SENATE BILL: April 2012 Foreign Policy Review (Passed)

[Donerail]

Aye

If we are discussing Sbane's amendment...I have a few points...
-I would like to hear more information regarding settlements....I'm not familiar with Green Line but that part sounds ok to me
-Israel I believe has worked very hard to have direct negotiations with the Palestinians...particularly Abbas. The second line I do not believe is warranted
-I agree with full military restrictions on Gaza but would also advocate full economic restrictions considering the government is Hamas
-I essentially agree but have problems with the West Bank...town squares and sports teams are named after suicide bombers for example- though moderate and a potential partner for peace- I believe they have some issues which need to be addressed

These are relatively minor points- to be honest Senator SbaneI would've thought we would be further away on this issue...I disagree with parts of your amendment but it is reasonable and recognizes the reality of the situation

The Green Line is the demarcation line between Israel and the West Bank; it means the same thing as '1967 borders'. Rerouting the West Bank separation barrier along the Green Line, instead of its current route (in which it cuts off Palestinians from Palestinian territory to encompass Israeli settlements), would be much fairer and cleaner:

Red is the planned route for the barrier, and the areas, especially around Immanuel and Ariel, where it sticks into Palestinian territory would be rerouted to follow the border between Israel and the West Bank.

As to the settlements, they're Jewish civilian communities (Palestinians/Muslims are not allowed inside) built on land in the West Bank/East Jerusalem/Golan Heights by Israelis (there used to be some in Gaza/the Sinai, but they were removed in 2005 and 1979, respectively). Israel continues to expand and make new settlements in the West Bank, which is illegal under the Oslo Accords and the Fourth Geneva Convention, and has been declared illegal by the ICJ and Ban Ki-Moon.

That line about negotiations appears in

You must be logged in to read this quote.

; it was just added so it wouldn't miss anything in the FPR already.

As to Gaza, I'd be concerned about whether full economic restrictions means we can't sell them things like what were previously banned by Israel from entering Gaza; things like cement, wood, iron, cattle, most medicines, musical instruments, and notebooks. Gaza really needs aid at this point in time; we don't want to cut off all trade.

The names of town squares and sports teams can be decided later; right now, we don't want to alienate the people who we need (and want, over Hamas) to work with for peace due to the name of their soccer team.

[Donerail]

Amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I could also introduce a bill for creation of an committee overseeing human right abuses in China by companies that export to Atlasia.

I'm not sure that I'm able to target a specific company unless it's run by a government, let alone target a certain factory complex. This'd probably be a separate bill, creating a committee or whatever you want to lay out.

As for Sbane's amendment, I think we have to accept Clarence's amendment first before we can consider Sbane's, as until Clarence's is accepted Palestine is not considered separately and thus Sbane's cannot be applied.

[Donerail]

Amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I could also introduce a bill for creation of an committee overseeing human right abuses in China by companies that export to Atlasia.

I'm not sure that I'm able to target a specific company unless it's run by a government, let alone target a certain factory complex. This'd probably be a separate bill, creating a committee or whatever you want to lay out.

As for Sbane's amendment, I think we have to accept Clarence's amendment first before we can consider Sbane's, as until Clarence's is accepted Palestine is not considered separately and thus Sbane's cannot be applied.

The only amendment that I have noted on this bill by Clarence has already been adopted prior to the abortive final vote. Sbane's amendment is currently under consideration. Both his and Seatown's need the feedback of the sponsor to move forward.

Ah; it was still on the amendment tracker in the noticeboard, so I assumed it hadn't.

[Donerail]

Amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I could also introduce a bill for creation of an committee overseeing human right abuses in China by companies that export to Atlasia.

I'm not sure that I'm able to target a specific company unless it's run by a government, let alone target a certain factory complex. This'd probably be a separate bill, creating a committee or whatever you want to lay out.

Perhaps the wording of Seatown's amendment could be changed to something that would pressure the Chinese government to address the human rights and pass labor standards, or take action against the factory.

We could add a note into the FPR, or just make it a separate bill.

[Donerail]

To the Chinese factory amendment? I say friendly

As the Secretary of External Affairs, it is my interpretation that the Foreign Policy Review is intended to lay out the policy of the administration towards nations. Although I find labor standards to be a serious concern, unless the company is run by the government (which Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd. (Foxconn) is not), it has no place in the Foreign Policy Review. I'm not trying to say I oppose this in what it aims to do, but this is not the proper format to do so. I would encourage Senator Seatown to propose legislation that would do what he aims to do, but our policy towards imports from a factory in Shenzhen isn't really part of our policy towards the current administration in the People's Republic of China.

[Donerail]

Reading over the FPR again, I'm concerned that we only have six nations on "Most Priority" status. Can we up that? Nations like Brazil, India, Indonesia, Argentina, Mexico, Canada, South Africa, Turkey, and Italy (a good chunk of whom are developing, a few of whom could emerge as superpowers in future, all of whom we should be striving to attain good relations with) aren't at that status.

[Donerail]

I'll offer an Amendment:

The status for Brazil, India, Mexico, Canada, and Turkey shall be changed to "Most Priority".  Yankee can format that properly

Most Priority for a pair of BRICS, our neighbors, and one of our closest allies in the Islamic world; wonderful. Let's wrap this up to move on to Iran.

[Donerail]

Apologies, Yank.  Here it is:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If that doesn't work, let me know.

The DoEA supports this amendment (and Sbane's question).

[Donerail]

If we're voting, then the Department of External Affairs encourages an Aye on Ben's amendment, a Nay on Seatown's, and a tentative Yea on Sbane's.

[Donerail]

Nay- I can't vote for the commentary at the end of Israel's paragraph

...you sponsored the commentary...

Israel: Most Priority; however, the DoEA urges Israel to end all settlements and work harder towards reaching a settlement to the Palestinian crisis.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Donerail]

SJoyceFla- I did not sponsor that amendment. I sponsored this bill- and declared that amendment unfriendly

The former is a direct quote from this bill (emphasis mine). The latter is the amendment section in question. The reason the amendment's phrasing is like such, and the reason it's nearly identical, and the reason it's in there in the first place, is due to it being taken almost word-for-word from the bill.

[Donerail]

Well my friend- you've got me on that one! That is my mistake and I would've attempted to amend...however having realized the error I change my vote to

AYE

We can always amend it later, and I think in light of recent events Iran needs amending too. All's good.

[Donerail]

The Department of External Affairs has already stated their serious objections to this amendment.

[Donerail]

The DoEA suggests a Yea.

[Donerail]

Why not Indonesia, Argentina, South Africa and Italy? Especially Italy....what did they do wrong except for repeatedly voting for Berlusconi?

[Donerail]

None of those nations has, in my opinion, either a close enough relationship with the US OR enough strategic significance to warrant Most Priority.

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/11/10/insight-strategic-significance-indonesiaus-relations.html
http://www.frontline.org.za/articles/TheBattleForSouthAfrica.htm
http://www.iai.it/pdf/DocIAI/IAI0921.pdf

[Donerail]

The DoEA approves!

[Donerail]

The DoEA approves!

Yes, but I've reached my limit.  No more nations get Most Priority.

Of course. Wouldn't want too many major allies

[Donerail]

Final text.