-THE IMPORTANCE OF INTERNET IN CIVIL SOCIETY AND DEMOCRACY AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE USA-

-THE IMPORTANCE OF INTERNET IN CIVIL SOCIETY AND DEMOCRACY AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE USA-

-ABSTRACT-

     Information access and using of it are seen as essential tools and rightes in democratic society, which all citizens should be kept all information that they can use it to make a decision in society as personal as political. Democracy and its relationship with civil society has important link with flow of information.
With the invention of the Internet, unpredictable growth in information and communication technologies in recent years, more materials are used and exchanged and shared. Information is now available in a digital formats and it can reach many zones. With the new age of the communication technology the internet is important factor in relationship between democracy and civil society. This paper explores the role of free flow of information with internet in affecting democratic values (as an example) in the United States and its power to mobilize civil society in democratic society such as current Wall Street Protest Action.

-INTRODUCTION-

     This paper demonstrate the role of the Internet as a democratic tool that provide significant benefits for society at large in democracy and politics. We can say that internet’s contribution to democracy has become significant tool. Its potential to mobilize groups and its potential for oppression and control should seen a new tool to affect civil society and democracy and its relationship.The power of Internet that has an effective accessibility of information can not be out of place while understanding of the evolution of democratic society, but it can be thought as an important tool the fundamental concepts of democratic society. Our research discusses the role of Internet in a democracy, and highlights the power of it.
     Firstly, democracy and civil society and its relations will be defined with the examples of some classical literature and writers.
     Secondly, there will be a discussion on what is the importance of internet in democratic society and in this relations.
     Thirdlly, the role of information in a democratic society that will be followed by a discussion on the influence of Internet on democracy, as an example of the United States, especially with Occupy Wall Street Protest.
     Finally, as the conclusion we plan to draw such a picture from the world.
According to many scholars, civil society is as a necessary element in a democracy and an economy. These scholars and others characterize civil society associations as a site for organizing of communication.
The importance of these practices is unquestionable in the case of political participation. The Internet can be thought as a medium that seems to present different dynamics, opportunities, and constraints for interaction. Therefore, we want to explore the relationship between everyday online interactions with different types of groups and the relationship between such practices and political participation, both offline and online. The different issues that are particularly important for democratic practice if the Internet is a medium will be discussed.
Before this important issues we should mention democracy and its relations with civil society and the importance of internet in democratic society.

-WHAT IS ( LIBERAL DEMOCRACY) DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY? –

-TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF INTERNET IN THIS RELATIONSHIP-

     ‘What is democracy? What is liberal democracy? And what is civil society?’What is the role of the internet in Wall Street Protest? These are important questions that should be defined to understand rightly the importance of relations among internet-democracy-civil society.
     Firstlly,we should define democracy. Democracy can be defined as a form of government in which all people have an equal rights and say in the decisions that affect their lives. We can say that, it is a political system to choose government with feer and fair election. It is tool for people to be active in participation in political life. It is protector of human right for all people and it is rule of law in which all people are equal.      There are several varities of democracy, but we will not defined, because we should focus on the relations among democracy-civil society and internet.
To understand the relationship between civil society and democracy we must answer ‘What is liberal democracy’?
     Liberal democracy is a type of representative democracy. It is a form of government in which the state is governed by the people, and in which individual freedoms are protected. Liberal democracies have constitutions, which describe the legal framework of the state and the basic rights.
Liberal democracy has focused on property rights, the right to privacy, equality before the law, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion and an economic policy founded on the principle of a free market.
     In this context, there are lots of inequalities among people that live in liberal system. Different kinds of social groups has been affected from this system. Some of them are satisfied, but some of them are unhappy in this system. The Wall Street Protest demonstrates us, unhappy people organized some activites to show their interests to protest conditions. When they become an civil society organization, they used some important tools, especially the internet, very actively to organize, coordinate and affect all people.
In this point, we can talk about the civil societies. Civil society can be defined as a collection of organizations with civic or social bent that works together without government control.
     It is a voluntary or non-profit sector of an economy. It includes of organized groups and institutions, non-governmental organizations, independent mass media, think tanks, universities, and social and religious groups.
Why the civil society is an important for democracy? Does it develop or challange the democracy?
The civil society is an important tool to limit or control the government. It can provide checking system over power of politicians and government. Without political parties, they mobilize the people as voluntary in political life. Civil societies can be seen as tool that provide participation in politics. Especially non-governmental organizations has supported the people to be active in political decision. With their lobby activities, they support the the rule of law.
     Civil society organizations are significant tools to develop democratic values.Larry Diamond is an important person to give an example to emphasize the relationship between civil society and democracy. In presentations of NGO Leaders, in February 10, 2004, Convention Center, in Baghdad, he explained the functions of civil society for democracy.
     As the most important function of civil society that they strengthen the democray. It mobilize people to represent their interest and it encourage the people to organize different types of goals. It includes many different group interests such as women groups, worker association, immigrants rightes…
It can be seen as important to help people to inform about public issues and explain their opinions in social groups.
     We mentioned about all of the important factors. With all of this functions, civil society has develop democracy when it grows in the new age of communication. We can say that internet has contribute this relationship between democracy and civil society. The rise of using internet provide better information about political and public issues. For organizations, social groups, institutions, all people, civil society can be seen as stronger with the using of internet.
     As an example; ‘Truman emphasizes that groups assist in the process of specialization. As society becomes more complex, groups proliferate to meet people's various needs’. There is huge demand for many people needs in Wall Street Protest. In this point, the internet is a tool to gain these needs.
As an another example;
     The opening sentence of the book, he emphasize that ‘In a political system where nearly every adult may vote but where knowledge, wealth, social position, access to officials, and other resources are unequally distributed, who actually governs?’ (Dahl 1961, 1). Robert Dahl asked in his book (Who Governs?)
He mentioned that all inequalities that affect the life of human, every adult vote to govern, but there are lots of differences about knowledge, wealth, social status, access the resource. These inequalities promote different social class to be active in civil societies. We can say that internet should be mentioned in this point. Because, to access the resources, to have knowledge, to have good social status, it provide important channels for all people. We are showing this significant relation with examples of the using of internet and example of Occupy Wall Street Protest.
     To understand the importance of the Wall Street Protest to show the importance of the internet in civil society and democracy, we should look at the United States. How do people use the internet in political participation and in their needs?

