Position Paper- Syria's critique of US foreign policy
The last century saw the growth of the United States of America as a superpower, developing from an isolationist nation to the most influential member of the United Nations and NATO. Consequently, its foreign policy has turned outwards, boasting both military and economic might. However, the Arab Republic of Syria will argue that while America regards Syria as a 'safe- haven' for terrorism, Syria regards the US as the instigator; police, judge and jury on all aspects of terrorism in the modern Middle East, and the biggest threat to peace and stability in the region.
While the US argues that it is a supporter of internationalism, co-operation and unanimity, its foreign policy portrays a motive of imperialism and corporate colonialism. Many nations will argue that America’s foreign policy is altruistic; indeed it was once an ally of the Syrian people, but has long since shown that it will attempt to shut down any de facto government that it disagrees with. Indeed, in the US’ short history, it has attempted to clandestinely and often, openly, accommodate and enforce regime change of over fifty legitimate, democratic states. Examples include the 1953 overthrow of Mossadegh and the installation of the Shah, the Bay of Pigs incident in Cuba in 1961 and the attempted coup of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela 2002.
The common theme appears to be the United States’ capitalistic vision being endangered by sovereign nation’s rights to their own natural resources; or the pursuit of an ideology not in keeping with their corporate visions. The US has historically intervened abroad both directly and indirectly; either through the funding of militia groups, direct military intervention or economic funding/sanctions. The point of this argument is to open the floor for nations to discuss the very real possibility that US foreign policy is dangerous, and cannot be allowed to influence the future of Syria, nor other sovereign states.
Through the US’ disagreements with Syria in the last ten years, they have attempted to influence regime change through economic sanctions, executing Executive Orders 11315, 13224, 13382, 13338, 13399, 13441 and 13460, currently freezing all Syrian financial interests in the US. Syria believes that the United States is once again attempting to influence the future of Middle Eastern Politics. Why is it that the US has a mandate to directly change regimes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and now Syria? Syria asks where in America’s free-market God complex has it arisen itself to Messiah of the Middle East?
Many nations may argue that the US has the moral legitimacy to act in the best of interests of the states that it tries to change, but Syria will prove that the US only interferes when it is in the best of interests of the US economy. As Canadian political analyst, Naomi Klein, has observed, America’s foreign policy is one of ‘Disaster Capitalism’ , attempting to use the fallout of state meltdowns to create a profit; a profit of free-market ideologues and proxy governments built in the image of the US and to develop the exploitation of natural resources. While you might claim America has a Christian desire to help the nations it intervenes in, the White Man’s Burden, so to speak, but it has been proven that intervention is simply in the interests of the US bank balance.
The US’ intellectual hegemony of the international community has led to Syria having very few allies; it seems that we have arrived at a narrative of free-market capitalism, backed up by the rabid hounds in blue, red and white. It is evident in history, through the coups in Argentina 1976 and Chile 1973, the support of Pinochet, the continual overthrow of democratic governments exemplify that America cannot be trusted to dictate global policy.
Syria believes the world would be a more peaceful place if we each kept to our own sovereign territories; just like in its secret funding of the opposition parties in Chile and Argentina, the US Office of Foreign Assets Control channels financial support for the Free Syrian Army through the Syrian Support Group non-governmental organization . Syria asks the international community; the United Nations, why an illegitimate opposition, comprised of Al-Qaeda splinter groups should be funded by a foreign body? Is it not evident that America rarely picks the moral; it merely chooses the “winner”?.
America’s dangerous, belligerent foreign policy is also evident in its direct military interventions of nations. In its invasion of Iraq, it broke the Geneva Conventions; its invasion was not sanctioned by the United Nations, yet there are no repercussions, no tribunals, and no war crimes . Why is it that the US can ignore international law, yet it is the Syrian people that feel the brunt of sanctions? This is but another indication that the US foreign policy is not only dangerous, but irreverent and vindictive.
One need only look at the US’ support of an illegal regime in Israel, to show its moral questionability. For half a century, the people’s of Palestine and Lebanon have been crushed under the tyranny of the Israeli state, with any direct action from the Palestinian/Lebanese people referred to as “terrorism”. Syria would like to question the term “terrorism”, is it not but an American term for those who disagree with its foreign policy?
Some nations might agree with the Syrian Arab Republic’s thesis, but say, ‘yes, but the US isn't the same under the Obama administration’. Syria will retort, irrespective of US Presidential incumbents, foreign policy is a constant. Obama’s persistent predator drones in Pakistan and neighbouring Afghanistan have resulted in the extraordinary figure of for every one soldier killed, fifty civilians are but ‘collateral damage’ . Indeed, the assassination of Osama Bin Laden was done without the knowledge of Pakistani authorities, breaking international laws once again. The US’ inability to distinguish between its enemies; its militaristic approach to diplomacy, and its ignorance of international law all backed up by its military and economic might prove that the US, not Syria, is the nation that we should all be afraid of.
