This course explores the politics of the Middle East with particular focus on the Arab-Israeli conflict, Identity and Politics in the region, the role of Islam and the U.S. in the region's politics. Fall 2007
Simulation Blog: The US and the International Community
posted by Muqtedar Khan @ 9:18 PM
20 comments
Dr. Muqtedar Khan is Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at the University of Delaware. He is also the Director of the Islamic Studies Program. He is a Non-resident Fellow at the Brookings Institution. He is the author of American Muslims: Bridging Faith and Freedom (Amana, 2002), Jihad for Jerusalem: Identity and Strategy in International Relations (Praeger, 2004).
20 Comments:
The major points that were decided in the discussions between the United States, France, England and Russia are as follows:
1. We agree to raise approximately 40 billion dollars in funds for reperations for Palestinians who can not practice thier right of return. In addition The World Bank, the Arab World, and other European countries are expected to contribute. These funds are to be given out by a third party that the UN will create and will be recieved by the Palestinians if they apply and meet the credentians. Credentials for this must include at the least the the Palestinians are former refugees living in the current state of Palestine and have no citizenship in any other country.
2. The UN will supply troops to patrol Jerusalem or any other boarders if Israel and Palestine agree that this is necessary.
3. Negotiations will only be made with the leaders of the new Palestinian state if they are democratic, agree to a cease-fire with Israel, agree with all boarders and any other stipulations created by the peace talks at the confrence.
Furthermore we suggest to Palestine that their current government work with Fatah to reach this peace as well as stability in their state.
Russian Press Release:
Русские сообщение для печати:
Following a heated and disappointing first day of discussion, I sent the following e-mail (e-mail #1) to the heads of the Arab world. We, the Russian Federation, felt that the Arabs were being misrepresented and being ignored, the United States was declaring themselves all-mighty peace-keepers, and we were being asked to provide outrageous amounts of money with no clear plans for its outcomes, and we were told that the World Bank and IMF would not be participating, despite their purpose (despite what was previously posted). We were told (despite our objections) that American-born UN troops would replace all IDF soldiers in the area, to police the civilians (and this would be mandatory, despite any potential objections from either side) We were told that the Americans had previously met with all the Arab leaders as well as the Palestinians and Israelis, and that they had all agreed to their terms, and that we were being unreasonable to look out for them. The Americans claimed that under no circumstances would they even speak to Hamas (even if they legitimately became the government for the Palestinian people...because the Palestinians are only allowed to have a government if they design in such a way that makes them feeble and in need of US 'guidance').
So I sent the following e-mail to the heads of the Arab world, to set up a meeting to discuss alternate solutions to the issue at hand:
My esteemed comrades,
I write to you as a representative of the government of the Russian Federation. As a member of the 'Quartet,' we have been involved in some preliminary hearings, or think-tanks, if you will, regarding the fate of the Palestinian Israeli conflict. Vladimir Viktorivitch Putin (Ashley Anderson) and I are not pleased with the way these conferences have been proceeding. The United States seems to believe that they are the peacekeepers of the world, and that they are in a position to influence our decisions in a way that will best benefit them. We firmly believe that the United States is not acting our (collective) best interest, and we propose a private council before the next meeting to discuss what is really important, and consider how we wish to shape the future.
--------------------------
And after that I listed my cell phone number and possible meeting times.
Last night I received a very confusing phone call from the American government asking why I wasn't at their meeting (I suppose that’s an indication of how things work in the west) and then shortly after received this e-mail:
Hey Russia,
This is Jeff Conrad, President Bush from the POSC simulations. First of all, to David: Sorry about that odd phone call you got. America was having a group meeting, and one of our members, Dan, hadn't shown up yet. Dan sounds like Dave; I glanced down at my papers and accidentally called your number. So there's the confusion.
As for how I have your number, the answer of course is because American intelligence intercepted the email you sent to the Arab world.