-UNDERSTANDING THE IMPORTANCE OF INTERNET IN CIVIL SOCIETY AND DEMOCRACY WITH THE BEST EXAMPLE OF THE UNITED STATES-

     The Wall Street Protest occupy in the in New York in USA. We should analyze internet and its using in this country and what is its role in this affective protest with emphasizing the civil society,democracy and internet.
Internet and its using have occured more rapidly than any other tecnologies in the history. Today it has been becoming as an indispensable for many population and cultures . For example, Americans, more than 80%, say the Internet plays a vital role in their daily routines . By the reason of this kind of changings in people’s lifes, social scientists have begun exploring the political and social implications of using of the Internet.
     Firstly, being an significant sample, the American democracy is suffered from low levels of participation. Poor and poorly educated people have not enough sense to vote, which means their interest are ignored officially. We can define this situation as ills. We can say that with the new age of the civil society with the highest using of the technology, internet is a cure for these ills. The internet can seen as significant tool to help solve this problem. We can say that computer networks will make more political participation in civil society and in a result in democracy. For example, many people will be able to vote from home or make financial contributions with the internet. At the same time, information can be shared, so citizens will have the knowledge they need to participate effectively. Many elites will allow more public participation in their decision making process.
     Secondly, it is most important that internet will give citizens greater control over the decisions that governments have traditionally made. As we mentioned early, civil society can be seen as affective tool to control government and its policies. Internet is supporting this control action in politics. We can say that it is seen as “the great equalizer,” by many people. Because it can affect “the balance of power between citizens and power heads (governmetns or local administers) ” We will demonstrate that in the final with the current examples such as Wall Street Protest.
     It is another important thing that more people can participate in politics and civic life if they have better access to information. From this perspective, the internet is providing free and accessible information. Access to the Internet can facilitate more direct democracy. Citizens can reach many information that should be known from civil society by surfing web pages to get relevant facts. Many information that we need in internet before we can vote or take other political action. We need to know which positions to adopt and which candidates and organizations come the closest to supporting our views. Which one is suitable for our opinions.     In addition, it can extend government decisions that are made by the few in the center of power to the many on the outside who wants to participate.
One example: We can understand the importance of internet from this event: ( ın USA) Of the 40 million people who reported that they registered, but they could not vote in the 1998 election, about many of them reported that they did not vote because they were too busy or had conflicting work. The Internet can provide political and civic participation more convenient and less consuming of time by bringing certain activities right into people’s homes.
     Furthermore, when you try to get information to assess for your political participation as a person this situation changes if you are a one member of a group. You can be member of political organization, an ethnic association, a sports league, its welfare will be affected by government decisions. If it has many members, they may see a clear effect from lobbying, protesting, and voting together. When the members discuss, and they try to persuade one another about political issues and convince one another to participate, we can undestand that groups are more important tool than a person to participate in politics and to promote democracy. It is important that civil society mobilize people and groups and it shows that group members are much better informed about politics, more likely to have been asked to vote, and more likely to discuss issues than nonmembers. We can say that If group membership is the significant key to political participation, the Internet can provide billions of Web pages and full of data to be used by this groups and civil societies. We must mention that the internet is a lever for groups and civil society to participate more and to reach their goals. It is used by civil society organizations to coordinate their behaviours and to get supports from people and to protest policies that implemented by government.
     There is another important issue is deliberation that is an essential element of any democracy. We can say that deliberation can be found on the Internet. By talking on-line, citizens can reach the motivation, knowledge, and the wisdom they need to participate in politics. They can see alternative perspectives, articulate their goals and develop mutual respect that allows them to cooperate even when they disagree.
In the USA, one survey was taken in 2000. According to this survey, 67 percent of Americans considered that internet is important to obtain “general news that gives you general information about important events that are happening,” whereas just 28 percent preferred to see “news that is about your interests and what’s important to you.” These statistics show that citizens may satisfy their desire for general news by glancing at headlines.
     Another thing that young people, men, and poorly educated people were unlikely to care about general news, they have no sense to participate in public delibrations. We can understand that internet provide new world (we can call that as digital world) for people to reach informations, general news, events. Many of them use this world to participate in public delibrations.

     We must mention that internet gives people opportunities to perform the very satisfying kind of “public work” that can be supportive works or protest works. Commons can serve some of the same values as a democracy: especially equality, participation, and freedom. And within a democratic society, a commons can provide resources (such as skills, information, and social networks) for disadvantaged citizens. Internet include all parts of society to act affectivelly towards their interest and it can facilitate organizing, coordinating to get best result. It shows that, collaborative work on the Internet teaches skills and habits that potentially transfer to politics. Today the internet provide and facilitate public works.

-THE WALL STREET PROTEST AS AN EXAMPLE-

     In the begining of our article, we said that internet is a significant tool that mobilize civil society and facilitiate deliberation in politics. People can be organized with internet when they want to support one policy or when they protest one stituation. Today, many people can join a number of civil society organization by one click of mouse. Many organizations use the internet to get support from people and to get stronger position. Internet organization act stronger role in politics.
     When we look at its relation with democracy, as Paul Jorion who is an anthropologist said “The internet is direct democracy”. He notes that there’s no hierarchy and everyone can express themselves with the Internet.
In many countries we can see most protest organization that are strengthened in internet, especially in the United States. In this point we should give an example of current Occupy Wall Street Protest Action. It is stronger protest against social and economic inequality, high unemployment, corruptions in the United States. Actually, doing this protest with using only internet could be wrong, but with it the movement expends to several areas. The Occupy Wall Street protest that started in New York, not just across the US but also around the world. Similar protests have emerged to 100 cities in the US and two dozen cities around the world. For instance, plans are now developing for similar protests at the London Stock Exchange. The Occupy Wall Street protest even has its own internet committee.

