Moderator may rule such motions out of order; these decisions will not be subject to appeal. When in order, these motions are not debatable, but will be immediately put to a vote barring any motions taking precedence and they require a majority to pass. A motion to adjourn will be out of order prior to the lapse of three-quarters of the time allotted for the last meeting of the committee.
RULE #18 - POSTPONEMENT AND RESUMPTION OF DEBATE (TABLING): Whenever the floor is open, a delegate may move for the postponement of debate on a draft resolution currently on the floor. The motion, otherwise known as tabling, will require a two-thirds vote to pass and will be debatable to the extent of two speakers in favor and two opposed. No debate or action, including voting, will be allowed on any draft resolution on which debate has been postponed. A motion to resume debate on a draft resolution on which debate has been postponed will require a majority to pass and will be debatable to the extent of two speakers in favor and two opposed. Resumption of debate will cancel the effects of postponement of debate.

RULES GOVERNING SPEECHES
RULE #19 - SPEAKERS LISTS: The Committee will have an open Speakers List for the Topic Area being discussed (see Rule #13). The Moderator will either set a speakers time or entertain motions to set a speaking time. Motions to change the speaking time will be entertained in the order in which they are introduced. Separate Speakers Lists will be established as needed for procedural motions and debate on amendments. A country may add its name to a Speakers List by submitting a request in writing to the dais, provided that the nation is not already on the Speakers List, and may remove its name from the Speakers List by submitting a request in writing to the dais. At any time, a Moderator may call for members that wish to be added to the Speakers List. The names of the next several countries to speak will always be posted or announced for the convenience of the committee. A Speakers List for the second topic area will not be opened until the committee has proceeded to that topic. A motion to close any Speakers List is never in order. If the Speakers List is exhausted and there are no more points or motions, debate is automatically closed.
RULE #20 - SPEECHES: No delegate may address a session without having previously obtained the permission of the Moderator. The dais may call a speaker to order if his or her remarks are not relevant to the subject under discussion or are offensive to committee members or staff. Speeches must be made in the third person, and no delegate may directly address another delegation. When a delegate exceeds the allotted time decided for speeches as described in Rule 19, the Moderator may call the speaker to order.
Rule #21 - ABSENCE: Delegates who are absent from committee when recognized by the dais forfeit their time. The Moderator shall continue with debate.
RULE #22 - YIELDS: After being recognized from the Speakers List, a delegate may yield any or all of his or her time in one of three ways: to another delegate, to questions, or to the dais. Please note that only one yield is allowed. A delegate must declare any yield at the conclusion of his or her speech. Yield to another delegate: The speakers remaining time will be offered to that delegate. If the delegate accepts the yield, the Moderator shall recognize the delegate for the remaining time. The delegate may not make any further yields. To turn the floor over to a co-delegate of the same member state is not considered a yield. Yield to questions: Questioners will be selected by the Moderator and limited to one question each, which will be limited to thirty seconds. Follow-up questions will not be allowed. The Moderator will have the right to call

to order any delegate whose question is, in the opinion of the Moderator, rhetorical, leading, or not designed to elicit information. Only the speakers answers to questions will be deducted from the speakers remaining time. Yield to the dais: Such a yield should be made if the delegate does not wish his or her speech to be subject to comments (Rule 23). The Moderator will then move to the next speaker.
RULE #23 - COMMENTS: If a speech from a Speakers List ends with no yields, the Moderator may recognize delegates, other than the initial speaker, to comment for 30 seconds each on the specific content of the speech just completed. The Moderator may rule a comment out of order if it is irrelevant or does not pertain directly to the preceding speech. Commenters may not yield. No comments will be in order during debate on procedural motions, amendment discussion, or in moderated caucuses. A maximum of two comments will be taken on any speech.
RULE #24 - RIGHT OF REPLY: A delegate whose personal or national integrity has been impugned by another delegate may submit a Right of Reply only in writing to the committee staff. The Moderators decision whether to grant the Right of Reply is unappealable, and a delegate granted a Right of Reply will not address the committee except at the request of the Moderator. The Moderator will read the submission if the dais accepts the Right of Reply.
RULES GOVERNING POINTS
RULE #25 - POINTS OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE: Whenever a delegate experiences personal discomfort which impairs his or her ability to participate in the proceedings, he or she may rise to a Point of Personal Privilege. A Point of Personal Privilege may interrupt a speaker only if the speaker is inaudible and delegates should use this power with the utmost discretion.
RULE #26 - POINTS OF ORDER: During the discussion of any matter, a delegate may rise to a Point of Order to indicate an instance of improper parliamentary procedure. The Point of Order will be immediately decided by the Moderator in accordance with these rules of procedure. The Moderator may rule out of order those points which are improper. A representative rising to a Point of Order may not speak on the substance of the matter under discussion. A Point of Order may not interrupt a speaker.
RULE #27 - POINTS OF PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY:

