un project reflection tea paragraphs and 5 sentences
1.) If another student asked me why the model United Nations project was important I would tell them that it was important because it helped us understand how the world leaders come to important decisions together and help make the world better. Learning about this was important for us to understand how to think critically about the big picture and all the people our decisions would affect, unlike how we usually think about our well being above others. My amendment to syria resolution was a good example because I had to take a step back and think about my decision more towards what would be the best for the people of Israel and not my own grade. this really made me think a lot more deeply about the things I decide on in the real world.
2.) I think that the habit of heart and mind that I exemplified the best during the model UN conference was my advocacy. A good example of this was when I advocated to China about my proposed amendment to their resolution 2a. I had to really step out in a crowd that was severely against me and tell them what I really thought should go into the resolution and I believe that because I stood my ground and advocated they really listened to what I had to say.
3.) I believe that the greatest challenge I faced in the model UN project was the continuous discouragement on my writing from the repeated bad grades i received from matt on my papers. However I pushed myself to do better on my final resolution and I received my best grade of the project. this showed me how to really persevere and work harder and harder until I finally get a grade I am satisfied with.
4.) I think that the most interesting comment or speech that a delegate gave at the exhibition was when I proposed that Israel shouldn’t have to move when the Palestinians can live anywhere, and Dana responded and told me to think about how the living conditions are for the Palestinians in their refugee camps. this really made me think of the Palestinians angle in the situation and not just think so much about my own country.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 5 sentences
In short, this project was to simulate a real world United Nations meeting. Each student was assigned a country to be the prime minister/president of. we wrote a policy paper on how our country felt on each issue, for example we practiced with a mini project on North Korea before we moved on to Israel and Palestine. Then we wrote a resolution for the problem for both countries and were given a final grade. In the end we did an exhibition in front of the public to show them how we could make a real life UN situation and come to an educated decision that everyone agreed with.
2.) I think that the habit of heart and mind that I exemplified the best during the model UN conference was my advocacy. A good example of this was when I advocated to China about my proposed amendment to their resolution 2a. I had to really step out in a crowd that was severely against me and tell them what I really thought should go into the resolution and I believe that because I stood my ground and advocated they really listened to what I had to say.
3.) I believe that the greatest challenge I faced in the model UN project was the continuous discouragement on my writing from the repeated bad grades i received from matt on my papers. However I pushed myself to do better on my final resolution and I received my best grade of the project. this showed me how to really persevere and work harder and harder until I finally get a grade I am satisfied with.
4.) I think that the most interesting comment or speech that a delegate gave at the exhibition was when I proposed that Israel shouldn’t have to move when the Palestinians can live anywhere, and Dana responded and told me to think about how the living conditions are for the Palestinians in their refugee camps. this really made me think of the Palestinians angle in the situation and not just think so much about my own country.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 5 sentences
In short, this project was to simulate a real world United Nations meeting. Each student was assigned a country to be the prime minister/president of. we wrote a policy paper on how our country felt on each issue, for example we practiced with a mini project on North Korea before we moved on to Israel and Palestine. Then we wrote a resolution for the problem for both countries and were given a final grade. In the end we did an exhibition in front of the public to show them how we could make a real life UN situation and come to an educated decision that everyone agreed with.
policy paper and resolution for north korea
Rifkin 1
Israel Policy Paper on North Korea’s Nuclear Missiles
TJ Rifkin
Matt Dooley
Model UN
6th February 2014
Israel Policy Paper
Although North Korea has national sovereignty, Israel highly encourages the United Nations to remain with harsh sanctions on North Korea. Israel supports this measure because North Korea is allied with some of Israel’s arch-enemies. this increases the chance of hurting Israel with North Korea’s Nukes.
Because North Korea is allied with many of Israel's enemies, the threat of nuclear trade to these enemies of Israel is very real and it is very relevant to the safety of Israel. Israel should request that the UN outlaws nuclear trade between North Korea and Israeli Bordering countries, such as Palestine, Iran, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. By doing this Israel’s national security could be greatly increased. Where as if these countries were to gain this nuclear power with the help of North Korea, Israel would be in deep trouble. Israel needs a solution to help resolve this issue quickly and efficiently.
Rifkin 2
If these countries were to each gain nuclear power from North Korea, Israel would be the first target for any of them. Author Ben Alon David wrote, “Iran and other potential customers in the Middle East are interested in purchasing nuclear weapons. It is feared that North Korea, which for years has been providing various countries in the Middle East with missile technology, is liable to become a supplier of nuclear technology and weapons to the region in the middle East.” (David, 1.) This article shows clearly the same idea Israel is trying to get across, that should North Korea ever give nuclear power to these hostile countries, they would all strike Israel first on their list. Overall, the evidence shown, has proven Israel’s stance on the North Korean Nuclear situation. Israel has the proposed solution of taking North Korea’s nuclear weapon’s by force, therefore solving and eliminating any nuclear threat to the national Israeli security by enemy countries.