     Registered users can easily find out when and where to participate, watch or read related news, and interact with other like-minded people on the Occupy Wall Street website (http://occupywallst.org/).
The movement counts more than 400 Facebook pages with its 2.7 million fans around the world. For example; the “We Are the 99 Percent” blog continues to publish the personal stories of people such as struggling with student debt, and health care costs on ‘Tumblr.com.’. There are also dozens of new wikis and web pages, such as ‘OccupyWallSt.org’ or ‘HowToOccupy.org.. Secondly, there are more than 100 accounts on ‘Twitter’ and the main account is ‘@occupywallstnyc’ that has more than 94,000 followers.

     Is Occupy Wall Street calling for a direct democracy? The message is that people will not be no longer tolerate walls that separates them, and it is same in a voice from the Berlin Wall to Tahrir Square, or from Tienanmen to the Gaza Strip. What is happening with this movement is that the opening the space for a democratic dialogue. An open space for imagination of the masses begins to move freely especially in the middle of seeming chaos and anarchy.
Kevin Gosztola is an independent journalist described how the OccupyWallStreet movement is challenging the rigged ‘two party’ political system. Although the importance of Occupy Wall Street was dismissed in the media, labor unions recognized its potential. In this case, Occupy Wall Street can be an experiment in direct democracy. In the conventional method of protest, people march for one day and put forward their demands. Then they have no choice without waiting for politicians to deliver. For example; before the invasion of Iraq in 2002, the global antiwar protest brought millions to the streets, but they were ignored by the media and shut out by the government. In contrast, Occupy Wall Street is not a one day event. When an interviewer asked what he wants to see at the end of this occupation, the protester answered; “As far as seeing it end, I wouldn’t like to see it end. I would like to see the conversation continue.”
Political actions and rallies such as those at the Occupy Wall Street would have been unsuccessful or impossible without the aid of the organizational and provocative power of social media and the internet. Internet’s power in organizing people is stronger than any of political, social or other forms of organizations. Today, a lot of revolutionary rallies are triggered through facebook, not through political parties. For instance, social media, facebook in particular, has been a large organizing force in the ongoing revolution in Cairo. Therefore social media brings the public closer to the cause and its propagators for making the revolution stronger.
     Can you imagine what would happen to the Occupy Wall Street Movement if Americans lost access to internet right now? Access to open communications platforms is critical for the human species evolution and survival.

-OTHER USES OF THE INTERNET IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY-

     It can be argued that, being the most important enabler of information is the biggest contribution of Internet for a democratic society. Some countries have tried to adapt the internet to the political sphere. For example, the parliament has a website, in which were online public debates in 1999, different issues are discussed, facilitated by politicians in Germany.
     The Internet has made it quicker and easier to contact elected representative. For instance, some politicians have their own website, and at the last Federal election in Australia, Kevin Rudd who was the 26th Prime Minister of Australia from 2007 to 2010 had his own Facebook page. As being not only a communication, but also as a research tool, the Internet has the potential to revolutionise the way that public can communicate with politicians.
Furthermore, another aspect of the Internet’s contribution to democratic society is giving the opportunities in which people can start their own businesses. As one of the features of a democracy is equality, the Internet makes it more affordable to start a business for people.
     The Internet has made information easy to access, easy to download, copy and manipulate. Artists, and some musicians have used their democratic right to free speech and enjoyed the benefit of an economic democracy to launch their careers on the Internet. This concept can be abused, with many illegal downloading sites or file sharing sites such as Napster or LimeWire. Although not only a democratic aspect that we are looking at specifically, but also an economic freedom to sell&buy and market to a worldwide has been revolutionary with Internet.
There has been some impact on politics;
√ Communications and information available through the Internet can be thought as a way for increased transparency of government administration.
√ The Internet is not only less expensive to campaign, but also it can be used to reach particular demographics that are useful used by political party organizers.
√ The Internet is using by many national parliaments to inform citizens about their activities and legislative procedures.
Also, the Internet can allow online communities to question political candidates or can be used to distribute critical video or an audio. It allows parties to develop their own social-network and provides pro-democracy citizens of authoritarian nations such Iran or China.

-DOES DEMOCRACY CONTRIBUTE TO INTERNET OR THE-

-INTERNET CONTRIBUTES TO DEMOCRACY-

     The internet helps to exchanged public information, by providing access to information, and it contributes to democracy. Although the internet can be a tool in the democratisation of a civil society, it is up to governments to promote democracy through their own policies with the freedom of information.
In more controlled countries such as China, people can access to the internet, however the level of censorship is too high. Although this censorship does not prevent the transmission of ideas or information, it certainly makes it more difficult. On the other hand, democracy face a different challenge; the increase in political apathy in the West. This is explained by the decrease in the membership of political parties, a decrease in voter and there is an increase in the public’s dissatisfaction in Parliament. The only exception to this seems to be single issue causes that seem to be enhanced by the internet through social networking sites such as Facebook. This kind of social networking sites may open people’s eyes and minds to the political issues of a country. For example, there so many ‘groups’ on this kind of sites for boycotting something, or donating to something. Even without these opportunities, these group members can engage in a debate, so can increase their knowledge, and therefore becoming more informed citizens.
The internet is facilitated by a democratic society, and a democratic society seems to be facilitated by the internet. In the societies, individuals can freely use the internet for their own purposes, such as promoting their own cultures and views. However, this feature of the internet can be perceived as a threat by the cencorship that does not allow to individuals to discuss differing viewpoints in countries that do not promote democracy, and so an underground culture can develop in there.

CONCLUSION

To sum up, as a research tool, the Internet can launch careers, conduct business in virtual shops, and it connects people through social networking sites. These factors are some of the contribution of the Internet to democratic society.
With the Occupy Wall Street Movement, the national dialogue was shifted from the deficit to economic problems such as unemployment, the large amount of student and other personal debt and other major issues of social inequality, for example; homelessness.. The awareness of undeserved wealth and lack of fairness in American society was raised by the Occupy movement.
The accesing to Internet was made by the improvements in technology, and now it is faster, and has allowed for more complex information. Because of the Occupy movement, labor unions have been able to become bolder in the tactics and have been using digital social media more effectively.
As politically, some of writers believe that the Occupy Wall Street shows the birth of a social movement. People are attempting to support sustained protest against political order and against their exclusion from decision making proses or events. They want rearrange the distribution of power, and solve the inequality as economic area. Instead, they insist that politics start to talk with citizens and listening them in the case of agreeing and disagreeing with mutual respect.
With our example of USA, if we need to answer how the internet has impacted on democracy, we can say the internet is simply a technology, which is neither good nor bad, because it depends on how it is used. Both of in the countries that are democratic and that have a more controlling form of government, the internet is used as an origin of information. Although it is not used with its full power, the internet has the potential to contribute very positively to the notion of a democratic society. Moreover, according to the Los Angeles Times, Occupy Wall Street is such a Civil society's awakening..