When the floor is open, a delegate may rise to a Point of Parliamentary Inquiry to ask the Moderator a question regarding the rules of procedure. A Point of Parliamentary Inquiry may never interrupt a speaker. Delegates with substantive questions should not rise to this point, but should rather approach the committee staff during caucus or send a note to the dais.
RULES GOVERNING THE PATH TO A RESOLUTION
RULE #28 - WORKING PAPERS: Delegates may propose working papers for committee consideration. Working papers aid discussion of draft resolutions through formalizing (in written form) ideas expressed in the committee. Working papers need not be in draft resolution format. Working papers require the approval of the Director to be copied and distributed, and may contain signatories of contributors. Once distributed, delegates may begin to refer to that working paper by its designated number, but otherwise, debate proceeds normally on the topic. There is no formal introduction of working papers; they are considered introduced as soon as they are distributed. There are no votes for the approval of working papers.
RULE #29 SPONSORS FOR WORKING PAPERS: Delegates may consider consolidating their compositions from the other delegates into working papers to gain supports of their ideas. The composers of the initial working papers will then be called the sponsors. No limitation of number is required to pass the working papers. However, the board of directors may require the sponsors to submit the working papers within the period of time given in order to be printed and distributed to the forum.
RULE #30 - SIGNATORIES FOR DRAFT RESOLUTIONS: A motion to introduce a draft resolution (see rule #31) will be in order when it receives the approval of the Director and is signed by one-fifth of the members in the General Assembly, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and European Union simulation, and 4 signatories in the United Nations Security Council. The final number of signatories required for each committee will be publicized at the beginning of the conference, as it is contingent on the eventual size of the committee. Signing a draft resolution need not indicate support of the draft resolution. Signing a draft resolution only indicates a desire for the draft resolution to be discussed in committee. The signatory has no further obligations.
RULE #31 - INTRODUCTION OF DRAFT RESOLUTIONS: Once a draft resolution has the requisite number of signatories, has been approved by the Director, and has been distributed, a delegate may move to introduce the draft resolution. A procedural vote is then taken to determine whether the resolution shall be introduced. Should the motion receive the simple majority required to pass, the

draft resolution shall be considered introduced and on the floor. More than one draft resolution may be on the floor at any one time, but at most one draft resolution may be passed per topic area. In Jakarta Model UN five minutes will be allocated as the period for sponsors to present their working papers, proceeded by five minutes clarificatory points from the floor. A draft resolution will remain on the floor until debate on that specific draft resolution is postponed or a draft resolution on that topic area has been passed. Debate on draft resolutions proceeds according to the general Speakers List on the topic area, and delegates may then begin to refer to that draft resolution by its designated number. No delegate may refer to a draft resolution until it is formally introduced.
RULE #32 - CLARIFICATORY POINTS ON RESOLUTIONS: At the Moderators discretion, he or she may recognize a delegate or group of delegates rising to answer clarificatory points on an introduced draft resolution, or the Moderator may answer these points him or herself. These points are non-substantive and typically refer to typographical errors or mistakes in the punctuation and spelling of the document in question. The Moderators decision on this matter is not subject to appeal. Any substantive points will be ruled out of order during this period, and the Moderator may end this clarificatory question-answer period for any reason, including time constraints. Motions to suspend the rules for substantive points on a resolution may be entertained by the Moderator.
RULE #33 - AMENDMENTS: Delegates may amend any draft resolution, which has been introduced. Only one amendment may be introduced at any given time. The motion to introduce an amendment is considered a procedural motion, and the final vote on the amendment is a substantive vote. An amendment must have the approval of the Director and be signed at least by one fifth of the delegates in General Assembly, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and European Union, and minimum 3 delegates in United Nations Security Council. The final numbers for required signatures will be posted at the beginning of the conference, as they are contingent on the eventual size of the committee. Amendments are numbered in the order in which they are introduced. Since there are no friendly amendments, all amendments must be voted on by the entire committee to be included in the draft resolution. Amendments to amendments are out of order; however, an amended part of a resolution may be further amended at a later time. Like draft resolutions, there are no official sponsors of amendments. Preambulatory phrases may not be amended. A motion to introduce an approved amendment may be made when the floor is open. Amendments do not need to be introduced in the order in which they are received. If the motion receives the simple majority required to pass, the Moderator will read the amendment aloud, time permitting. General debate on the topic area will be suspended, and a Speakers List (no comments) will be established for and against the amendment. A motion to close debate will be in order after the committee has heard at least two speakers for the amendment and at least two against or if the Speakers List has been exhausted (Rule 16) When the debate is closed on the amendment, the committee will move to an immediate substantive vote on whether or not to adopt the amendment. Votes on amendments are substantive. If this vote receives the simple majority required, the amendment will be considered part of the draft resolution. After the vote, debate will