Works Cited
David, Alon Ben. "Israel Fears North Korea to Become Nuclear Supplier of Middle East - Al-Monitor: The Pulse of the Middle East." Al-Monitor. Israel Pulse, 19 Feb. 2013. Web. 29 Jan. 2014.
Newspaper ArticleLinkTagsEditDelete
"Israel's Sequel to North Korea's Nuclear Playbook." Weblog post. Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 7 Oct. 2013. Web. 29 Jan. 2014.
Blog / PodcastLinkTagsEditDelete
Reuters, John M. "North Korea Rejects UN Sanctions, Declares Pursuit of Nuclear Weapons." Haaretz.com. Haaretz, 9 Mar. 2013. Web. 29 Jan. 2014.
Resolution Paper
General assembly committee
Israel (TJ Rifkin)
Allowing North Korea to have Nuclear Weapons
Guided by the facts of of the past, Israel maintains that the arguably minor sanctions the United Nations has placed on North Korea have been unsuccessful to say the least,
Bearing in mind that these past sanctions have been minor, this happens any time the UN security council tries to put any major sanctions on North Korea, their main ally (China, a member of the security council) Vetoes the decision to keep their alliance with north Korea,
Now realizing that the UN has not controlled North Korea, and their last 2 attempts to stop North Korea nukes of 1718, 1874 have failed,
Convinced now that North Korean sanctions are so minor, they focus more on their nuclear program than feeding their own people,
Affirming that The UN’s sanctions on North Korea have shown the UN’s inability and weakness to act strongly when needed, a new resolution is needed between the UN and North Korea,
1.) Discourages the UN to allow North Korea to continue making nuclear bombs or keep them.
2.) Further requests that the UN security council steps into North Korea with military power, secure and take away their nuclear weapons, in order to give countries that are enemies with North Korea, including israel, peace of mind.
3.) Denies that North Korea deserves the right to national sovereignty, due to their track record of hostility and unpredictability.
a.) Acknowledging that North Korea will not willingly give up their national sovereignty.
4.) Calls upon the general assembly to hear Israel’s dilemma and cry for help to outlaw North Korea’s nuclear arsenal and give them harsh sanctions should they try and rebuild it.
5.) Takes note that not all countries within the general assembly will agree with this resolution, but however will be content with the decision made by the security council to better all countries as a whole.
6.) Further reminds the UN of North Korea’s recent childish behavior, with their petty nuclear threats regularly to the US and a number of their other enemies that they should have these nuclear privileges taken away immediately.
7.) Transmits the message to the UN that the imminent danger caused to Israel will be extreme, unless North Korea is given more sanctions to control their nuclear unpredictability.
8.) Authorizes the UN to take and action towards North Korea that would still result in a shared hatred between Israel and North Korea.
Israel Policy Paper on North Korea’s Nuclear Missiles
TJ Rifkin
Matt Dooley
Model UN
6th February 2014
Israel Policy Paper
Although North Korea has national sovereignty, Israel highly encourages the United Nations to remain with harsh sanctions on North Korea. Israel supports this measure because North Korea is allied with some of Israel’s arch-enemies. this increases the chance of hurting Israel with North Korea’s Nukes.
Because North Korea is allied with many of Israel's enemies, the threat of nuclear trade to these enemies of Israel is very real and it is very relevant to the safety of Israel. Israel should request that the UN outlaws nuclear trade between North Korea and Israeli Bordering countries, such as Palestine, Iran, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. By doing this Israel’s national security could be greatly increased. Where as if these countries were to gain this nuclear power with the help of North Korea, Israel would be in deep trouble. Israel needs a solution to help resolve this issue quickly and efficiently.
Rifkin 2
If these countries were to each gain nuclear power from North Korea, Israel would be the first target for any of them. Author Ben Alon David wrote, “Iran and other potential customers in the Middle East are interested in purchasing nuclear weapons. It is feared that North Korea, which for years has been providing various countries in the Middle East with missile technology, is liable to become a supplier of nuclear technology and weapons to the region in the middle East.” (David, 1.) This article shows clearly the same idea Israel is trying to get across, that should North Korea ever give nuclear power to these hostile countries, they would all strike Israel first on their list. Overall, the evidence shown, has proven Israel’s stance on the North Korean Nuclear situation. Israel has the proposed solution of taking North Korea’s nuclear weapon’s by force, therefore solving and eliminating any nuclear threat to the national Israeli security by enemy countries.