RESOURCES
Cyber-protest and civil society: the Internet and action repertoires in social movements (Jeroen Van Laer and Peter Van Aelst)
Civil Society and Cyber Society: Culture Governance and Democratic Politics (Michael J. Jensen, James N. Danziger, Alladi Venkatesh)
Democracy and the Internet: Access, Engagement and Deliberation
(Roman GERODIMOS) Centre for Public Communication Research, University of Bournemouth Bournemouth, BH12 5BB, United Kingdom

http://occupywallst.org/
G. William Domhoff, 2002, Who Rules America?
http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats2.htm
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1192/internet-politics-campaign-2008
Dankwart Rustow, 1970, “Transitions to Democracy: Toward a Dynamic Model”
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/cyberpol.htm
Elmer Eric Schattschneider, 1960, The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America

DİLARA ÜNÜVAR & OZAN DENİZ HİNTBAHAR ORTAK ÇALIŞMASI...

‘’The United Nations & Middle East’’ (The Israel - Arab World)

1)Introduction

2)The United Nations

3)Middle East

4)United Nations and Middle East

Historical Process and Events

Current Situation

United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the 2008 Gaza War

Can the United Nations Fix the Middle East?

Introduction

The international organizations as well as states, governments or other state entities are the main players of the international community and makers of the international politics, and international peace.

In my opinion we have to give importance to the United Nation Organization. It’s role in the globalized world should grow more and more. The United Nation Organization is an association of states, governmental institutions and national entities based on the same/common agreements, consensus, plans, projects. All of them have the same interests, priorities, they cooperate in the field of economy, finance, bussines, culture, social affairs. Such organizations associating states of the same or similar cultures can also achieve more significant succes in the common cooperation.

Ø What is the role of the UN in the Middle East? Are their work and activities effective and contributing for the region?

I shall focus on the issue of the UN peacemaking activities in my paper. What is the role of the UN Organization in the Middle East, is it efficient and of benefit? I will strive to answer these questions in analysing the peacekeeping operations in the Middle East, in the perspective of especially Israel-Arab world conflicts.

- THE UNITED NATIONS-

The United Nations is an international organization founded in 1945 after the Second World War by 51 countries committed to maintaining international peace and security, developing friendly relations among nations and promoting social progress, better living standards and human rights.

The main mission of this world organization is to maintain world peace and security. The UN has been asked many times to prevent armed conflicts since the beginning of its existence; this organisation tried to persuade hostile parties to solve their problems in a peaceful way, it was an arbitrator in conflicts many times, and Security Council (SC) Resolutions contributed to bring these military conflicts to an end on innumerable occasions . The UN seeks to improve its cooperation with regional and local organizations; its peacemaking operations are adjusted as quickly as possible to new situations and needs; it makes efforts to establish stability and security in the damaged country after the end of a conflict.

The United Nations system is based on five principal organs (formerly six – the Trusteeship Council suspended operations in 1994); the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), the Secretariat, and the International Court of Justice. Other bodies with a peacemaking role are the General Assembly and the Secretary-General. The main tasks of the UN are prevention of conflicts, restoration of peace, and maintaining, enforcing and building peace in the world.

The organization works on fundemantal issues of the global problems, events and situations, from peacekeeping, peacebuilding, conflict prevention and humanitarian assistance, child survival and development, environmental protection, human rights, environment and refugees protection,agricultural development and fisheries, education, the advancement of women, emergency and disaster relief, air and sea travel, counter terrorism, disarmament and non-proliferation, promoting democracy, peaceful uses of atomic energy, labour and workers’ rights, the list goes on.There are many other ways the United Nations and its system affect our lives and make the world a better place.

When I look at these important issues, I can say that counter terrorism, human rights, governance, wars, conflicts are more significant, because they can affect the world, societies and humans negatively, widely, speedly with globalization. In this perspective, the importance of Security Council emerges on achievement of peacebuilding all around of the world. The Security Council plays an important role in enforcing world peace and security. It is the only body of the UN organization with the power of approval that agreed many complex peacemaking operations for solving (not only) intrastate conflicts.

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is one of the principal organs of the United Nations and is charged with the maintenance of international peace and security. Its powers, outlined in the United Nations Charter, include the establishment of peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions, and the authorization of military action. Its powers are exercised through United Nations Security Council Resolutions.

The Security Council held its first session on 17 January 1946 at Church House, London. Since its first meeting, the Council, which exists in continuous session, has traveled widely, holding meetings in many cities, such as Paris and Addis Ababa, as well as at its current permanent home in the United Nations building in New York City.

There are 15 members of the Security Council, consisting of 5 veto-wielding permanent members (China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, and United States) and 10 elected non-permanent members with two-year terms. Security Council members must always be present at UN headquarters in New York so that the Security Council can meet at any time. This requirement of the United Nations Charter was adopted to address a weakness of the League of Nations since that organization was often unable to respond quickly to a crisis.

United Nations especially works on peacekeeping operations. Peacekeeping, as defined by the United Nations, is a way to help countries torn by conflict create conditions for sustainable peace. UN peacekeepers—soldiers and military officers, civilian police officers and civilian personnel from many countries. The Charter of the United Nations gives the Security Council the power and responsibility to take collective action to maintain international peace and security. For this reason, the international community usually looks to the Security Council to authorize peacekeeping operations. Most of these operations are established and implemented by the United Nations itself with troops serving under UN operational command.

The middle east is one of the most important critical part of the world for the international peace and United Nations has been working to provide collective action to maintain international peace and security in this region. For this reason, the international community usually looks to the Security Council to authorize peacekeeping operations in the Middle East. Therefore, we should turn our attention to middle east and we must search this critical part.