resume according to the General Speakers List on the topic or move to the closing of the introduction of the draft resolution.
RULE #34 - CLOSING THE INTRODUCTION OF THE DRAFT RESOLUTIONS: A motion to close debate will be in order after the committee has heard the clarificatory points on resolutions. Following the normal procedure of Rule 16, the Moderator will recognize at most two speakers for and two speakers against the motion to close debate on the clarificatory points. Afterwards, a vote of two-thirds is required for closure. When debate is closed on the the clarificatory points, the committee will move to an immediate substantive vote on whether or not to pass the draft resolutions.
RULES GOVERNING VOTING
RULE #35 - PROCEDURAL VOTING: All voting is considered procedural with the exception of voting on draft resolutions. Delegates must vote on all procedural motions, and no abstentions are allowed. A motion that requires a simple majority needs more affirmative than negative votes to pass. A motion that requires two-thirds to pass requires exactly or more than two-thirds of the votes to be affirmative. If there is not required number of speakers for/against a motion, the motion will automatically fail/pass.
RULE #36 - SUBSTANTIVE VOTING: The only substantive voting will be voting on draft resolutions. All other votes will be procedural votes. After debate has been closed on the general topic area, the committee will move into final voting procedures and the chambers are then sealed. At that point, only the following points and motions will be entertained: Division of the Question, Reordering Draft Resolutions, Motion for a Roll Call Vote (see Rule #38), Point of Personal Privilege, Point of Parliamentary Inquiry, and Point of Order. If there are no such motions, the committee will vote on all draft resolutions. For substantive voting, each country will have one vote. Each vote may be a Yes, No, or Abstain. Members who abstain from voting are considered as not voting. All matters will be voted upon using placards by default, except if a motion for a roll call vote is accepted. A simple majority requires Yes votes from more than half the members voting (i.e. more affirmative votes than negative votes). Once any resolution has been passed, the voting procedure is closed, as only one resolution may be passed on a topic area.

RULE #37 - REORDERING DRAFT RESOLUTIONS: After debate is closed, a motion to change the order of voting on draft resolutions currently on the floor will be in order. This motion takes precedence over a motion to divide the question. The delegate raising this motion will indicate the desired ordering of draft resolutions. The default order will be the order in which the draft resolutions were introduced. There will be no debate on this motion, and it will require a simple majority to pass. Only one such motion can pass in each round of voting procedures. The reordering proposals will be voted on in the order that they were received; there is no precedence of one over the other. Hence, the Moderator will first take all proposals for reordering, and then proceed to call for votes on each one, until one of them passes.
RULE #38 - ROLL CALL VOTING: After debate is closed on any topic area, any delegate may request a roll call vote on any draft resolution being considered, principally if the draft resolutions are acknowledged not more than two compositions. Such a motion may be made from the floor and agreed on by a third of the committee. A motion for a roll call vote is in order only for substantive votes (and thus, not in order for voting on amendments). In a roll call vote, the Moderator will call countries in alphabetical order starting with a selected member. In the first sequence, delegates may vote Yes, No, Pass or Abstain. A delegate may request the right to explain his/her vote only when the delegate is voting against the policy of his/her country; such a vote is termed with Rights. The delegate may only explain an affirmative or negative vote, not an abstention from voting. In the second sequence, the delegates who voted Pass should vote Yes No or Abstain. All delegates who had requested the right of explanation will be granted time to explain their votes, not to exceed thirty seconds. The Moderator will then announce the outcome of the vote.

