For the Model United Nations Simulation, I will be co-representing Iran. Iran is also known as the Islamic Republic of Iran because it is a state under a certain theocratic form of government. 98% of its citizens are Muslims, so Islamic theology plays into a lot of Iranian politics. Iran’s government acts under a theocratic republic. The theocracy consists of a Supreme Leader who oversees the majority of Iranian political affairs, an executive branch under the president, a legislative branch, and a judicial branch. The president is in charge of the executive branch, signing treaties and dealing with international affairs, national planning, state employment affairs, etc. However the president does not have complete control over international affairs; he shares these powers with the Supreme Leader, the most powerful person in the Republic of Iran. Some key functions of the Supreme Leader include:
1) supreme command of the armed forces
2) declaration of war, peace, and mobilization of the armed forces
3) appointment, dismissal, and acceptance of resignation of:
a. supreme judicial authority, head of radio/television network, chief of the joint of staff, chief commander of the armed forces
4) signing the decree formalizing the elections in Iran for the President of the Republic by the people.
5) Dismissal of the president of the republic with regard for the interest of the country
The president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is the first president of Iran in 24 years who is not a religious cleric. He was elected in 2005, and has taken part in many key Iran foreign affairs since the start of his presidency. He has been a supporter of Iran’s uranium enrichment program, which has been condemned by the United Nations Security Council, and has been asked to be terminated. Ahmadinejad claims that their program is peaceful in nature, but research and Iran’s failure to comply with Security Council demands have suggested that the program may be a threat to international security. He is also known for his expression of resentment towards Israel. He has supported “Anti-Zionism,” supporting a world without Zionism, or without Israel. He has been criticized for his quotes implying the state of Israel should be erased from the Islamic world. These implications have led people to assume that Ahmadinejad has anti-Semitic goals in regard to Israel. Regardless of the validity of these assumptions, Iran’s rule under Ahmadinejad has led the world (particularly Israel and the US) to see Iran as a security threat.
In order to further understand Israel, it is also important to have knowledge of some basic demographics. Iran is located in the Middle East between Iraq and Pakistan, bordering the Gulf of Oman, the Persian Gulf, and the Caspian Sea. As stated before, 98% of Israel’s citizens are Muslims, the remaining 2% consisting of Zoroastrians, Jews, Christians, and Baha’ians. With this commonality among Iranian citizens, Islamic theology is a monumental aspect of the Iranian culture. Iranians’ morals and values are all predicated on their Islamic faith. The main language is Persian (58%), then Turkic (26%), Kurdish (9%), Luri (2%), Balochi (1%), Arabic (1%), Turkish (1%), and other (2%). The state controls the majority of economic activity in Iran, undermining private sector growth in the economy. Iran’s Oil industry accounts for the majority of government revenues. However Oil market prices in Iran have decreased in the past year, and are anticipated to decrease even more in 2009. Iran makes $106.4 billion in exports, and petroleum (crude oil) accounts for 80% of their exports. With oil being such a valued commodity, it gives Iran certain precedence in negotiating foreign affairs. The European Union is Iran’s most significant trading partner, accounting for 40% of Iran’s exports. The European Union relies largely on Iran for energy resources, but their trade activity has decreased due to Iran’s uranium enrichment program. Continued failure to comply with Security Council demands may damper Iranian trade relationships. Iran’s GDP in 2008 was $859.7 billion, and their public dept (in percentage of the GDP) is 25%.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ir.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad#Relations_with_Israel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader_of_Iran
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/983509.html
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Public Opinion of Stimulus Package
With President Barack Obama entering office during such a low state for our country, one of his focuses has been taking immediate action in order to evoke change as quickly as possible. There is a lot of pressure in regards to the economy in particular, and Obama has done his best to keep America’s support on plans of action. However public opinion reveals that America’s support for the stimulus package is declining. An article released on February 4 by Ramussen Reports, a site that focuses relevant government polling, indicated that opposition of the package has grown from 34% (three weeks prior to the article’s release) to 43% (February 4th). 45% of American, pro-dominantly Republicans, support a tax-cut only plan, while only 34% oppose. In addition, 46% of Americans are concerned that the government will do too much in response to America’s economic problem, and 41% are concerned that the government will do too little. Based on these poles it seems that many Americans feel that the American economy will bounce back on its own, and that tax cuts are preferred rather than severe intervention.