The United Nations operating in the Middle East can be devided by the several points of view:

- the organizations focused on the humanitarian aid

- the organizations ensuring peace and stability in the world

- the organizations working and interested in politics

- the organizations working and interested in economy

- the organizations working and interested in culture and social affairs.

MIDDLE EAST

The Middle East is a region that encompasses southwestern Asia and Egypt. In some contexts, the term has recently been expanded in usage to sometimes include Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Caucacus and Central Asia, and North Africa. It's often used as a synonym for Near East, in opposition to Far East. The corresponding adjective is Middle-Eastern and the derived noun is Middle-Easterner.

The history of the Middle East dates back to ancient times, and throughout its history, the Middle East has been a major centre of world affairs. When discussing ancient history, however, the term Near East is more commonly used. The Middle East is also the historical origin of three of the world’s major religions - Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The Middle East generally has an arid and hot climate, with several major rivers providing for irrigation to support agriculture in limited areas. Many countries located around the Persian Gulf have large quantities of crude oil. During the Cold War, the Middle East was a theater of ideological struggle between the two superpowers: the United States and the Soviet Union, as they competed to influence regional allies. Of course, besides the political reasons there was also the "ideological conflict" between the two systems. Moreover, as Louise Fawcett argues, among many important areas of contention, or perhaps more accurately of anxiety, were, first, the desires of the superpowers to gain strategic advantage in the region, second, the fact that the region contained some two thirds of the world's oil reserves in a context where oil was becoming increasingly vital to the economy of the Western world . Within this contextual framework, the United States sought to divert the Arab world from Soviet influence. Throughout its history the Middle East has been a major center of world affairs; a strategically, economically, politically, culturally, and religiously sensitive area.

The modern Middle East began after World War I, when the Ottoman Empire, which was allied with the defeated Central Powers, was partitioned into a number of separate nations. Other defining events in this transformation included the establishment of Israel in 1948 and the departure of European powers, notably Britain and France. They were supplanted in some part by the rising influence of the United States.

In the 20th century, the region's significant stocks of crude oil gave it new strategic and economic importance. Mass production of oil began around 1945, with Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait, Iraq, and the United Arab Emirates having large quantities of oil. Estimated oil reserves, especially in Saudi Arabia and Iran, are some of the highest in the world, and the international oil cartel OPEC is dominated by Middle Eastern countries.

Throughout the 20th and into the 21st century, the region has experienced both periods of relative peace and tolerance and periods of conflict and war. Current issues include the US Occupation of Iraq and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Various ethnic and religious types in the Middle East, 19th century. The Middle East is home to numerous ethnic groups, including Arabs, Turks, Persians, Jews, Kurds,Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriacs , Armenians , Azeris, Circassians, Greeks and Georgians.

The Middle East is very diverse when it comes to religions, most of which originated there. Islam in its many forms is by far the largest religion in the Middle East, but other faiths, such as Judaism and Christianity, are also important. There are also important minority religions like Bahá'í, Yazdânism, Zoroastrianism.

There are the three top languages, in terms of numbers of speakers, are Arabic, Persian and Turkish, representing Afro-Asiatic, Indo-European, and Turkic language families respectively. Various other languages are also spoken in the Middle East, and they too span many different language families. Other languages spoken in the region include Syriac (a form of Aramaic), Armenian, Azerbaijani, Berber, Circassian, smaller Iranian languages, Hebrew, Kurdish, smaller Turkic languages, Greek, and several Modern South Arabian languages. English is commonly spoken as a second language, especially among the middle and upper classes, in countries such as Egypt, Jordan, Israel, Iran, Iraq, Qatar, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. It is also a main language in some of the Emirates of the United Arab Emirates.

Why is the Middle East so important on the world?

n It is one of the most important oil producing regions in the world.

n It controls a strategic waterway, the Suez Canal which links Europe to Asia.

n It has several significant conflicts, especially between Israel-The Arab World.

n It has important materials that states need to get possession.

THE UNITED NATIONS & MIDDLE EAST

Since its founding at the end of World War II, the United Nations has played a major role in defining--if not solving--the conflicts which grew out of the retreat of colonialism from the Middle East. From the Western Sahara to Lebanon to Iran, UN resolutions, usually from the Security Council, have often been the closest thing to an international consensus on the region's many disputes. Some of these resolutions have come and gone, proving unenforceable, untimely, or just plain unwise. But the following few dozen remain highly relevant today.

Peace in the Middle East and the role of the United Nations in establishing and maintaining a lasting Peace in that region. The basic premise of this series of posts is that Justice and Respect of International Law are essential predicates and foundation for Peace in the Middle East, and indeed anywhere else as well on our Earth. The secession of hostilities, if not based on Justice and International Law, is not Peace, it is just the state of preparing for the next round of war and destruction. In this post we will examine the historical background of the Middle East Peace as it relates to the Palestinian-Israeli issue, we will review the UN resolutions that established Israel, the partitioning of Palestine and the British role in that time period from 1946 to 1949. Then we will briefly review the succession of the UN resolutions.

The United Nations has been involved in various problems in the Middle East since 1947 . Whereas the Korean War and the Congo issue were settled in the sense that there was no further outbreak of hostilities, the United Nations has not managed to do the same in the Middle East . Wars have broken out in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973 and several problems exist to this day.

Firstly, after World War One, Britain had governed Palestine as a League of Nations mandate. Britain got more and more embroiled in the area and in 1947 asked the United Nations to take over the duty of running the area. The Palestinians and the Jews in the area may have detested and fought one another but both fought the British troops who were stationed there. By 1947, Britain had had enough.

The United Nations took over the area and set up an eleven-man commission to examine the problem. Their solution was to divide Palestine in half with one part for the Jews and the other for the Palestinians. The Arab nations that surrounded Palestine made it clear that this plan would not be acceptable. Regardless of this – and aware of world sympathy for the Jews in the aftermath of World War Two - the United Nations went ahead with its plan. The General Assembly approved the partition in November 1947.

However, the United Nations plan came to nothing. The British left Palestine in May 1948 and the Jews set up Israel almost immediately using territory given to them in the United Nations plan. The Arab nations that surrounded Israel immediately attacked with the intention of destroying the new state.