GUIDE TO POSITION PAPER
Before the conference begins on July, delegates are expected to compose and submit a position paper. Position paper is the focus of the substantive preparation before the conference. The main purpose of the position paper is to help delegates to express their countrys policy clearly and concisely. A strong position paper will contribute to delegate performance in committee at conference. It is not meant to be definitive and it is understood that you are likely to continue researching after its submission, however it is still needed to depict the outline of your countrys stance throughout the conference. Position papers are great tools to help you prepare for the conference. Not only will it assist you in developing your country/organizations standpoint, reading other delegates position papers will allow you to gain an idea of the views and ideas of the committee in advance.
Elements of Position Paper A good position paper shall encompass these three areas: 1. 2. 3. Problem Summary/Causes: Short/ Brief summary about the problem or the topic area presented in the committee Countrys Past Action: Mention what are the past international and national actions that your county has taken regarding your topic area Specific Solution/ Proposal: Please specify or elaborate any ideas, solution and proposal that your nation would like to bring forth before the committee in order to response to the problem presented by the topic area.
Instruction for Position Paper Write your position paper from the point-of-view and foreign policies of the nation you are representing. This may not necessarily explore the whole truth of the scenario. e.g. a position paper by United Kingdom on political representation might not mention unrest or admit truth to allegations of vote rigging. On top left of your paper, write down; your country name, topic area and Committee Use Times New Roman 12, single space. Clearly state your committee and your position at the beginning of each paper. Your position paper should be written up to one to one and a half page long per Topic Area.
Tips for Composing a Position Paper 1. 2. 3. Make sure you have done an in depth research about both your country and your topic area. The easiest way would be to access the official government website or the UN website. Adding up a bit of statistic or speech or statement from a country leader would be acceptable. Remember to keep it simple.

POSITION PAPER FORMAT GUIDE BANGLADESH ON GLOBAL TERRORISM Disclaimer: This model only works for committee with one topic area only. Whereas those delegates who are assigned in the committee with two topic areas, are obliged to write the position paper under two topic areas in according to the given format. Country: Bangladesh Topic Area: Global Terrorism Committee: General Assembly Although the United Nations has been unable to draft a universally accepted definition for terrorism, the UNSC Resolution 1566 aptly described it as a set of criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, which intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act. However, the causes and ramifications of these activities are multifarious. Causes Intensification of terrorist activities has largely occurred in the twenty-first century, marked by the infamous devastation of the World Trade Centre in 2001. Disparity, both social and economic, happens to be the preponderant factor responsible for violent methodologies of terrorists. Although the overlords of the perpetrators have covert political as well as economic interests, the assassin is merely a pawn who has no bread for his family. In some cases, such as the LTTE in Sri Lanka, terrorism is a direct repercussion of majoritarianism. Armed groups resort to unacceptable means with the belief that they are acting in national interest. Policies Bangladesh has signed and ratified the SAARC Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism. The newly elected Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, has categorically stated that no terrorist outfits will be allowed to thrive on Bangladeshi soil. The past attempts made to hunt down camps of insurgent groups have been stalled largely due to corruption, from the shackles of which, the country has finally freed itself. Bangladesh is witnessing a transition to secularism, as Islamic fundamentalism is losing ground to acceptance for all religions. Solutions 1. Cutting its Finance More inclusions in the Financial Action Task Force and better implementation of the already existing measures are essential. Data Mining Software, which tracks suspicious transactional patterns, and maintains a better record of an account-holding entity that can be viewed intelligently, has been greatly successful in countering

money laundering, a major financial source of terror. Charities given for various purposes should be audited, as there have been instances of transfer of funds to nefarious groups via this route.
2. Inter-community Power Sharing The amended governance model in Belgium, which espouses equitable representation of different ethnicities in the legislature, can be suitably modified and applied to a country like Sri Lanka to ensure harmony. The Belgium model also provides for a community government, which makes laws pertinent to an ethnic groups culture, language, education etc. without interfering in the polity.
WORKING PAPER FORMAT GUIDE
The purpose of the Working Paper is to clearly communicate the interests of one or more countries. Please note that there is no set format for working papers; the following is just one example of a possible working paper. To facilitate the process, working papers should include the name and topic of the committee and should list the countries, which wrote the paper. Pending the approval of the Director, working papers may be copied and distributed to the committee.
Committee: UN Conference on Trade and Development Topic A: Generalized System of Preferences Submitted by Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador (this can be referred as the Sponsors)
Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador believe that a GSP should be set up so that Lesser-Developed Countries (LDCs) receive preferential treatment from Developed Countries (DCs). To that end we propose:
1. Each DC reduces their tariffs to the lowest level possible. This level will be determined by the below created subcommittee, 2. Bilateral trade agreements should be pursued for further reductions in tariffs. 3. Trade preferences should be granted in the following areas: Agriculture Manufactures Semi-manufactures Raw materials 4. Decisions on product coverage by preference giving nations are made in consultation with the affected LDC. Annual re- evaluation of coverage shall take place with the LDC with disputed going to the below-created subcommittee.