Two-thirds of those surveyed predict that Obama's package of tax cuts and new spending would boost the nation's economy, at least by a little. When it comes to their own family finances, however, half say it either would have no effect or even make things worse (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-02-02-poll-stimulus_N.html). It is only natural for Americans to be concerned with their personal situation. Political scientist Charles Franklin states that, “its sort of paradoxical: they’re both supportive and pessimistic.” Many Americans support the bill under the consensus of major revisions being made before the bill is passed. Some believe that the bill is overspending particularly for programs that are not likely to have a long term affect on the economy. However many people believe that the bill is worthless, and a huge waste of money. Michael Steele, chairman of the republican national committee, believes that the government is likely to recover in two years anyway, and that last year’s stimulus package and that $700 billion bailout have produced, “in a word, nothing.” He states, "I think if the government were to get out of the way and let the small business community and corporations of America weed themselves through this process, it's survival of the fittest.” This is a legitimate argument, considering that many times in the past, increased spending was not effective in jump-starting the economy. “Sometimes policymakers took too long to recognize the problem or too long to act. Sometimes their actions weren't properly targeted, and most of the money didn't get spent. Sometimes the policies were permanent, and the long-term damage in terms of increased deficits and debt outweighed the short-term benefit (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-01-23-economicstimulus_N.htm).” These have been some of the mistakes made in economic stimulus history that fuel the laissez-faire argument of many conservatives. However at this point President Obama cannot take the risk of non-intervention in hopes that our economy will bounce back on its own. With our economy’s state continuing to relegate, our government must take some form of action before the situation gets even worse. Action is necessary and urgency is needed to insure the proper affect of the proposed legislation. Only 22% of Americans believe that Obama is moving too fast in dealing with major problems, and 63% believe that he is moving just about right (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-02-02-poll-stimulus_N.html). President Obama has stressed that this is going to be a long process, and America seems to realize that there is not going to be a quick fix. Despite the economic stimulus package, 64% of Americans still approve of the way Barack Obama is dealing with his presidency. It will be interesting whether Barack’s charisma and ability to articulate his perspective will be able to increase public support for his economic stimulus package.
Two-thirds of those surveyed predict that Obama's package of tax cuts and new spending would boost the nation's economy, at least by a little. When it comes to their own family finances, however, half say it either would have no effect or even make things worse (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-02-02-poll-stimulus_N.html). It is only natural for Americans to be concerned with their personal situation. Political scientist Charles Franklin states that, “its sort of paradoxical: they’re both supportive and pessimistic.” Many Americans support the bill under the consensus of major revisions being made before the bill is passed. Some believe that the bill is overspending particularly for programs that are not likely to have a long term affect on the economy. However many people believe that the bill is worthless, and a huge waste of money. Michael Steele, chairman of the republican national committee, believes that the government is likely to recover in two years anyway, and that last year’s stimulus package and that $700 billion bailout have produced, “in a word, nothing.” He states, "I think if the government were to get out of the way and let the small business community and corporations of America weed themselves through this process, it's survival of the fittest.” This is a legitimate argument, considering that many times in the past, increased spending was not effective in jump-starting the economy. “Sometimes policymakers took too long to recognize the problem or too long to act. Sometimes their actions weren't properly targeted, and most of the money didn't get spent. Sometimes the policies were permanent, and the long-term damage in terms of increased deficits and debt outweighed the short-term benefit (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-01-23-economicstimulus_N.htm).” These have been some of the mistakes made in economic stimulus history that fuel the laissez-faire argument of many conservatives. However at this point President Obama cannot take the risk of non-intervention in hopes that our economy will bounce back on its own. With our economy’s state continuing to relegate, our government must take some form of action before the situation gets even worse. Action is necessary and urgency is needed to insure the proper affect of the proposed legislation. Only 22% of Americans believe that Obama is moving too fast in dealing with major problems, and 63% believe that he is moving just about right (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-02-02-poll-stimulus_N.html). President Obama has stressed that this is going to be a long process, and America seems to realize that there is not going to be a quick fix. Despite the economic stimulus package, 64% of Americans still approve of the way Barack Obama is dealing with his presidency. It will be interesting whether Barack’s charisma and ability to articulate his perspective will be able to increase public support for his economic stimulus package.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
In the most recent news, President Barak Obama has made his first trip as head of state to Canada to meet with Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The meeting was held to deal with state relevant issues as well as global issues, and to ultimately renew the important relationship between the bordering countries.