The United Nations, now with a war to deal with, arranged for a four-week truce. However, the end of the truce saw the start of hostilities again. A major problem for the United Nations was the murder of their chief negotiator in the area – Count Bernadotte. His successor was Ralph Bunche and he managed to arrange for another cease-fire in 1949 . This was signed by Israel and all but one of the Arab nations that had attacked Israel in 1948 . However, for many it was a truce and a renewal of war was only a matter of time . The Middle East was to present to the United Nations its most difficult question.

During the 1948 conflict, 800,000 Palestinians had fled from what was now Israel and lived in refugee camps along the border of Israel and the Arab nations that surrounded Israel. Their lifestyle was poor and the humanitarian side of the United Nations was needed to improve the lot of people who felt that they had been dispossessed of their homeland. The United Nations responded to this problem by setting up the United Nations Relief and Welfare Agency (UNRWA). It was the task of UNRWA to deal with the refugee camps – provide clean water, decent tents etc. – until a political solution could be found for the refugees which would entail them returning to Israel or being accommodated by a nearby Arab nation.

The United Nations also set-up the CCP – Conciliation Commission for Palestine. This body held talks in neutral Switzerland. The main issue that had to be addressed was the border Israel held between itself and its Arab neighbours. In 1948, Israel had taken much of the land from the Palestinians that had been scheduled under the United Nations plan to be given to them.

In 1956, a full-scale war broke out when Israel attacked the Sinai – Egypt east of the Suez Canal.

Egypt, lead by Nasser, had nationalised the Suez Canal. Up to 1956, this had been co-owned by Britain and France with both countries benefiting from the profits this canal made. Now, Nasser believed that these profits should go to Egypt.

As a result of this, Britain and France had helped Israel plan out its October attack on Egypt. Their plan was simple – Israel would attack the Sinai (Egypt east of the Suez Canal) while Britain and France would attack and occupy the Suez Canal zone.

When the Security Council voted on a resolution for Israel to withdraw from the Sinai, Britain and France vetoed it. The Security Council transferred its power to the General Assembly using the ‘Uniting For Peace’ principle and the General Assembly of the United Nations called for a cease-fire and on November 5th 1956, it created a United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF). The role of the UNEF was to act as a buffer between the Israelis and the Egyptians thus ensuring that a cease-fire was maintained.

Just one day later the British and French launched their attack on the Suez. The United Nations was powerless to stop this attack. However, America, lead by Eisenhower, expressed its severe reservations regarding this attack and threatened to stop oil supplies to both Britain and France. The Suez Canal could not be used to gain oil as it had been shut. Therefore, unless Britain and France did what America wanted, they would be starved out of oil. They had to pull out of the Suez.

On November 16th 1956. 6000 United Nations troops arrived in the Sinai to keep both Israel and Egypt apart. The United Nations troops came from Finland, Canada, Yugoslavia, Denmark, Norway, Brazil, India and Columbia. They carried only light weapons and were ordered only to use them in self-defence. The UNEF remained in the Sinai as a buffer until told to leave by Nasser in 1967. During the time they were there, 89 UNEF troops had been killed. The mission also cost the United Nations over $200 million.

The UNEF left the Sinai in 1967 because it had agreed that if told to leave it would do so. To many observers, the order by Nasser for the UNEF to withdraw meant that trouble was brewing. Israel feared that she would be attacked and before waiting to be attack, Israel launched attacks on Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Iraq. This war lasted only six days and the fighting only stopped when the Security Council ordered a cease-fire. It also drew up Resolution 242 which they believed would restore peace to the Middle East. Resolution 242 called for:

*The withdrawal of Israeli forces from all Arab land they had occupied
*A solution to the Palestinian refugee problem
*The right of every state concerned in the Middle East to live in peace
*Free navigation of international waterways
*Secure boundaries between each nation in the Middle East.

All the involved nations signed 242 except Syria. However, it was not long before it became clear that each side – Arabs and Jews – interpreted each point differently. Each side also put a different emphasis on each point. What was important to the Arabs had much less importance to Israel. As an example, Israel declared its intention of staying in Arab land that they considered to be of strategic importance to the survival of Israel. The Arab nations viewed the withdrawal of Israeli forces from occupied Arab land as not open to interpretation. With such distrust, it was clear that some form of warfare would occur again. This happened in 1973 and once again the United Nations could do nothing to prevent it.

In 1973, Egypt had a new leader – Anwar Sadat. He announced that any future peace for the Middle East could only be settled once and for all by the use of military force. On Israel’s most holy of days, Yom Kippur, Egypt attacked catching the usually vigilant Israeli forces off guard.

The United Nations called for a cease-fire and passed Resolution 338. A United Nations conference in Geneva was called but produced no result. This was an obvious rebuff for the United Nations and all future peace negotiations were taken on by the USA – not the United Nations. As a result of America’s Secretary of State, Henry Kissenger, and his use of ‘shuttle diplomacy’ a Disengagement Agreement was signed in January 1974. This allowed for a new UNEF to be sent to the Middle East. This new force was made up of 7000 men and was again stationed between Egypt and Israel. A United Nations Observer Force was sent to monitor the border between Israel and Syria.

Between 1973 and the 1978 Camp David agreement, most of the work done at a diplomatic level regarding the Middle East was centred on an American input. However, in 1975, the United Nations did criticise Israel regarding its treatment of those Palestinians who continued to live outside of Israel’s borders in refugee camps and who wished to return to live in what they would refer to as Palestine. In 1977, the United Nations also criticised Israel’s policy of building settlements on land they occupied as a result of military victories. The UNDOF was established in 1974 in order to supervise the armistice between Israel and Syria in the framework of an agreement between Israel and Syria. They have been operating in the Golan Heights until today and their mandate was extended in January 2006 for sixth months. The second peace support operation was the UNEF II at the Sinai Peninsula after the end of the fourth Arabian-Israeli war, from where Israel withdrew its forces after concluding Egyptian-Israeli peace agreements in the American Camp David in the year 1978 under mediation of United States of America . Approximately 5 thousand soldiers operated in the area in the time of the UNDOF formation and the quantity is ten times higher at present. Besides maintaining the cease-fire and the armistice between Israel and Syria, the main UNDOF task is to monitoring their units in the free 80 km zone. To become more mobile and operative, the UNDOF has to modernize its military and technical facilities. This modernization program, that is full swing today, should help to improve the infrastructure and the integration of all UN units in the region. Replacing Polish General Franciszek Gagor, Major-General Bala Nanda Sharma from Nepal became the new Commander-in-Chief of UNDOF peacekeeping forces on January 14^th, 2004.