First of all, I just wanted to say that America is disappointed by your secrecy. In the world of the simulation, we're disappointed because the Cold War is over and we're supposed to be working together. In real life, we're disappointed because we're supposed to be working together and we feel that you're taking the game to a bit of a ridiculous level. In the reality of the situation, there would be no "secret meetings" between Russian leaders and leaders of the Arab world. That's not how international relations work these days, and it's a distortion of reality to act otherwise.
We're also disappointed by your deception. On Thursday, we came to an understanding. At first we were at odds with each other, but in the end we both compromised and came up with a situation that both countries said they found acceptable. You didn't tell us that you were still unsatisfied. For this to work, all countries must be completely open with each other. You didn't do this.
Finally, we're disappointed by your divisiveness. The goal of this assignment is to create peace. Peace is only acquired through openness and understanding. What you did, in contrast, was create discord. You took an already messy situation and made it even more chaotic. That's not the way to facilitate open discourse.
Now we could keep this to ourselves, and have our own secret meeting where we try to sabotage your attempts at peace (similarly to what you did). But we're being open and frank about the situation, because that's how communication and progress work. America has yet to make a decision on how your underhandedness will affect our foreign relations or the simulation as a whole, but we just wanted to keep you apprised of the simulation. America, like Russia, is tasked with facilitating peace. We share the same goal. It's a shame one party felt the need to attempt sabotage on the other.
Sincerely,
George W. Bush (and/or Jeff Conrad)
------------------------------
I suppose it is good to know that despite being one of the largest world superpowers, being on the security council, having significant economic influence in the middle east, and being a country with one of the largest populations in the world, we are still expected to answer to the United States, who is scolding us as if we were an ignorant child for proposing a meeting that they weren't invited to (because according to them, every time any government officials meet its in the middle of times square with thirty news networks filming every word, because 'secret' (who said it was secret?) meetings don't exist in real life between nations). I wasn’t aware that we were forbidden from conducting our own meetings. I also rather enjoyed the portion about Russia attempting to sabotage the peace process. I feel a bit like Dr. Khan on this one… I don’t see anywhere in my email anything about halting the peace process. As far as I can see, I merely proposed meeting to hear the Arab perspective on the situation, and working towards finding an alternate solution.
It would seem that we are all expected to lie down and allow America to establish themselves as supreme rulers of the world, despite their prejudicial tendencies and their actively waning appeal outside their egocentric power-hungry safety-bubble that no longer shields them from experiencing terrorism like the rest of the world, but continues to blind them from the realities of international relations (but what could they be missing? According to them, all international exchanges are completely open to the public, and are never conducted behind closed doors.)
What we, the United States, were getting at was simply that the point of this assignment- and let me remind you that this is a CLASS PROJECT- is to work towards a solution for peace. You are more than welcome to have your own meetings; however, we were under the impression that you, Russia, were on board with what we had proposed at our meeting, and we were making many attempts to try and create a solution that everyone present could agree to. Since we left Thursday having what we thought to be your agreement on everything but the exact amount that would be given to refugees, we simply found it unnecessary to call a “secret meeting” (to plan against what we had worked on) and then have your e-mails anonymously sent to us. We refer to it as secret solely because we had the email forwarded to us by a source who wished to remain anonymous. Yes, there was disagreement about the legitimacy of Hamas, but we were open to different suggestions on the subject and were asking your input to try and come to a compromise. I do not have the time to address every point that you made, but I would definitely like to say that we DID NOT state that we were unwilling to work with Hamas. While we are not interested in working with them in their current state we did however say loud and clear that if Hamas were to change their ways and renounce terror, then yes we would definitely reconsider. It has absolutely nothing to do with the desire for a Palestinian government to be weak and/or feeble, it has to do with the United States not wanting to negotiate with terrorists.