The relationship between Canada and the US is necessary and beneficial for the interest of both countries. Approximately 300,000 people cross the border everyday between US and Canada. Negotiations must be made in order to regulate this travel across the border. Since 2007 US citizens traveling by air to and from Canada have needed a valid passport to enter or re-enter the United States. Beginning January 31, 2008, US and Canadian citizens at the age of 19 and older traveling into the U.S. from Canada by land or sea have had to present documents denoting citizenship and identity (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2089.html). In addition to border operations, Canada and the United States’ trade relationship is an ineffable value. Their trade relationship is said to be the closest and most extensive in the world. The summed volume of bilateral trade consists of about $1.5 billion dollars a day in goods. “Canada's importance to the U.S. is not just a border-state phenomenon: Canada is the leading export market for 36 of the 50 U.S. States, and ranked in the top three for another 10 States. In fact, Canada is a larger market for U.S. goods than all 27 countries of the European Community combined, whose population is more than 15 times that of Canada (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2089.html).” This alone clarifies the United States’ priority to maintain its close relationship with Canada. Canada and the US also value their relationship as allies that are concerned with international peace as well as national security of both nations. Canada has shown their commitment to the US national security in its deployment of troops in the US war in Afghanistan. In 2008 Stephen Harper announced that Canada would extend its military mission in Afghanistan until 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada's_role_in_the_invasion_of_Afghanistan). This will solidify US forces in Afghanistan, as the US disperses its military in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Altogether Canada is an extremely valuable ally to the United States and it is imperative that we demonstrate our continual commitment in this relationship with the start of a new presidential term.
Some of the prominent issues discussed were the global economic downturn, a new initiative to fight global warming, and the ongoing struggle against Taliban and al Qaeda elements in Afghanistan. With global warming and climate changes being an international issue, President Obama stressed the importance of tackling this problem globally. The two national leaders will now be discussing ways for both countries to develop cleaner uses of energy and more advanced carbon reduction technology. The two leaders also focused on the importance of the stimulus package, and the use of Canada’s economic stimulation to effectively help the American economy bounce back. On the topic of the war in Afghanistan, Canada has continued to deploy troops to the Afghani front. However they are also focused on the training of the Afghani army so that, “the Afghans can become responsible for their day-to-day security (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/19/obama.canada/index.html).” Canada and the US have many common relations but these are the three main interests that were discussed in their meeting.
At the end of the conference President Obama stated, “Canada and the United States are closer economically, socially, culturally, in terms of our international partnerships, than any two nations on the face of the Earth -- closer friends than any two nations on the face of the Earth. And I think we can safely predict that in four years' time, we will be in exactly the same spot (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/19/obama.canada/index.html)."
Hopefully if Canada and the US maintain their close relationship, this vision can be reached, bringing both countries to a brighter and more prosperous future.