After the so-called Jordanian Black September in 1970, many Palestinian refugees came to Lebanon where they settled in refugee camps at the Lebanese territory. These camps turned into military camps so that Palestinian Arabs started armed attacks in Israel and interfered also with internal politics state of the Lebanese state. After the Israel invasion into southern Lebanon in 1978, the UN Security Council summoned Israel to withdraw from the Lebanese territory and established UN Interim Forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL). The task of these units was to monitor a complete withdrawal of the Israeli army from Lebanon, to restore peace and security and to help Lebanon regain control of its territory, which happened only after the full withdrawal of the Israeli army from southern Lebanon in May 2000 . Another Israeli invasion to Lebanon followed in 1982 when the Israeli army got kept part of southern Lebanon territory under its control until 2000.

During the entire time of the Israeli occupation, the UN defended the sovereignty and integrity of the Lebanon state, its right to political independence; the Secretary-General, too, sought to persuade Israel to withdraw its army many times. Al that was, among others, laid down in the UN Resolution No. 425 issued in 1978. The UNIFIL mission contributed also to the mitigation of the military conflict by providing humanitarian aid and protecting civilians.

On April 11^th to 27^th, 1996, Israel launched one of the biggest military operations in Lebanon called „Grapes of Wrath“. Israel opened a global war in the entire Lebanese territory including its capital. Massacres in Mansouri, Sohmor, Nabatieh, Saida, Kfour followed with the worst being in Cana where one of UN centres was located. The Israeli army fired missiles prohibited by the international law at the Fiji regiment that operated in Cana and cooperated with other international units in Lebanon. Approximately 850 civilians including children and women took shelter in the centre of international forces hoping that the UN flag would protect them. But the Israeli army nearly destroyed the town including the UN centre. This accident is regarded as one of the most gruesome massacres of the 20^th century. The text in which the UN Security Council requests Israel to reimburse the damage caused by its military operation in Cana has been submitted to the General Assembly repeatedly since then. Unfortunately, the approval was always short of few votes. There are proposals to transform the text into a UN resolution out of that reason.

After the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000, the SC approved the Secretary-General’s operative plan concerning aid to Lebanon to restore the state authority.

UNIFIL units have remained in the Lebanon territory, better to say in the so-called „Blue Line“ on the south Lebanese-Israeli border where they control the area occupied by Israel formerly. Some observers allege that Israel did not interpret the line of its withdrawal as stipulated in the UN plan correctly. Israel refuses this standpoint. There is an ongoing territorial dispute about the withdrawal of the Israeli army related to the Shebaa farm situated on the very Lebanon-Israel border that is claimed both by the Lebanon and the Israel party. The farm is located on the west side of Anti Lebanon Mountains called also called „Galilee Fingers“.

Israel intrudes the Lebanese airspace frequently. Political party Hizbullah responds to it with anti-aircraft missiles fired from the Lebanon territory towards Israeli border. After the withdrawal of Israeli units from southern Lebanon, Hizbullah, formerly a resistance movement, controls the mentioned part of the Lebanese territory. According to the Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s Personal Representative for southern Lebanon, Steffan de Mistura, Israelis often transgress the Blue Line, intrude the Lebanese airspace, attack Hizbullah’s positions, which caused not only material damage but casualties, too. The UN keeps on admonishing Israel to make an end to its overflights of Lebanon and Lebanon to stop firing anti-aircraft missiles. The UN also appeals to investigate the assassination of ex-prime minister Rafiq Haríri in February 2005 in Beirut.

In spite of Israel intruding the Lebanese airspace all the time and occasional tensions, the situation is relatively calm in the Blue line and in Lebanon in general. But in the matter of Golan Heights and Israeli-Syrian relations, no significant progress was made. The Israel occupation of Golan Heights continues.

During the Israeli occupation of the Southern Lebanon and Syrian military presence in Lebanon the UNO always defended sovereignty and complexity of the Lebanese territory, its right for independency. The Secretary – General appealled many times Israel and Syria to withdraw their armies from Lebanon as the UN resolution no. 425 requested since 1978. The UNIFIL mission contributed to moderate the millitant conflict in Lebanon, ensured and distributed the humanitarian aid and protected civilians.

On December 11, 2007, the GA adopted a resolution on agricultural technology for development sponsored by Israel. The Arab group proposed a series of amendments referring to the Palestinian occupied territories, but these amendments were rejected. " The United States was saddened by the inappropriate injection into the agenda item of irrelevant political considerations, characterized by inflammatory remarks that devalued the importance of the United Nations agenda". The resolution was approved by a recorded vote of 118 in favour to none against, with 29 abstentions. The abstentions were mainly from the Arab Group, with the notable exception of Pakistan which voted in favour.

Current situation

The automatic majority enjoyed by the pro-Palestinian resolutions is described as such:

Tal Becker, legal advisor to Israel's permanent mission to the UN, visualizes this anti-Israel voting bloc as a series of "concentric circles." The smallest of the circles is the core of twenty Arab nations that constitute what is known as the "Arab group” which initiates the harshest condemnations of Israel. These countries are part of the larger fifty-six-member "Moslem group", all of whom can be counted on to consistently support anti-Israel resolutions. These fifty-six nations represent part of the Non-Aligned group of 115 largely third-world nations that formed during the Cold War and generally have voted as a group independent of Soviet or U.S. influence. And an even larger circle, considered the standard lineup against Israel, is composed of the 133 members of the G-77, which includes all of the developing countries.

A few countries have consistently supported Israel's actions in the UN, such as the United States of America and the states of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands and Palau all of which are associated states of the U.S. Recently Australia, under the leadership of John Howard, and Canada, under the leadership of Stephen Harper, have also supported Israel at the UN .