Works Cited
David, Alon Ben. "Israel Fears North Korea to Become Nuclear Supplier of Middle East - Al-Monitor: The Pulse of the Middle East." Al-Monitor. Israel Pulse, 19 Feb. 2013. Web. 29 Jan. 2014.
Newspaper ArticleLinkTagsEditDelete
"Israel's Sequel to North Korea's Nuclear Playbook." Weblog post. Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 7 Oct. 2013. Web. 29 Jan. 2014.
Blog / PodcastLinkTagsEditDelete
Reuters, John M. "North Korea Rejects UN Sanctions, Declares Pursuit of Nuclear Weapons." Haaretz.com. Haaretz, 9 Mar. 2013. Web. 29 Jan. 2014.
Resolution Paper
General assembly committee
Israel (TJ Rifkin)
Allowing North Korea to have Nuclear Weapons
Guided by the facts of of the past, Israel maintains that the arguably minor sanctions the United Nations has placed on North Korea have been unsuccessful to say the least,
Bearing in mind that these past sanctions have been minor, this happens any time the UN security council tries to put any major sanctions on North Korea, their main ally (China, a member of the security council) Vetoes the decision to keep their alliance with north Korea,
Now realizing that the UN has not controlled North Korea, and their last 2 attempts to stop North Korea nukes of 1718, 1874 have failed,
Convinced now that North Korean sanctions are so minor, they focus more on their nuclear program than feeding their own people,
Affirming that The UN’s sanctions on North Korea have shown the UN’s inability and weakness to act strongly when needed, a new resolution is needed between the UN and North Korea,
1.) Discourages the UN to allow North Korea to continue making nuclear bombs or keep them.
2.) Further requests that the UN security council steps into North Korea with military power, secure and take away their nuclear weapons, in order to give countries that are enemies with North Korea, including israel, peace of mind.
3.) Denies that North Korea deserves the right to national sovereignty, due to their track record of hostility and unpredictability.
a.) Acknowledging that North Korea will not willingly give up their national sovereignty.
4.) Calls upon the general assembly to hear Israel’s dilemma and cry for help to outlaw North Korea’s nuclear arsenal and give them harsh sanctions should they try and rebuild it.
5.) Takes note that not all countries within the general assembly will agree with this resolution, but however will be content with the decision made by the security council to better all countries as a whole.
6.) Further reminds the UN of North Korea’s recent childish behavior, with their petty nuclear threats regularly to the US and a number of their other enemies that they should have these nuclear privileges taken away immediately.
7.) Transmits the message to the UN that the imminent danger caused to Israel will be extreme, unless North Korea is given more sanctions to control their nuclear unpredictability.
8.) Authorizes the UN to take and action towards North Korea that would still result in a shared hatred between Israel and North Korea.
policy paper and resolution for israel and palestine
TJ Rifkin
March 3rd, 2014
Dooley Humanities
Israel and Palestine Policy Paper
Although Israel has made many efforts to create peace with the people of Palestine, Israel’s more than generous offers of peace have been denied by the political officials of Palestine, therefore Israel proposes the new solution of leaving few military bases and limited Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but pulling out the majority of the Israeli population, therefore allowing a multitude of Palestinians to settle in the West Bank once again. Israel’s previous proposal to the Palestinians of giving them 38% of the West Bank was denied by Palestinian prime minister Mahmoud Abbas.(Federman, 3.) The Palestinians countered with an offer to Israel that they should take 95% of the West Bank. Israel shot this proposal down immediately ( Federman, 1). Israel as a whole believes that if Palestine continues to be greedy, and not accept the more than generous offers that we keep putting forth, then they shouldn’t reserve the right to re-occupy any of the West Bank at all.
Israel is prepared to allow 300,000 of its residents to live under Palestinian control should they not relocate when Israel give the word to do so. Of course this is all contingent upon Palestine’s acceptance of Israel’s offer to pull the majority of their residents and military forces (IDF) Stuart Maariv wrote in the Times Of Israel, “Israel has raised the idea of transferring parts of the territory in “the triangle” southeast of Haifa — along with the hundreds of thousands of Israeli-Arab citizens who live there — to a future Palestinian state in return for annexing West Bank territory including settlement blocs, Maariv reported on Wednesday.” ( Maariv, 2 .) We believe that this will help solve our conflict with Palestine because this is a very generous offer and this could potentially call a final “cease fire” on the continuous dispute between Israel and Palestine.