In conclusion, Syria is not a safe haven for terrorists; it is the home of ordinary citizens, some who turn to direct action when they see their country sanctioned to the point of collapse. Syria has shown that the US, if anyone, is the cause of terrorism in the Middle East, an ominous spectre looming over internal struggles in sovereign nations, pulling the strings on opposition groups throughout the world, irrespective of moral or political legitimacy. Syria calls on solidarity with its Arab brothers, with the Arab League, with all those who oppose global tyranny and support the right to self determination. Syria does not want another attempt to create a free-market enterprise on the remnants of Syrian society through a shock doctrinal policy- a Middle East of Israel and America, but not of free, Arab nations. Syria opens the floor to discussion of its position on American foreign policy.
Cheese_Monster
QFA
QFA
The Arab Republic of Syria presents this Position Paper to the General Assembly and the Security Council and asks the representative to the United States to consider more reconciliatory and holistic approaches to its foreign policy in the Middle East in future. It would like to hear from the US representative.
OOC: Although I've just seen that Kiss is banned, not sure for how long.
The Swiss Confederation believes that before Syria condemns the USA it ought to look at the stability in its own nation and the rest of the Arab world, because lets face it, it is not exactly the bastion of peace. We Swiss however, also find it good that Syria has got this through and we hope that in the future Syria and the USA will cooperate diplomatically to encourage multilateral relations between the two nations because sabre rattling is unnecessary and a waste of time.
The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan highly disagrees with its neighbour. The US has provided a constant platform for multilateral and internationalist support through the United Nations, NATO and various other organisations. The Kingdom believes that it is not them who is at fault, it is us in the Arab world for not taking the opportunity to voice our concerns unlike many of the esteemed representatives further afield. Furthermore, " Syria calls on solidarity with its Arab brothers, with the Arab League, with all those who oppose global tyranny and support the right to self determination." I the representative of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan highlight this statement in light of the fact that we in the Arab world have not been all that cooperative. Baathism in particularly as an Anti Colonial and Post Colonial Pan Arab movement failed as shown by the United Arab Republic and the fact that Jordan is one of the more Secular Kingdom's in the Arab world. We call on Syria to change their stance and that their manichaen view of the USA and their foreign policy is not helpful towards any diplomatic process or cooperation.
The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan highly disagrees with its neighbour. The US has provided a constant platform for multilateral and internationalist support through the United Nations, NATO and various other organisations. The Kingdom believes that it is not them who is at fault, it is us in the Arab world for not taking the opportunity to voice our concerns unlike many of the esteemed representatives further afield. Furthermore, " Syria calls on solidarity with its Arab brothers, with the Arab League, with all those who oppose global tyranny and support the right to self determination." I the representative of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan highlight this statement in light of the fact that we in the Arab world have not been all that cooperative. Baathism in particularly as an Anti Colonial and Post Colonial Pan Arab movement failed as shown by the United Arab Republic and the fact that Jordan is one of the more Secular Kingdom's in the Arab world. We call on Syria to change their stance and that their manichaen view of the USA and their foreign policy is not helpful towards any diplomatic process or cooperation.
[North Korea]
The DPRK greatly endorses this position paper. We, and many other nations have noticed the clear bias of the International Community when it comes to enforcement of International Law. Nations such as Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom, have broken International Laws on many occasions with little repercussions, yet nations such as Iran are given crippling sanctions on the basis of flawed evidence and assertion.
We look forward to the response of the United States, as well as their allies.
The DPRK greatly endorses this position paper. We, and many other nations have noticed the clear bias of the International Community when it comes to enforcement of International Law. Nations such as Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom, have broken International Laws on many occasions with little repercussions, yet nations such as Iran are given crippling sanctions on the basis of flawed evidence and assertion.
We look forward to the response of the United States, as well as their allies.
The Kingdom of Morocco must respectfully disagree with the position held by Syria. Morocco congratulates the United States on their efforts towards bringing peace throughout the world but particularly the effort they have continuously put into the Middle East. The United States has for a long time acted to quell tensions and violence in a region rife with both and we feel they should be commended for showing such leadership. Morocco would like to see the United States continue with its current foreign policy towards the Middle East as we think they are both willing and capable of bringing lasting peace to the region.
The Federal Republic of Germany does not agree with the position and has the same beliefs of The Swiss Confederation in that Syria should look upon its own nation and its stability before condemning the USA's attempts to 'interfere'
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
[North Korea]
We find it interesting that the nations disagreeing with this position paper do so without evidence. If you wish to show that the position paper is flawed then prove why, disputing it's claims and the evidence used. Otherwise, it remains perfectly legitimate.