The relationship between Canada and the US is necessary and beneficial for the interest of both countries. Approximately 300,000 people cross the border everyday between US and Canada. Negotiations must be made in order to regulate this travel across the border. Since 2007 US citizens traveling by air to and from Canada have needed a valid passport to enter or re-enter the United States. Beginning January 31, 2008, US and Canadian citizens at the age of 19 and older traveling into the U.S. from Canada by land or sea have had to present documents denoting citizenship and identity (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2089.html). In addition to border operations, Canada and the United States’ trade relationship is an ineffable value. Their trade relationship is said to be the closest and most extensive in the world. The summed volume of bilateral trade consists of about $1.5 billion dollars a day in goods. “Canada's importance to the U.S. is not just a border-state phenomenon: Canada is the leading export market for 36 of the 50 U.S. States, and ranked in the top three for another 10 States. In fact, Canada is a larger market for U.S. goods than all 27 countries of the European Community combined, whose population is more than 15 times that of Canada (http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2089.html).” This alone clarifies the United States’ priority to maintain its close relationship with Canada. Canada and the US also value their relationship as allies that are concerned with international peace as well as national security of both nations. Canada has shown their commitment to the US national security in its deployment of troops in the US war in Afghanistan. In 2008 Stephen Harper announced that Canada would extend its military mission in Afghanistan until 2011 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada's_role_in_the_invasion_of_Afghanistan). This will solidify US forces in Afghanistan, as the US disperses its military in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Altogether Canada is an extremely valuable ally to the United States and it is imperative that we demonstrate our continual commitment in this relationship with the start of a new presidential term.
Some of the prominent issues discussed were the global economic downturn, a new initiative to fight global warming, and the ongoing struggle against Taliban and al Qaeda elements in Afghanistan. With global warming and climate changes being an international issue, President Obama stressed the importance of tackling this problem globally. The two national leaders will now be discussing ways for both countries to develop cleaner uses of energy and more advanced carbon reduction technology. The two leaders also focused on the importance of the stimulus package, and the use of Canada’s economic stimulation to effectively help the American economy bounce back. On the topic of the war in Afghanistan, Canada has continued to deploy troops to the Afghani front. However they are also focused on the training of the Afghani army so that, “the Afghans can become responsible for their day-to-day security (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/19/obama.canada/index.html).” Canada and the US have many common relations but these are the three main interests that were discussed in their meeting.
At the end of the conference President Obama stated, “Canada and the United States are closer economically, socially, culturally, in terms of our international partnerships, than any two nations on the face of the Earth -- closer friends than any two nations on the face of the Earth. And I think we can safely predict that in four years' time, we will be in exactly the same spot (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/19/obama.canada/index.html)."
Hopefully if Canada and the US maintain their close relationship, this vision can be reached, bringing both countries to a brighter and more prosperous future.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
The recession, how did we get here and where are we going?
The topic of America right now is the “recession,” the threat of America’s most sacred value: money. Realizing the seriousness of the situation, I wanted to further understand how our economy managed to get into this state, and what is going to be done to fix it. Manav Tanneeru, a writer for CNN.com wrote an article called “How a ‘Perfect Storm’ Led to the Economic Crisis,” providing an articulate explanation of how America’s economy got into it’s terrible state According to Tanneeru, it all started with the housing market. A study that Taneeru referenced stated that, "After the mid-1990s ... real house prices went on a sustained surge through 2005, making residential real estate not only a great investment, but it was also widely perceived as a very safe investment.” Homebuyers were increasing tremendously, and banks were affectively receiving more loan requests. Banks were reaping benefits from housing loans because the price of housing was continuing to increase, so therefore their income of mortgage payments were increasing. Banks were then taking these loans and giving them to investors, who were making money off of interest from the original home-buyers. Buyers were in a good position because as housing prices continued to increase, they were going to be able to sell their house for more than they bought it for. This cycle continued to blossom because everyone involved with the process was making money off of it quickly. However Americans did not take in a count that, “people might lose their jobs, the interest rate might go up, and the housing prices may go down. Guess what? All three happened.” Affectively, this cycle reversed or backfired on everyone involved. Americans all started to sell their houses at the same time and prices went down to compete with one another. Banks were tied up with too many bad loans from the house market surge so they stopped lending in order to recover and the financial system was essentially frozen at a standstill. This is a brief, general explanation of how America found itself in its monumental debt today. (http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/29/economic.crisis.explainer/).
