Model United Nations: France’s Position on the Situation in Syria and Iraq
For years, the Syrian government has been blatantly ignoring any and all United Nations
condemnations of its “continued grave and systematic human rights violations by the Syrian
authorities, such as arbitrary executions, excessive use of force and the persecution and killing of
protesters and human rights defenders, arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, torture and ill
treatment of detainees, including children". (United Nations Resolution, December 19, 2011) And
although France has coauthored and supported many reasonable propositions that would force the
Syrian government to take responsibility for terrorizing and slaughtering its own people as opposed
to leading with a just and gentle hand, well-rounded propositions have been vetoed by China and
Russia, countries known for obstructing justice and sanctioning the same brutality as Syria against
their own people. This has inhibited the UN’s ability to promote justice and end the meaningless and
unjustifiable suffering of millions of Syrians, and cannot continue. France is invested in bringing
safety and security to these abused and terrorized civilians, and accepts a certain moral-bound duty
and responsibility for the injudicial butchery of these people, preventable carnage. France firmly
believes and understands that a true and lasting resolution cannot be achieved without the
cooperation of all countries involved, and thus urges Russia, China, and Syria to aid in the enactment
of justice, not its prevention. If Syria is not perturbed with the clear moral implications of the
extreme and unwarranted human rights violations, which they have demonstrated with their repeated,
depraved offenses they are not, the United Nations will be compelled to impose crippling economic
sanctions on the already struggling state of Syria to evince the gravity of these offenses and the true
abhorrence they evoke in the international community. France supports and will continue to advance
this action in any way possible, and if necessary, will promote more aggressive measures, if it would,
as we firmly believe it will, liberate the people of Syria from the oppressive violence they have been
subject to for far too long. In regards to the autocrat Bashar Al-Assad, France opposes totalitarianism
and aspires to eventually bring a peaceful, stable, and accountable government to Syria and the rest
of the Middle East, but acknowledges that a certain transitioning must take place prior to this;
unalienable human rights and the rights of a people must be established in order to lay a foundation
for a proper, constitutional government. We fully appreciate the delicacy of the situation at hand and
therefore understand that the United Nations must also address the issue of the various terrorist
organizations looming over Syria, attempting to ensure their rule follows Al-Assad’s, which France
recognizes would be a catastrophic loss for the region and would only continue and possibly
exacerbate the appalling human rights situation in Syria. ISIS, a terrorist group known for their
shocking brutality and effrontery, has already achieved alarming gains in Iraq. Hence, France
proposes the implementation of a plan focused on the enlightenment and edification of the Syrian
people concerning the true horrors of ISIS and their misguided teachings in order to prevent the
Syrian people from acquiescing to the rule of ISIS and imposition of Shariah Law, which France
feels would not only be a step back for the women of the region, but also a momentous and
intolerable gain for ISIS. France contends that if the people were educated as to the true and
execrable, odious aims of ISIS and the incontestably inhumane lengths they are willing to go achieve
them, most people would be appalled and outraged, certainly not willing in any way to submit
themselves to their jurisdiction. France also would be prepared to send UN peacekeepers to the scene
in order to establish order and prevent that very thing from happening: the unrestricted and extremely
destructive reign of the arguably most radical terrorist group that substantiates its depravity with
religion. However, since the situation is so precarious, France recognizes that the best course of
action is liable to change, and thus France’s views with it. However, France is thoroughly convinced
that the current most advisable course of action would be to assure Syria as to the depth of our
determination to erase the stain of injustice and oppression they have so cruelly painted with the
blood of their people, and communicate the stark potential for imminent and devastating economic
sanctions if they do not respond as human beings with alacrity. France is confident that the crippling
sanctions will bring Al-Assad to quickly reconsider the implications of his actions and take seriously
the UN’s call for freedom and justice. Then, in order to cope with the looming and explosive threat
of ISIS and other terrorist organizations, France will proposes the commencement of a campaign to
inform and edify the Syrians on the subject of Islamic terrorist associations and their injudicious and
misplaced base and abject brutality. If necessary, France resolves to equip Syria with sufficient
peacemakers to ensure a more stable community. And France will always recall that, as Martin
Luther King Junior faithfully proclaimed, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” as
we strive to bring peace to the downtrodden and oppressed.
Model United Nations: France’s Position on Israel and Palestine
Throughout the history of Israel and Palestine, tensions have been brewing and growing,
peppered and fueled by an incessant stream of scuffles and enmity. France acknowledges, as do
many, that this is a precarious, potentially explosive relationship, and must be handled with extreme
caution. However, France firmly believes in putting out the fire at the source, not just clearing the
smoke. Hence, France knows that the only lasting solution for this delicate conflict is the two-state
solution. This solution is well-outlined by Francois Delattre, a representative of France to the United
Nations; it would entail: “an independent, democratic, contiguous and sovereign Palestinian state,
living in peace and security alongside Israel, based on 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as the capital of
the two states.” This solution, which would establish an independent and sovereign Palestine, would
thus preempt and proscribe Israel from engaging in violence with Palestine; there are many more
consequences to be received from the international community if a member of that community is
decimated or otherwise harmed due to piddling, injudicious, de minimis reasoning. However, this is
not to say that Israel does not experience legitimate security threats from Palestine. And above all,
France respects Israel’s sovereignty. Thus, France encourages Israel to engage in prolific, genuine
discussion with Palestine about its bona fide security concerns, but understands that Israel is quite
capable of determining how it believes the situation would best be handled. In order to express
France’s solidarity with Israel, France offers Israel its sincerest support with this troublesome issue,
and would even be willing to contribute monetarily or with arms to help keep Israel’s borders and
people secure. That is not to say, however, that France condones Israel’s current approach to its
security concerns; this summer’s slaughter of more than 2,100 people, including several hundred
innocent children, was extreme; though France understands Israeli concerns over Hamas bombings, it
cannot accept the 11,000 Palestinian injuries and “unprecedented destruction” as reasonable.
(Representative Delattre) The destruction of the Gaza Strip was so extensive members of
international community, expressing their solidarity with Palestine, pledged $5.4 billion dollars to aid
in the reconstruction. However, France cannot sit and watch this endless, vicious cycle of destruction
and reconstruction while the perpetrators of the destruction offer not single dollar to aid in the
reconstruction. Also, Israel’s blockade restrictions, which it has maintained since 2007 on the
grounds of preventing Iranian rocket shipments, are unacceptable at its current level and cannot
continue. Currently, the severe restrictions on necessities such as access to food, water, electricity,
gas, construction materials, healthcare, and even edification are devastating Gaza’s people and
economy. This cannot be justified. And as border crossings are also seriously limited, the blockade is
an issue of freedom as well. As France sees it, Israel is controlling and acutely restricting access to
significant religious sites, regulating the inalienable freedom of religion, a freedom and right France
believes should be universal. And beyond denying ingress to religious locations, this border blockade
has also denied civilians access essential services like healthcare and education. This injustice cannot
and should not be condoned. This injustice cannot and should not persist. France surmises that if the
two-state solution were enacted, animosity and injustice, causes for violence and conflict, would
abate; for if Israel gave Palestine its own state, reducing its borders to those of 1967, allowing
Palestinians easier access to the Holy Land, eliminating the humanitarian crisis, it would thus
mitigate tensions between Palestinian civilians and Israeli government. Thus, the two-state solution,
which France recognizes as an impressive compromise on the part of Israel, would reduce tensions
between the two countries, improving relations and tempering ostensible reason or pretext for
savagery.