We find it interesting that the nations disagreeing with this position paper do so without evidence. If you wish to show that the position paper is flawed then prove why, disputing it's claims and the evidence used. Otherwise, it remains perfectly legitimate.
The US dismisses these claims on the basis that the Syrian Republic is not taking into account the benefits democracy has brought to the people who have chosen to overthrow similar regimes in the Arab Spring of 2011. We do not see how our attempts to bring help, fair election and an end to authoritarian regimes where the people have given a call for help is a mark of colonialism, if anything it suggests a more mature humanitarian goal for the world itself. Whilst we understand that some places have not yet achieved an enlightened policy on government which is fair, we aim to help those which seek it, and Syria is no exception.
As for the argument that we are the biggest threat to peace, this is a ludicrous statement since the Middle East has been rampant with war long before we partook in activities to help bring peace about. If we examine the conditions of living in Afghanistan and Iraq based on GDP and HDI, we see that the quality of life has improved since American intervention.
Terrorism world wide has been countered more than it has been caused by our engagement in the War on Terror. We have successfully captured and killed some of the most wanted men in the world through our intelligence gathering, military operations and interrogations.
The Palestinian/Israeli conflict has largely been rooted in Zionism, not American foreign policy. Whilst America trades and deals with the Israeli government, we cannot exert control over a sovereign state which has yet to be fully recognised by the Arab League through sheer stubbornness.
This is a mere backlash from Assad's crumbling regime under the pressure of a people who are unprepared to take his authoritarianism any longer, and we will support these fighters of democracy.
As for the argument that we are the biggest threat to peace, this is a ludicrous statement since the Middle East has been rampant with war long before we partook in activities to help bring peace about. If we examine the conditions of living in Afghanistan and Iraq based on GDP and HDI, we see that the quality of life has improved since American intervention.
Terrorism world wide has been countered more than it has been caused by our engagement in the War on Terror. We have successfully captured and killed some of the most wanted men in the world through our intelligence gathering, military operations and interrogations.
The Palestinian/Israeli conflict has largely been rooted in Zionism, not American foreign policy. Whilst America trades and deals with the Israeli government, we cannot exert control over a sovereign state which has yet to be fully recognised by the Arab League through sheer stubbornness.
This is a mere backlash from Assad's crumbling regime under the pressure of a people who are unprepared to take his authoritarianism any longer, and we will support these fighters of democracy.
Original post by Kiss
The US dismisses these claims on the basis that the Syrian Republic is not taking into account the benefits democracy has brought to the people who have chosen to overthrow similar regimes in the Arab Spring of 2011. We do not see how our attempts to bring help, fair election and an end to authoritarian regimes where the people have given a call for help is a mark of colonialism, if anything it suggests a more mature humanitarian goal for the world itself. Whilst we understand that some places have not yet achieved an enlightened policy on government which is fair, we aim to help those which seek it, and Syria is no exception.
As for the argument that we are the biggest threat to peace, this is a ludicrous statement since the Middle East has been rampant with war long before we partook in activities to help bring peace about. If we examine the conditions of living in Afghanistan and Iraq based on GDP and HDI, we see that the quality of life has improved since American intervention.
Terrorism world wide has been countered more than it has been caused by our engagement in the War on Terror. We have successfully captured and killed some of the most wanted men in the world through our intelligence gathering, military operations and interrogations.
The Palestinian/Israeli conflict has largely been rooted in Zionism, not American foreign policy. Whilst America trades and deals with the Israeli government, we cannot exert control over a sovereign state which has yet to be fully recognised by the Arab League through sheer stubbornness.
This is a mere backlash from Assad's crumbling regime under the pressure of a people who are unprepared to take his authoritarianism any longer, and we will support these fighters of democracy.
As for the argument that we are the biggest threat to peace, this is a ludicrous statement since the Middle East has been rampant with war long before we partook in activities to help bring peace about. If we examine the conditions of living in Afghanistan and Iraq based on GDP and HDI, we see that the quality of life has improved since American intervention.
Terrorism world wide has been countered more than it has been caused by our engagement in the War on Terror. We have successfully captured and killed some of the most wanted men in the world through our intelligence gathering, military operations and interrogations.
The Palestinian/Israeli conflict has largely been rooted in Zionism, not American foreign policy. Whilst America trades and deals with the Israeli government, we cannot exert control over a sovereign state which has yet to be fully recognised by the Arab League through sheer stubbornness.
This is a mere backlash from Assad's crumbling regime under the pressure of a people who are unprepared to take his authoritarianism any longer, and we will support these fighters of democracy.