President Barack Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden have an economic plan that they feel may be able to reverse this recession and give the American Economy a boost in the right direction. There are many different components of this plan, but there are three essential aspects involved in the plan. One key part of his plan is to make tax-cuts for middle-class and working families, steering away from former President Bush’s tax cuts for the rich. This will provide a tax credit for 95% of working families, consisting of either $500 a person or $1000 for a family. This will hopefully give the working/middle class some economic relief and room for a jumpstart. Another key part of Obama’s plan is to provide tax relief for small businesses and start ups. This eliminates all capital gain taxes for people starting businesses to provide encouragement for innovation and increasing job opportunities. On the realm of job opportunity, the government will also offer rewards and encourage companies to hire American workers. The third major change is the fight for fair trade; open up foreign markets to support good American jobs. The government will negotiate with the World Trade Organization to prevent governments from giving unfair subsidies to foreign exporters and non-tarrif barriers on US exports. This hopefully will help level the playing field for American workers, opening up more availability for jobs (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/).
I am not an expert on globalization and international trade, but I feel like there is a lot of international problems that affect the lack of American job opportunities. The fact that other countries like China and Indonesia have such poor labor laws and allow human rights violations in the workplace puts American labor at a disadvantage. Due to America’s legitimate labor laws and minimum wages, American workers can’t keep with the efficiency that foreign laborers can provide. Workers in countries such as China and Indonesia are being paid maybe a quarter of what Americans are legally able to work for, and they will work for long hours under very strenuous conditions. So international organizations who are trying to create the largest profit margin possible take advantage of labor in these countries; they get the most labor for the cheapest cost. It seems that until foreign governments provide their working citizens with sufficient human rights and labor laws, Americans will be at a strong disadvantage for labor opportunity.
However it seems to me that Obama’s Economic plan has some good foundations that may give our economy the boost that it needs. The bill passed in the senate by a vote of 61-37, but only three republicans voted in favor of the bill. It is assumed that they will play “hardball” in reforming the bill and making budget cuts. Many people believe that the bill asks for too much money and could be equally efficient by cutting the budget in half. It will be interesting to see how long it will take for the house to reach a consensus to pass the bill. Hopefully it will be as soon as possible because our economy needs immediate changes. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090210/ap_on_go_co/congress_stimulus).
President Barack Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden have an economic plan that they feel may be able to reverse this recession and give the American Economy a boost in the right direction. There are many different components of this plan, but there are three essential aspects involved in the plan. One key part of his plan is to make tax-cuts for middle-class and working families, steering away from former President Bush’s tax cuts for the rich. This will provide a tax credit for 95% of working families, consisting of either $500 a person or $1000 for a family. This will hopefully give the working/middle class some economic relief and room for a jumpstart. Another key part of Obama’s plan is to provide tax relief for small businesses and start ups. This eliminates all capital gain taxes for people starting businesses to provide encouragement for innovation and increasing job opportunities. On the realm of job opportunity, the government will also offer rewards and encourage companies to hire American workers. The third major change is the fight for fair trade; open up foreign markets to support good American jobs. The government will negotiate with the World Trade Organization to prevent governments from giving unfair subsidies to foreign exporters and non-tarrif barriers on US exports. This hopefully will help level the playing field for American workers, opening up more availability for jobs (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/).
I am not an expert on globalization and international trade, but I feel like there is a lot of international problems that affect the lack of American job opportunities. The fact that other countries like China and Indonesia have such poor labor laws and allow human rights violations in the workplace puts American labor at a disadvantage. Due to America’s legitimate labor laws and minimum wages, American workers can’t keep with the efficiency that foreign laborers can provide. Workers in countries such as China and Indonesia are being paid maybe a quarter of what Americans are legally able to work for, and they will work for long hours under very strenuous conditions. So international organizations who are trying to create the largest profit margin possible take advantage of labor in these countries; they get the most labor for the cheapest cost. It seems that until foreign governments provide their working citizens with sufficient human rights and labor laws, Americans will be at a strong disadvantage for labor opportunity.
However it seems to me that Obama’s Economic plan has some good foundations that may give our economy the boost that it needs. The bill passed in the senate by a vote of 61-37, but only three republicans voted in favor of the bill. It is assumed that they will play “hardball” in reforming the bill and making budget cuts. Many people believe that the bill asks for too much money and could be equally efficient by cutting the budget in half. It will be interesting to see how long it will take for the house to reach a consensus to pass the bill. Hopefully it will be as soon as possible because our economy needs immediate changes. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090210/ap_on_go_co/congress_stimulus).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)