TJ Rifkin
Dooley Humanities
March 7th, 2014
The General Assembly and Security Council,
Israel (TJ Rifkin)
Israel and Palestine Resolution
Guided by the fact that Israel took the land in the West Bank in a defensive war against the Jordanian people, and that Palestine never owned the land in the first place,
Bearing in mind that Israel has 25% of their gross population occupying the West Bank with their settlements and multiple military bases, ( Chaime, 1)
Affirming that Palestine calls out for redemption in their supposed land that is the West Bank, and that their calls do not go unnoticed,
Emphasizing that Palestine has been hostile to Israel, but not denying that Israel has also committed acts of aggression as well,
Having considered that Palestine has no true legal right to the land in the West Bank that they wish to return to, and noting the greed expressed by Palestine’s denial of Israel’s generous peace offers, (Lapidoth 1),
Keeping in mind that Israel has offered multiple treaties to the Palestinian people in a valiant effort to create peace between the two countries,
Realizing that Palestine wants more land in the West bank than they deserve or need, it’s land that belongs to the Israeli people , land that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of their property (Declaration of Human Rights, Article 17),
Recalling that the land that the Israelis currently occupy was never in legal possession of Palestine, but was taken from the Jordanians in the war of 1956 in an act of defense (Ayalon),
Having examined that the Israeli people have been living in this land for thousands of year in advance, the holy relics in jerusalem, Judea, and samaria are an undeniable reason to allow Israel to keep the land ( Kohn 1),
1.) Calls upon the general assembly to urge Palestine to accept Israel’s proposal to allow them back into 38% of the West Bank and create peace between the countries;
2.) Expresses its hope that the General Assembly will instruct Palestine that their return to the West Bank is a privilege created by Israel not a right, and that the offer proposed by Israel as stated above is very generous;
3.) Denies Palestine their counter offer to return to 95% of the West Bank, which would force Israel to other parts of the land ( Federman 1);
4.) Welcomes the Palestinians into 38% of the Israeli owned West Bank, and leaving very limited military bases and pulling the majority of the Israeli population out of that particular area in the west bank;
5.) Proclaims that Palestine does not reserve the right of return and that Israel’s proposed offer is very serious and should be very carefully considered;
6.) Declares accordingly that Palestine should accept the offer of taking 38% of the land offered to them by Israel in the West Bank, or future offers will not be as generous as this one is now;
7.) Further reminds Palestine that Israel is giving this proposed 38% in a sincere effort to create peace, with the most sincere hopes of ending the grudge held between the two countries;
8.) Calls upon the United Nations to allow Israel to have full access to any holy sites or relics that fall within the borders of the land allowed back to Palestine in the West Bank;
a.) Allows neutral zone roads between all holy sites;
b.) Urges that all relics inside any sites should be guarded 24 hours a day to maintain safety so that no harm shall be caused between opposing religions;
c.) Resolves that any and all holy places that Palestine has in Israel’s land, shall be easily accessed by the Palestinians at any time;
9.) Requests that the UN allows Israel and Palestine to each have their national sovereignty over disputes and issues between the two countries on a small scale.
Works Cited
Lapidoth, Ruth. "Palestinian Refugees:Do Palestinian Refugees Have a Legal "Right of Return" to Israel?" Do Palestinian Refugees Have a Legal "Right of Return" to Israel? Jewish Virtual Library, n.d. Web. 06 Mar. 2014.
WebsiteLinkTagsEditDelete
"The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UDHR, Declaration of Human Rights, Human Rights Declaration, Human Rights Charter, The Un and Human Rights." UN News Center. UN, n.d. Web. 05 Mar. 2014.
Federman, Josef. "‘Israel Wants to Hold 40% of West Bank in Peace Deal’." The Times of Israel. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Mar. 2014.
March 3rd, 2014
Dooley Humanities
Israel and Palestine Policy Paper
Although Israel has made many efforts to create peace with the people of Palestine, Israel’s more than generous offers of peace have been denied by the political officials of Palestine, therefore Israel proposes the new solution of leaving few military bases and limited Israeli settlements in the West Bank, but pulling out the majority of the Israeli population, therefore allowing a multitude of Palestinians to settle in the West Bank once again. Israel’s previous proposal to the Palestinians of giving them 38% of the West Bank was denied by Palestinian prime minister Mahmoud Abbas.(Federman, 3.) The Palestinians countered with an offer to Israel that they should take 95% of the West Bank. Israel shot this proposal down immediately ( Federman, 1). Israel as a whole believes that if Palestine continues to be greedy, and not accept the more than generous offers that we keep putting forth, then they shouldn’t reserve the right to re-occupy any of the West Bank at all.