Russia feels it ought to point out America has had its hands in the middle east for the better half of atleast a century...
Original post by cl_steele
Russia feels it ought to point out America has had its hands in the middle east for the better half of atleast a century...
The US rebuffs this argument on the fact that Russia has done likewise.
Original post by Kiss
The US rebuffs this argument on the fact that Russia has done likewise.
Russia has never denied this however we dispute any assertion that we are currently involved there.
Original post by Kiss
The US dismisses these claims on the basis that the Syrian Republic is not taking into account the benefits democracy has brought to the people who have chosen to overthrow similar regimes in the Arab Spring of 2011. We do not see how our attempts to bring help, fair election and an end to authoritarian regimes where the people have given a call for help is a mark of colonialism, if anything it suggests a more mature humanitarian goal for the world itself. Whilst we understand that some places have not yet achieved an enlightened policy on government which is fair, we aim to help those which seek it, and Syria is no exception.
The Syrian Arab Republic asks the USA where it sees any benefits brought from the Arab Spring bar discord and tumult? Syria also recognises that the US representative has ignored many of its tangible examples of American attempts to destabilise perfectly democratic governments to install its own puppet governments. Why does your country believe you are more 'enlightened' than the rest of us, that seems both sanctimonious and incredibly ill informed. It seems to Syria that America is so badly informed of Middle Eastern politics; its foreign policy is merely decided by the opposition parties to legitimate governments in the Middle East, and without any contingency plan once your interdictions have occurred, you actually leave the nations that you are 'attempting to help' in worse condition.
As for the argument that we are the biggest threat to peace, this is a ludicrous statement since the Middle East has been rampant with war long before we partook in activities to help bring peace about. If we examine the conditions of living in Afghanistan and Iraq based on GDP and HDI, we see that the quality of life has improved since American intervention.
Syria would think it foolish that you measure one's quality of life by GDP. Also, perhaps your statement is true, but America has only exacerbated hatred and bloodshed unnecessarily in the Middle East.
Terrorism world wide has been countered more than it has been caused by our engagement in the War on Terror. We have successfully captured and killed some of the most wanted men in the world through our intelligence gathering, military operations and interrogations.
Syria asks why the US is so deluded? 'Terrorism' as you define it is not what 'terrorists do', a vague concept confined to one organisation, or a group of men and it cannot be defeated with bullets. This statement is mere conjecture, what evidence do you have to support such a statement if we compare the state of the Middle East before your 'War on Terror', to today's political climate? Isn't your 'War on Terror' itself just a Bush pseudo-concept designed to give the US unlimited access to pillage the Middle East under the guise of 'peacekeeping' against an intangible enemy in 'terror'?
The Palestinian/Israeli conflict has largely been rooted in Zionism, not American foreign policy. Whilst America trades and deals with the Israeli government, we cannot exert control over a sovereign state which has yet to be fully recognised by the Arab League through sheer stubbornness.
It has been completely undermined by America's support of Zionism.
This is a mere backlash from Assad's crumbling regime under the pressure of a people who are unprepared to take his authoritarianism any longer, and we will support these fighters of democracy.
Yet again, the US' naivety shines through. Why do you assume that any opposition group has 'moral legitimacy'? Indeed, Assad's enemies are largely splinter factions of Al-Qaeda, also your enemy? So why do you now support them? Syria asks if America could please be more consistent with their foreign policy and stick to ideals rather than backing whoever it is will benefit their regime better.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- AQA A Level Geography Paper 2 (7037/2) - 6th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Edexcel A Level History Option 2G Italy
- AQA A Level History Paper 1 (options A to L) 7042/1C - 26 May 2022 [Exam Chat]
- Will I lose marks for using difficult to access article?
- AQA A-level History USA: Making of a Superpower (7042/1K) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- AQA A-Level History Paper 2 Option 2H
- AQA A Level Economics Paper 2 (7136/2) -22th May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- A level stuarts factor question
- Us history paper alevel on wednesday
- predictions for a level history tudors exam
- Is AIT still a non-profit organization?
- OCR A-Level History Unit 1 (Y101-Y113) - 9th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- AQA A Level History - Making of Modern Britain(2S) Exam Chat - 9th June 2023
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3A (9PL0 3A) 16th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- AQA A Level History Paper 2 (7042/2A to 2T) 9 June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Help needed: Economics A-level question
- Edexcel A Level Economics A Paper 3 (9ECO 03) - 5th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- ALEVEL HISTORY Essay Help!!!
- AQA A Level History Paper 1 (7042/1A to 1L) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]
- History course work- To what extent Germany was responsible for the outbreak of ww1
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
