|
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Debate: The Situation in Iraq | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 14 2014, 07:52 PM (249 Views) | |
| Bobithy | Jul 14 2014, 07:52 PM Post #1 |
|
Great Leader of the Korean People
|
![]() Vitaly Churkin Permanent Ambassador to the United Nations Russian Federation Esteemed delegates and distinguished guests, We speak before you today to bring up a vital issue of global and regional security: the deteriorating situation in the Republic of Iraq. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) have made dramatic gains in the country since the beginning of the year. As we are all well aware, the Iraqi security forces have had significant problems fighting the ISIS fighters and thus far the group has pushed nearly to Baghdad and in fact we expect fighting to begin occurring in Baghdad any day. Now, the Russian Federation currently has soldiers in Iraq at the request of the Iraqi government to train their Air Force in the use of new equipment provided and to provide security for our trainers. However unilateral action is not what is needed in Iraq. A force, backed by the United Nations, in order to push the ISIS out of Iraq is what is needed in this situation. Currently there are French, Russian, Iranian, and American personnel on the ground in the country; though it seems the Americans are concentrating on assisting the Kurdish regions in the North. That is already virtually an international presence. But it is not an international presence via the UN. It is via the invitation of the Iraqi government. It is just as legal; but this situation does need "just as legal" moves by individual countries. This situation needs the United Nations to intervene. I think that all of us can agree that the ISIS is a terrorist organization; something none of the responsible members of the United Nations can support. As a result the Russian Federation is calling upon this body to authorize a United Nations military intervention in Iraq for the sole purpose of removing the ISIS from the country and to ensure they do not return. The ISIS are also in Syria and if any member of this body wishes to bring that up as well; we would not be opposed but we would reiterate the need for restraint due to the full scale civil war being fought in that country. I also would like to invite the honored delegate from the Republic of Iraq to participate in this discussion if he so wishes in order to ensure that what we decide is in line with what the Iraqi government wants; something that was not done in the past and something that Russia has no intention of being allowed to be repeated. I yield the floor to discussion. |
![]() |
|
| Eryk | Jul 15 2014, 03:48 AM Post #2 |
|
СССР
|
United States Ambassador to the United Nations Ambassador Churkin, You, as the Iraqi representative, will recall that the United States has repeatedly stated both publicly and privately that political reforms are necessary for Iraq to survive as a united state. The sectarian crisis that is ongoing can only be alleviated by a change of government, and the political crisis in Baghdad can only be resolved through a dedicated new head of government willing to listen to all national minorities and pursue the completion of a new constitutional document providing guarantees and rights to the Sunni and Kurdish minorities. This has been our position throughout the duration of this crisis, and will continue to be our position. As a result, we will not support direct intervention by the United Nations in this case. We emphasize that through political reforms Baghdad can reassert its legitimacy and present a necessary united front to the ISIS. We have provided extensive assistance to Baghdad already, including intelligence that was gathered through our overflights in the conflict areas, and on the ground with the deployment of hundreds of officers to assist Iraqi forces in combat. These measures have helped stall the advance of ISIS, and are giving Baghdad the time it needs to work out a political arrangement. We have further offered our diplomats as mediators between all three major minorities, however this offer has fallen upon deaf ears, it seems. To put it flatly, the ball is in the Iraqi government's court. Substantial effort has been put into assisting it, and convincing it that changes are necessary. Unless the crucial necessary changes come about, any military action will prove temporary, as the Sunni Muslim minority will enter a constant state of insurgency as it has for the past decade because of presumed and actual mistreatment at the hands of a government inconsiderate of it and its plight. |
![]() |
|
| Chris | Jul 15 2014, 08:01 AM Post #3 |
![]()
|
Sir Geoffrey Adams Her Britannic Majesty's Permanent Representative to the United Nations HM Government is watching developments in Iraq with some concern, however for as long as ISIS retains a presence in Syria, any action in Iraq will be relatively fruitless. We do not believe that the threat ISIS presents can be removed from one without the other, and we also have concern that as pressure builds on ISIS in Iraq and Syria, the group will likely dissolve and reappear elsewhere, with our assessments suggesting Jordan is at particular risk as border crossings have been lost and the flow of refugees and other displaced peoples from Syria into Jordan provides cover for these extremists. I can appreciate your call for a UN military intervention Ambassador Churkin, however, I do not believe that this will solve the problem. This is a domestic issue that can only be resolved politically by Iraq. As Ambassador Power has implied, if Iraq is unprepared to address the situation at hand military action will provide only a temporary reprieve. In fact, it will likely only serve to inflame the situation further as civilian casualties inevitably mount, the Sunni population feel further aggrieved that they are being targeted not only by their government, but by the international community, and Iraq once again becomes a sectarian battleground that makes the crisis in Syria look miniscule. |