Israel is prepared to allow 300,000 of its residents to live under Palestinian control should they not relocate when Israel give the word to do so. Of course this is all contingent upon Palestine’s acceptance of Israel’s offer to pull the majority of their residents and military forces (IDF) Stuart Maariv wrote in the Times Of Israel, “Israel has raised the idea of transferring parts of the territory in “the triangle” southeast of Haifa — along with the hundreds of thousands of Israeli-Arab citizens who live there — to a future Palestinian state in return for annexing West Bank territory including settlement blocs, Maariv reported on Wednesday.” ( Maariv, 2 .) We believe that this will help solve our conflict with Palestine because this is a very generous offer and this could potentially call a final “cease fire” on the continuous dispute between Israel and Palestine.
TJ Rifkin
Dooley Humanities
March 7th, 2014
The General Assembly and Security Council,
Israel (TJ Rifkin)
Israel and Palestine Resolution
Guided by the fact that Israel took the land in the West Bank in a defensive war against the Jordanian people, and that Palestine never owned the land in the first place,
Bearing in mind that Israel has 25% of their gross population occupying the West Bank with their settlements and multiple military bases, ( Chaime, 1)
Affirming that Palestine calls out for redemption in their supposed land that is the West Bank, and that their calls do not go unnoticed,
Emphasizing that Palestine has been hostile to Israel, but not denying that Israel has also committed acts of aggression as well,
Having considered that Palestine has no true legal right to the land in the West Bank that they wish to return to, and noting the greed expressed by Palestine’s denial of Israel’s generous peace offers, (Lapidoth 1),
Keeping in mind that Israel has offered multiple treaties to the Palestinian people in a valiant effort to create peace between the two countries,
Realizing that Palestine wants more land in the West bank than they deserve or need, it’s land that belongs to the Israeli people , land that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of their property (Declaration of Human Rights, Article 17),
Recalling that the land that the Israelis currently occupy was never in legal possession of Palestine, but was taken from the Jordanians in the war of 1956 in an act of defense (Ayalon),
Having examined that the Israeli people have been living in this land for thousands of year in advance, the holy relics in jerusalem, Judea, and samaria are an undeniable reason to allow Israel to keep the land ( Kohn 1),
1.) Calls upon the general assembly to urge Palestine to accept Israel’s proposal to allow them back into 38% of the West Bank and create peace between the countries;
2.) Expresses its hope that the General Assembly will instruct Palestine that their return to the West Bank is a privilege created by Israel not a right, and that the offer proposed by Israel as stated above is very generous;
3.) Denies Palestine their counter offer to return to 95% of the West Bank, which would force Israel to other parts of the land ( Federman 1);
4.) Welcomes the Palestinians into 38% of the Israeli owned West Bank, and leaving very limited military bases and pulling the majority of the Israeli population out of that particular area in the west bank;
5.) Proclaims that Palestine does not reserve the right of return and that Israel’s proposed offer is very serious and should be very carefully considered;
6.) Declares accordingly that Palestine should accept the offer of taking 38% of the land offered to them by Israel in the West Bank, or future offers will not be as generous as this one is now;
7.) Further reminds Palestine that Israel is giving this proposed 38% in a sincere effort to create peace, with the most sincere hopes of ending the grudge held between the two countries;
8.) Calls upon the United Nations to allow Israel to have full access to any holy sites or relics that fall within the borders of the land allowed back to Palestine in the West Bank;
a.) Allows neutral zone roads between all holy sites;
b.) Urges that all relics inside any sites should be guarded 24 hours a day to maintain safety so that no harm shall be caused between opposing religions;
c.) Resolves that any and all holy places that Palestine has in Israel’s land, shall be easily accessed by the Palestinians at any time;
9.) Requests that the UN allows Israel and Palestine to each have their national sovereignty over disputes and issues between the two countries on a small scale.
Works Cited
Lapidoth, Ruth. "Palestinian Refugees:Do Palestinian Refugees Have a Legal "Right of Return" to Israel?" Do Palestinian Refugees Have a Legal "Right of Return" to Israel? Jewish Virtual Library, n.d. Web. 06 Mar. 2014.
WebsiteLinkTagsEditDelete
"The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, UDHR, Declaration of Human Rights, Human Rights Declaration, Human Rights Charter, The Un and Human Rights." UN News Center. UN, n.d. Web. 05 Mar. 2014.
Federman, Josef. "‘Israel Wants to Hold 40% of West Bank in Peace Deal’." The Times of Israel. N.p., n.d. Web. 06 Mar. 2014.