Okay Dave. Time out. I am not going to begin my response by speaking here as George W. Bush. Instead I am speaking as Jeff Conrad, a student in a political science course. And as Jeff Conrad, I have to say that you are completely out of line. You are taking what's supposed to be a friendly and harmless project, and turning it into a flame war. You've been messaging me on Facebook, in Russian. I’m hoping that you were just trying to be cute, but instead you were disconcerting and slightly creepy. I would ask you to stop trying to contact me “as Russia” outside of classtime and this blog. If you’d like to contact me as Dave, you’re welcome to do so. If you’d like to email America as Russia, then you can do so through our ambassadors. But please stop trying to push the game so far past its original boundaries. You’re supposed to be acting like Russia, and no Russian leader would conceivably behave in the way you’ve been acting.
As far as your claims go...You know what? I’m too busy and too irritated to respond to each and every one of your points. We can discuss it in class. You’re being antagonistic for the sake of it, and I (Jeff Conrad, not George W. Bush) won’t play your game. I stand by what I wrote in my original email to you. The goal of the assignment is to work towards peace, and you’re being divisive, you’re being petty, and you’re abandoning any pretense of verisimilitude in an attempt to steal the limelight away from Israel and Palestine. It’s ridiculous, and I won’t play. Every student in class who’s a member of the Quartet will agree that, after initial disagreement, America and Russia ultimately came to a compromise. You agreed in class to a compromise, you told us that you accepted our ultimate proposal. And then, after you’ve told us that our deal was acceptable, you email a bunch of people and say that you disagree? It’s ridiculous. And it’s not how international relations work.
You and I, in this assignment, have the same goal. America can proceed with or without you. Please let me know when you're ready to act in a civil and progress-oriented manner.
-Jeff Conrad
I dont understand why you would take any of this personally. Like you said, it is a simulation, and I assumed that you were in character in your e-mails... I believe I am acting appropriately in this situation.
Mgriffin, Dick Cheney did specifically tell us that under no circumstances would the US deal with Hamas, and then other representatives said that they must first denounce terrorism. When we asked what that meant, we were not given an explanation.
Jeff- I dont understand why you are getting so angry about this? We should be angry. You completely ignored us and talked down to us for over an hour last week. We told you we didn't agree, and then we set out to hear other points of view.
I must stress again, that nowhere in my email did I state that we were working to stop the peace process, sabotage the United States, or that we wanted to secretly conspire. If you read it, I said that we were unhappy with teh way the proceedings went, and wanted to meet to discuss alternate solutions. Alternate doesnt have to be a negative thing. Israel and Palestine are seeking alternate solutions by talking with you. As to us telling you that your deal was acceptable and then double crossing you...we told you outright that we disagreed with your proposal, but we would continue to support you in finding ways to entice both sides to agree to a peaceful solution. After that, you went in front of class and told everyone that we were behind you %100.
And Jeff, as to you attacking my character and calling me creepy? I sent you a message on facebook in russian asking why you were so disorganized after you (of course i'm the creepy one) somehow got my phone number and called my on my cell phone at 10pm to ask me where I was.
The goal of the assignment is not necessarily just to create peace, the assignment is to be realistic. In real life its not always rainbows and sunshine. In real life most of the world hates the United States because they look down on everyone else.
First of all, I clearly explained to you why I accidentally called your phone (and we got your email because a member of one of the Arab nations anonymously forwarded it to us). The phone call was a dumb mistake on my part that’s actually a bit humorous if not taken so seriously.
As far as messaging me on Facebook...if you wanted to legitimately question my lack of organization (which isn't really your place), why would you do so in Russian? How is that communication? What you were doing was purposely invading my personal, non-POSC-related life in (I believe) the hope of antagonizing me. And that’s why I was upset.
Though I do apologize for my improper wording. I meant to call your actions creepy, not you yourself. And there is an important difference there. I have no desire to engage in ad hominem attacks.
Anyway, I really have no desire to fight either. Obviously there’s been some miscommunication. America ended on Thursday under the impression that you had agreed to the compromises which we offered. Obviously we were mistaken, and I apologize for that. What I’m respectfully asking you to do for the remainder of the simulation is the same thing that I would ask of Russia were I actually Dubya: Please, next time you’re unhappy, speak directly with the source. All of this was the result of a miscommunication that could easily have been remedied if, after I spoke to the class on Thursday, you had approached me and said, “Hey, that’s not what I thought we agreed to at all.” Had you done that, instead of gone behind our backs, you would have seen that I had no ulterior motives in my speech, and I was truly saying only what I thought we had agreed on. So all George Bush asks of Russia in future negotiations is a bit of openness and candor. Détente?