Many European countries usually adopt a neutral stance, abstaining from the ongoing condemnations of Israel and supporting the foundation of a Palestinian state. Such countries include France, Russia, and Germany.

United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the 2008 Gaza War

A fact finding mission on Human Rights violations during the 2008 Gaza War between Israel and Hamas was called by the Jan 12 2009 UNHRC Resolution A/HRC/S-9/L.1 which limited the investigation to "violations by the occupying Power, Israel, against the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip" but, before any investigation, already "Strongly condemns the ongoing Israeli military operation carried out in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip , which has resulted in massive violations of the human rights of the Palestinian people" .

Former UN high commissioner for human rights and Ireland President Mary Robinson refused to head the mission because she "felt strongly that the Council’s resolution was one-sided and did not permit a balanced approach to determining the situation on the ground."

On April 3, 2009, Richard Goldstone was named as the head of the mission. In an interview, he said "at first I was not prepared to accept the invitation to head the mission". "It was essential," he continued, to expand the mandate to include "the sustained rocket attack on civilians in southern Israel, as well as other facts." He set this expansion of the mandate as a condition for chairing the mission.

Melanie Phillips notes that the resolution that created the mandate allows no such change and questions the validity of the new mandate. "It looks therefore as if he [Goldstone] and the UNHRC President unilaterally tore up both the Council’s mandate and UN regulations". She thinks the mandate was changed in order to allow a negligible criticism of Hamas "to provide Goldstone with the fig-leaf to disguise the moral bankruptcy of the entire process". Israel also thought the change of the mandate didn't have much practical effect.

Israel concluded that "it seemed clear beyond any doubt that the initiative was motivated by a political agenda and not concern for human rights" and therefore refused to cooperate with it – in contrast to its policy to cooperate fully with most of the international inquiries into events in the Gaza Operation.

The mission report was published on Sept 15 2009. As noted in the press release, the mission concluded "that serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law were committed by Israel in the context of its military operations in Gaza from December 27, 2008 to January 18, 2009, and that Israel committed actions amounting to war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity. The Mission also found that Palestinian armed groups had committed war crimes, as well as possibly crimes against humanity."

Reactions to the report's findings were varied. The report was not immediately ratified by a UNHRC resolution. This step was postponed to March 2010. This delay is attributed to diplomatic pressure from Western members of the Council, including the US which joined in April 2009 and, surprisingly, from the Palestinian Authority representative. About the U.S. pressure, UNHRC representative Harold Hongju Koh described the U.S. participation to the Council as "an experiment" with the Goldstone report being the first test.

The report was finally ratified by the October 14th UNHRC resolution A/HRC/S-12/L.1. Like the January 12th resolution but unlike the report, this ratification condemns Israel, not Hamas ^.The "unbalanced focus" of the ratification was criticized by U.S. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly , U.S. ambassador to the UNHRC Douglas Griffiths and Richard Goldstone himself.
12 March 2010 – The United Nations-supported diplomatic group seeking to promote peace in the Middle East today condemned Israeli moves to expand settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory of East Jerusalem.

The Quartet, comprising of the UN, the European Union (EU), the US and Russia, “condemns Israel’s decision to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem,” the group said in a statement, agreeing to closely monitor developments in the region.

“The Quartet reiterates that Arab-Israeli peace and the establishment of an independent, contiguous and viable state of Palestine is in the fundamental interests of the parties, of all States in the region, and of the international community,” the statement read.

The statement called for the urgent resumption of talks between the parties to resolve all outstanding issues of the conflict, including the status of Jerusalem.

The Quartet said it will take full stock of the situation at its meeting in Moscow on 19 March. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said that he shared the deep frustrations of Palestinian leaders and of the members of the Arab League over Israel’s plans.

“Settlements are illegal, and their expansion violates the Roadmap [which calls for two States – Israel and Palestine – living side by side in peace and security],” Mr. Ban’s spokesman Martin Nesirky told reporters in New York .In a separate statement, the Secretary-General said the Israeli announcement “undermines any movement towards a viable peace process.”

Can the United Nations Fix the Middle East?

The U.N. could help fix the Middle East on developmental, regional, and economic issues, such as water arrangements. On other issues, the U.N. will never be able to fix the Middle East, for the simple reason that the United States would not let it. The more the United States gets involved in the U.N., the more effective an organization it will be. The repeal of the Zionism-equal-racism equation, for instance, was the outcome of strong American diplomatic work. So was the gathering together of the Gulf war coalition. In fact, after the Gulf war the U.N. was in a state of huge euphoria.

More effort will be required from the United States to make the U.N. a more effective organization when it comes to solving problems related to the Middle East. The Clinton administration, however, is gradually less involved in the work of the U.N., for both internal and external reasons.

We have aimed to evaluate the role of the international and regional organization in the Middle East, especially the UNO role in the Middle East on the basis of selected examples in this paper. The UNO role, or more precisely its peaceful, humanitarian activity, is beneficial in our opinion. The role of UNO being a world organisation in the multidimensional and multicultural world will rise.

UN peacemaking missions implement peace agreements, help to manage political transitions and changes, build institutions, support economic reconstruction, provide protection of refugees and humanitarian aid, supervise or organize elections, monitor observance of human rights, clear minefields, take disarmament measures. To achieve all these tasks, the UN cooperates with regional organisations, Bretton Woods institutions etc. But the main initiative, the signal, must always arise from member states, from a man.

Resources:

The Middle East: ten years after Camp David (by: William B. Quandt)

Israel, the Middle East, and the great powers Israel Stockman-Shomron

The United Nations and international politics (by Stephen Ryan)

United Nations law and the Security Council (by Max Hilaire)

The UN Security Council: from the Cold War to the 21st century (by David Malone)

http://www.globalissues.org/issue/103/middle-east

http://www.honestreporting.com/a/region.asp

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=18&region_id=13

http://www.globalissues.org/article/119/the-middle-east-conflict-a-brief-background

http://www.the-map-as-history.com/maps/2-history-middle-east-ottoman.php

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/united_nations_middle_east.htm

http://www.un.org/Docs/scres/2002/sc2002.htm