![]() |
|
| Bobithy | Jul 15 2014, 09:37 AM Post #4 |
|
Great Leader of the Korean People
|
![]() Vitaly Churkin Permanent Ambassador to the United Nations Russian Federation It is beyond disappointing that the Western Community has such views of Iraq and are willing to simply let the country disintegrate because they disagree with the way the government is run or how it is set up. Yes the government needs to be reformed but you are asking them to reform in the middle of a virtual civil war: something that is not smart for any government. |
![]() |
|
| Redbirdfan | Jul 15 2014, 09:53 AM Post #5 |
|
Bundesrepublik Deutschland
|
Ambassador Liu Jieyi Permanent Representative of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations Beijing reiterates the need for an agreement here in the Security Council. Washington has ignoted this crisis by placing an ineffectual government in charge and then refusing to help when said government fails, their actions have been morally irrehensible thus far. China would be willing to find an agreement that legalizes the current deployment of international forces in Iraq as the safeguard of security for the country. However, the Iraqi government must step up and begin to route out the terrorits in the country, such as ISIL/ISIS. |
![]() |
|
| Eryk | Jul 15 2014, 10:03 AM Post #6 |
|
СССР
|
United States Ambassador to the United Nations Ambassadors, There seems to be a prevailing - and incorrect - opinion that it is somehow our responsibility for the current crisis in Iraq, and that we bare responsibility for the government of the incumbent Prime Minister. We do not, and Iraq has been a sovereign nation that was provided with a gret deal of assistance to build a democratic government and an effectual civil service. In 2011 our forces left after Iraqi insistence that such a withdrawal come, and for the past five years we have continued to provide humanitarian and reconstruction aid to the Republic of Iraq. I will say once more, and for the final time, we are not responsible for Iraq, and we will not intervene on behalf of its support. We will not support an intervention mandated by the United Nations either. The only involvement of the United Nations which we would envision and support is a UN Peacekeeping mission, after necessary political reforms have been enacted, and the active combat phase of the current crisis in Iraq is concluded. Edited by Eryk, Jul 15 2014, 10:03 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Eryk | Jul 15 2014, 10:12 AM Post #7 |
|
СССР
|
United States Ambassador to the United Nations Apologies - I misspoke. We will not support intervention on behalf of the current Iraqi government, and not Iraq itself. Should political reforms be enacted, and a new inclusive government formed, we would be willing to revisit this proposal. |
![]() |
|
| Bobithy | Jul 15 2014, 10:13 AM Post #8 |
|
Great Leader of the Korean People
|
![]() Vitaly Churkin Permanent Ambassador to the United Nations Russian Federation Excuse us, delegate, but it was an ineffectual campaign of occupation which has caused this instability. The Iraqi government, in its current form, was supported by America and now you simply are pulling your support from it because you do not view it as in your interests anymore. Instead it seems that the interests of Washington are to see a country fall apart, terrorists come to power, and for the entire region if not the entire world be destabilized by a country which will more than likely supply terrorist organizations globally in a Jihad which will not only endanger Europe, Asia, and the Middle East; but also your cities again. Has America so soon forgotten about that horrible day in September of 2001? We hope not. |
![]() |
|
| Eryk | Jul 15 2014, 10:22 AM Post #9 |
|
СССР
|
United States Ambassador to the United Nations Forgive me if I am mistaken, but it appears that you are insinuating that we are indirectly supporting the rise of a terrorist group in the Republic of Iraq. We are not, nor will we be held responsible for any of the failures of the Iraqi government when we have expended so much to make it a viable state. In fact, we have given so much, that the fate of Iraq is now in the hands of its own leaders, and what they decide moving forward. Should they continue the path of sectarian conflict, and disagreement, no level of intervention will ever calm the Sunni minority which, as the British Ambassador so eloquently mentioned, would only be infuriated more. That is our primary concern, that this intervention will merely be a temporary resolution to the crisis, and five years or less after the withdrawal of international forces, this conflict will flare up yet again. Quick fixes are not the way forward. That is why we have repeatedly proposed to mediate between the three major minorities in Iraq, and to provide the level of support necessary once the root of this conflict is targeted. |
![]() |
|
| Bobithy | Jul 15 2014, 10:26 AM Post #10 |
|
Great Leader of the Korean People
|
![]() Vitaly Churkin Permanent Ambassador to the United Nations Russian Federation There is no insinuation Ambassador Powers, the Russian Federation believes that you are indirectly deteriorating the situation further and thus indirectly supporting the take of of Iraq by a terrorist organization. The Republic of Iraq, as was shown by the actions of their soldiers; incidentally soldiers trained by your Armed Forces and who ran away at the first sight of the enemy; was not ready to be responsible for their own security. America simply was unwilling to finish what it started, illegally started in fact. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Round 4 · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2










8:58 AM Jul 13