5. A subcommittee of UNCTAD should be created with equal membership of developed and developing countries. This subcommittee would have the following powers: a. To mediate disputes between preference givers and receivers b. Make recommendations, which all countries should follow c. Serve as a forum for airing grievances relating to the GSP d. Report regularly to the Secretary-General
Membership should be as follows: a. Five permanent nations from the DCs b. Five permanent nations from the LDCs and LLDCs c. Ten members elected annually by UNCTAD
Voting rights will have to be worked out, but the UN format for subcommittees seems best. Of course, we are amenable to change.
RESOLUTION FORMAT GUIDE
Heading / Preambule The title should be in capital letters, above the main body of the resolution. The title consists of a number (signifying the first or second topic area being discussed), followed by another number (identifying the individual resolution). For example, the first draft resolution on the first topic area discussed would be titled Draft Resolution 1.1 accordingly. The committee Director will assign the number once the resolution has been approved. On the left margin and two lines below the title should be: (1) the committee name (2) the topic addressed by the resolution, and (3) the signatories of the resolution. NOTE: There are no sponsors of a resolution.
Body The resolution is written in the format of a long sentence. Just as grammatical rules make a language more uniform in its usage, so is the resolution in its format.

The resolution begins with The General Assembly, for all GA committees and with the names of the councils respectively. The rest of the resolution consists of phrases and clauses with the first word of each phrase/clause underlined. The next section, consisting of Preambulatory Phrases, describes the problem being addressed, recalls past actions taken, explains the purpose of the resolution, and offers support for the operative clauses that follow. Each clause in the preamble begins with an underlined word and ends with a comma. Operative Clauses are numbered and state the action to be taken by the body. These clauses all begin with present tense active verbs, which are generally stronger words than those used in the Preamble. Each operative clause is followed by a semi- colon except the last, which ends with a period. Any sub-operative clauses (or subsub-clauses, etc,) also should end with a semi- colon. There should be no periods in the body of the resolution. Content Of course, the most important characteristic of the final resolution is the content, which will be carefully scrutinized by the Director before approval. A well-written resolution demonstrates: Familiarity with the problem. Relevant background information and previous United Nations actions are included. Recognition of the issues. Arguments on the topic are specified early. At a minimum, the resolution should address in some form all the issues listed in the Questions a Resolution Must Answer section of the Study guide. A clear and concise style. Every clause and phrase should have a purpose. Good form. Each phrase and clause should follow the exact format described above.
Preambulatory Phrases Affirming Believing Confident Declaring Deeply convinced Desiring Expressing its appreciation Fully aware Further deploring Having adopted Having devoted attention Alarmed by Bearing in mind Contemplating Deeply concerned Deeply disturbed Emphasizing Expressing its satisfaction Fully alarmed Further recalling Having considered Having examined Approving Aware of Cognizant of Convinced Deeply conscious Deeply regretting Expecting Fulfilling Fully believing Guided by Having considered further Having heard

Having received Noting further Noting with deep concern Observing Recalling Seeking Having studied Noting with regret Noting further Realizing Recognizing Taking into account Keeping in mind Noting with satisfaction Noting with approval Reaffirming Referring Taking note
Viewing with appreciation Welcoming
Operative Clauses Accepts Authorizes Confirms Deplores Emphasizes Expresses its appreciation Further proclaims Further requests Notes Recommends Requests Strongly condemns Trusts Affirms Calls for Considers Draws attention Encourages Expresses its hope Further reminds Further resolves Proclaims Reminds Resolves Supports Urges Approves Calls upon Declares accordingly Designates Endorses Further invites Further recommends Has resolved Reaffirms Regrets Solemnly affirms Takes note of