I am playing Dick Cheney, and (not to be rude) but I remember what I said. Yes under no circumstance would we negotiate with Hamas in their current state. If they decide to change their ways, then we would reconsider. We defined renouncing terror as a cease fire on their part as well as one on the part of Israel.
This post has been removed by the author.
America stands by its original post and the speech given which clearly outlines the confrence. If read, the first post should explain any objects that were made in the post directly after it; there is a plan for the money, world bank is involved, troops will only be supplied if agreed upon by both sides, and The US will negotiate with any govenment of the state of Palestine that was democratic and held a cease fire.
The only disagreements are on exactly who was talked to, Arab Countries was confused with all Arab Countries which in a loud room is a simple mistake.
In the future if there are an misunderstandings like this or points that anyone is unsure of we hope that this individual contacts us and asks for clarification before posting innacurate data and causing an unnecessary international conflict.
11/13/2007
Ségolène Royal(Mitch Masucci), France - Reporting on the European meeting with Arab allies of Palestine.
- 40 billion dollars for refugees without citizenship
- Two state solution with 1967 borders
- Those of current Israeli citizenship living in the area that will become Palestine
who refuse to move will become Palestinian citizens only and subject to their
laws and government, and vice versa for Palestinians living in Israel who refuse
to move. We strongly encourage fair and responsible civil rights for these
enclaves.
- To facilitate movement across Israel, the UN will supply troops who will
guarantee safe passage for a period of five years. At the end of this five years, a
commission will decide whether these troops need to stay longer. Ultimately,
however, it will be up to the sovereign nation-states of Israel and Palestine to
facilitate passage.
Items that came up that need further discussion:
- Reparations/reimbursement of Arab/Muslim states
- Infrastructure building of the Palestinian state
- Jerusalem
- The American-Israeli position on the piece-by-piece partitioning of the West
Bank
We plan on discussing the bottom items further the next time we meet.
We would like to extend an invite to any and all European countries and Russia to a meeting tonight in trabant at 9 pm, we are getting as many people as possible to be there.
-Condi
wow guys. It's a simulation. The whole contacting people outside of class and in character is what makes this fun and a bit of a learning experience. I think you need to just step back and play along with the game.
Not how international relations works these days...
Every nation or other political body in every single conference, summit, peace talk or meeting has only one goal: To increase the power and position of their home. Despite what the politicians say, their main goal is not "for the good of the people", it is for the good of Russia, or Iran, or the United States. If, during negotiations, one nation does not like the cards being dealt to them (such as Russia in this case), then you can bet that they will find other allies that will give them what they want.
Last night the Palestinians received an invitation to meet with the Americans, which was received 45 minutes prior to your meeting time. Also last night, Hamas invited the Americans to meet with them at 2:30pm. The Americans did not show. Why do you continue to disrespect us? And when you do invite us to meetings, they are not within time to prepare for them.
Prime Minister Ismail Haniya
We are sorry about the short notice of the meeting last night, we didn’t realize that posts on the blog take some time to show up. It’s really difficult to coordinate the schedules of this many people, so if we do get a chance where everyone can meet don’t you think you can manage without having a ton of time to prepare? I’m playing Dick Cheney, and I had no idea that the US was invited to a meeting today at 2 30. Was there an email sent about that?
Press Release, Wednesday, November 14, 2007
As Prime Minister of Israel, I am proud to report that the United States and Israel have successfully bridged all gaps between their respective proposals for the creation of a Palestinian state and an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. President Bush and his administration including Vice President Cheney and Secretary of State Rice rightly deserve great praise for their hard work and devotion to peace. We hope that the United States will continue to remain a close partner of Israel in the pursuit of peace throughout any negotiations and beyond. Below is the blueprint that America and Israel have agreed upon as the basis for all further negotiations.