SAMPLE RESOLUTION
DRAFT RESOLUTION 1.1 (order of draft will be on the discretion of dais)
Committee: Commission on Information Regulation Topic: International Newsflow Imbalance
The Economic and Social Council, Recalling its Resolution A/36/89 of 16 December 1981, The Declaration on Fundamental Principles Concerning the Contribution of the Mass Media to Strengthening Peace and International Understanding, Further recalling Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Everyone has the right to...receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers, Recognizing that the problem of newsflow imbalance is that two-way information among countries of a region is either nonexistent or insufficient and information exchanged between regions of the world is inadequate, Realizing the need for all sovereign nations to maintain their integrity and still play an active role in the international system, 1. Recommends that a three-level information interchange system be established on the national, regional, and international levels to ameliorate the current problems of newsflow imbalance, to operate as follows: a. Each regions member nations will report their national information and receive the information of other nations in their region from the regional level of this interchange system; b. Nations will decide the character of the newsflow media best suited to the need of their sovereign territory, be this printed, audio, or audio-visual; c. Regional News Gathering Agencies will serve to gather information from the nations in their region, and these boards will have no editorial discretion and will serve to forward all information to the International Board; d. Each regional agency will be composed of representatives from every member nation of the nation of the region; e. The primary function of the International Board will be to translate information accumulated from the regional news gathering agencies; f. The secondary purpose will be to transmit all information gathered back to the member nations via the regional news gathering agencies;

g. In order to expedite the transfer of information from the international to regional level the international board will utilize a UN frequency on a European Economic Community satellite; 2. Urges the establishment of the University of International Communications, which will be based in Geneva, Switzerland, with the following aims: a. The University and branches will be established with the express purpose of bringing together worldviews and facilitating the transfer of technology; b. All member nations of the United Nations will be equally represented at the University; c. Incentives will be offered to students of journalism and communications at the University to return to their countries to teach upon completion of instruction; d. The instructors of the regional education centers will be comprised of a multi-partisan coalition of educators from throughout the world; 3. Calls for the continued use of funds from the International Program for the Development of Communications, Special Account, The United National Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the UN Development Programme, and other sources of funding including national governments and private donors; 4. Recommends that the distribution of funds be decided by the International Programme for the Development of Communication (IPDC).
Award Policy Jakarta Model UN expects an exceptionally realistic simulation of the United Nations to provide delegates a comprehensive opportunity for learning. Each delegate is expected to act truly on the interest of the country they are assigned to. But most importantly Jakarta Model UN highly appreciates cooperation and understanding, as Jakarta Model UN believes it as the key to problems and dispute in international realm. Thus in giving the award we hope to seek a realistic, competitive but not putting aside the aspect of cooperation because after all that is what UN is all about. The award in Jakarta Model UN will be given to delegate that fulfill certain criteria as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Perform a comprehensive leadership quality as an individual and conference participant. Understanding and comprehensive knowledge on nations interest and policies of country assigned. Quality of position paper. Ability to work together with other delegate and persuade other delegate on the solution offered. Ability to provide creative and pragmatic solution to problems at hands. Skill in effective caucusing, debate, negotiation,public speech, and writing (amendment, and resolution).
Those criterias are the basic guidelines, the judgment is on the Board of Directors discretion. You may ask for personal assesment after the conference ended, however the marking sheet is under the right of directors discretion whether to publish it or not.

Study Guide of General Assembly: "Palestinian Request For Full Membership Status in United Nations"

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Study Guide of General Assembly: "Palestinian Request For Full Membership Status in United Nations"

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Study Guide of General Assembly

Palestinian Request for Full Membership Status in United Nations

JAKARTA MODEL UNITED NATIONS 2012

July, 9th 13th 2012

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |2

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |3

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |4

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

About General Assembly

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |5

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Ibid. from http://www.un.org/en/ga/about/background.shtml, February 20th 2012.

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |6

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |7

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |8

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |9

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Background of The Problem

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |10

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |11

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

United Nations, Ibid, p. 15.

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |12

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

United Nations, Ibid, p. 16. Ibid.

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |13

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14630174, accessed in March 14th 2012.

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |14

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |15

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |16

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Membership Status for Palestinians

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |17

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |18

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |19

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |20

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |21

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |22

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |23

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |24

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |26

Jakarta Model United Nations 2012

Study Guide of General Assembly & Rules of Procedure |27