1)The creation of an effectively contiguous Palestinian state with secure and recognized borders based on the 1949 armistice line (the pre-1967 borders) in conformance with United Nations resolution 242.
a. While the pre-1967 borders are the proposed basis for the borders of the new Palestinian state, minor territorial adjustments are necessary in order to take into account residential realities on the ground.
b. Israel will annex large Jewish settlements (more appropriately deemed cities or towns) in the West Bank that contain tens of thousands of Jews including, but not limited to, Ariel, Ma’aleh Adumim, and Gush Etzion. These Jewish settlements are of crucial strategic importance to Israel (especially those surrounding Jerusalem such as Ma’aleh Adumim, and Gush Etzion) and are thus nonnegotiable . All Israeli settlements and military outposts remaining within the newly created Palestinian state will be dismantled over a period of 3-5 years.
c. After territorial adjustments, the new Palestinian state will be formed on 91% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip, in addition to Israeli territory ceded to Palestine for land annexed by Israel in a ratio of 1:1. Israeli land ceded to Palestine as part of the “land swap” will come from land contiguous to the West Bank predominately inhabited by Israeli Arabs, such as sections of the Negev in the south and Galilee in the north.
d. Israel and the United States both understand that the lack of a contiguous Palestinian state is a potential barrier to mutual peace and prosperity. Both countries have agreed to help fund the construction of a high speed rail line and elevated highway linking the West Bank and Gaza Strip through the Negev desert. America and Israel seek the financial assistance of the international community in order to make the construction of the rail line and highway possible.
2) A just, practical, and sustainable division of Jerusalem based on the guiding principle of Israeli sovereignty over Jewish communities and Palestinian sovereignty over Arab communities, as well as respect for the holy sites of all faiths.
a. Jerusalem will be divided into two cities— a Jewish city to be known as Jerusalem which will serve as Israel’s capital (as it does now), and an Arab city to be known as Al-Quds (the Arabic name for Jerusalem) which will serve as the capital of the new Palestinian state.
b. Jewish areas outside Jerusalem’s current municipal boundaries will be annexed by Israel and officially become part of Jerusalem. Arab areas both inside and outside Jerusalem’s municipal boundaries will be granted full sovereignty and become the new Arab city of Al-Quds, the Palestinian capital.
c. Jerusalem’s ancient, walled Old City will be divided, with the Muslim quarter offered full sovereignty under the Palestinian state, while the Jewish, Christian, and Armenian quarters will remain fully under Israeli rule.
d. The new Palestinian state will also be granted full sovereignty over the Temple Mount, Dome of the Rock, and Al Aqsa Mosque, provided that both Jews and Christians are guaranteed access to an area on the Temple Mount for religious observance and prayer. Israel will retain full sovereignty over the Western Wall.
e. Israel and Palestine will completely cede security control over all the holy sites on or near the Temple Mount to an international force whose mission is to ensure access and the safety of religious observers of all faiths. The Temple Mount area will essentially become a demilitarized zone for the forces of Israel and Palestine.
3)The creation and deployment of a Multinational Transitional Antiterrorism Force (MTAF) with a strong mandate to aid the Palestinian security forces in their fight against extremist groups bent on destroying peace.
a. Established by the United Nations, the MTAF will have a 3-5 year mandate to aid the new Palestinian state in maintaining a monopoly on the use of force and fighting extreme groups determine to continue violence against Israel. The MTAF must also be given the authority to pursue terrorists and their leaders directly with deadly force in the event that Palestinian security forces are unable to suppress terrorist violence against Israel on their own.
b. The United States agreed to make a significant contribution of troops to the MTAF but requests that the international community make a similarly strong commitment. European and especially Arab states must contribute troops to the multinational force in order for it to be both effective and legitimate.
c. Israel and the United States wish to make clear that the multinational force is designed to end the so-called “cycle of violence” while continuing the fight against terrorism. By ceding counterterrorism to Palestinian security forces and the MTAF, Israel seeks to avoid counterterrorist measures being perceived as Israeli aggression. It should be noted that the MTAF is in no way designed to replace the Israeli occupation and will be phased out over a period of 3-5 years, as Israeli withdrawal is completed.
4) An unlimited right of return of Palestinians to the newly constituted Palestinian state with a very limited right of return to Israel proper for the reunification of families only. Just compensation for refugees will also be provided.
a. The creation of an international fund to compensate Palestinians who lost property during the decades of war and conflict. The fund will have a target value of $40 billion.
b. Both Israel and the United States have agreed to make a significant financial contribution to the compensation fund, but international cooperation is crucial for the fund’s success. America and Israel call upon European and Arab nations to make a similarly significant financial contribution to the compensation fund.
Israel and the United States believe very strongly that the above blueprint represents the most practical and realistic hope for a just and sustainable peace. Both President Bush and I are optimistic that through this plan, the hopes of both the Palestinian and Israeli peoples for peace can finally be realized.
As President Bush, I was never made aware of any request by Hamas for a meeting between them and the American delegation. This is the first I'm hearing of any 2:30 meeting.
-Jeff Conrad
Actually Hamas did send you an email...
------------------
Date: Tue 13 Nov 22:01:35 EST 2007
From: [restricted]
Subject: Re: Meeting tonight
To: United States usa377@gmail.com
Hamas would like to meet with you at the University of Delaware Morris Library tomorrow (Nov. 14) at 2:30pm. Is this viable?
-Hamas
------------------
I thought America had the best technology in the world? They can't even gain access to an email!
We feel very disgraced that you try to blame your ignorance on someone else, typical Americans!
--Prime Minister Ismail Haniya
As President Vladimir Putin of Russia, I must say I am outraged. During today’s final peace talks, I ,along with the representatives of Britain and France, approached Ehud Olmert and George W. Bush to discuss the security issues facing both Israeli/Palestinian states and the UN security council’s intention of sending peace keeping troops into Jerusalem and possibly elsewhere. Russia wanted to make sure that UN peacekeeping troops were predominantly (if not all) multi-national and not dominated by U.S troops.
However, and much to my surprise, Olmert’s flippant response to my suggestion was “what does Russia have to do with this?” Honestly, Olmert? Your diplomacy is beginning to have that American unilateralist ring to it, tsk tsk no way to treat a fellow peace ally. Russia’s concern for the security of Israel and Palestine ranks among our priorities in this peace conference as with our united struggle against terrorism. The U.S presence in the Middle East, as all undoubtedly know, has caused increased tension, distress, and terrorist activity in the region. The U.S is increasingly unpopular among the Arab world and their presence in this region should not be allowed to further antagonize. Russia’s goal in this process was to make sure that intentionally ignored voices were heard and to motivate compromises with countries such as Iran in order to further stabilize Israel’s position in the Middle East. And please do not forget that Russia’s influence in the Security Council has not wavered and still retains veto power- if any aid from UN troops is expected. . .
Your diplomacy is nearly offensive and such disrespect in response to our assistance will not be taken lightly by the Russian government. I advise you, Ehud Olmert, to rethink your casual dismissal of Russia’s involvement in this conflict.
-President Vladimir Putin
And furthermore, keep in mind that more than a quarter of your population is of Russian origins. Your own deputy Prime Minister was concerned about your inability to properly represent your people. Your entire culture is based on ours. Modern Hebrew is based on Russian...Klezmer originated in Eastern Europe...even your cuisine is based on our styles. So we developed your language, your music, your food...one could argue that all of Israeli culture is based on ours, sprinkled with American and Arab modifications. Not to mention, we do quite a bit to keep you on the map. As President Putin put it, do not forget Russia's influence. Whether you recognize it or not, you need us, and if you listened to your people you would know that.
-The Russian Foreign Minister
Post a Comment
<< Home