The rise of the Islamic State has affected nearly all aspects of global affairs. In fact, ISIL’s impact can even be felt on the economies of the world, as was discussed in the International Monetary Fund today.
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL, currently controls an area containing eight million people and has now created a self-sustaining economy, significantly harming the economies of both Syria and Iraq in the process. ISIL in Iraq currently controls many of Iraq’s northern oil fields, and while Iraq is still in control of the larger ones in the south, Iraq’s economy is struggling to cope with this loss of export.
The issue of oil export was brought up by the delegate of Sweden, who implied that Turkey was supporting ISIL, perhaps by supplying them with oil. The delegation of Turkey did not comment on this accusation.
The delegate of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea then changed the topic to the refugee crisis, reminding delegates that the Syrian Civil War also was contributing to the refugee crisis currently causing disruption in the Middle East and in Europe.
Following North Korea’s speech, the delegate of Chile changed the topic back to Sweden’s criticism of Turkey, again stating that Turkey was supporting ISIS. Spain, on the other voiced support of the commencement of “a Second Great Crusade” and the construction of “a great wall” along ISIL’s border, with nations supporting ISIL paying for it. Many delegates responded harshly to this speech, with Chile stating that the delegate of Spain had “his head in the clouds”.
This controversial speech was followed by a reminder from Belarus that the IMF has no military power and can only make recommendations. Following this largely unproductive segment of debate, the dais reminded delegates that the IMF should be focusing on combating ISIL monetarily.
Showing a return to the topic at hand, Libya called for an investigation into the funding of ISIL, and the possibility of economic sanctions on nations found to be aiding ISIL.
This possibility was then discussed at length, with the DPRK echoing the suggestion of earlier delegates for nations trading with ISIL to be sanctioned. However, this was opposed by Turkey, who implied that cutting off ISIL will mainly harm the innocent civilians within ISIL controlled territory, citing the DPRK as an example of the possible negative effects of economic sanctions.
This was fervently opposed by the delegate of Switzerland, who insisted that allowing nations to trade with ISIL will only strengthen the terrorist group.
In general, the committee session seemed very contentious, with multiple nations being unable to find common ground and others dismissing the ideas of other delegates in order to promote their own. This led to the committee being unable to make much progress towards a real solution. Additionally, many delegates needed constant reminders of the actual purpose and powers of the IMF.
If the IMF wishes to truly find economic means to combat ISIL, delegates in the future must be willing to work together and look past their differences in order to combat the real threat: the Islamic State.
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL, currently controls an area containing eight million people and has now created a self-sustaining economy, significantly harming the economies of both Syria and Iraq in the process. ISIL in Iraq currently controls many of Iraq’s northern oil fields, and while Iraq is still in control of the larger ones in the south, Iraq’s economy is struggling to cope with this loss of export.
The issue of oil export was brought up by the delegate of Sweden, who implied that Turkey was supporting ISIL, perhaps by supplying them with oil. The delegation of Turkey did not comment on this accusation.
The delegate of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea then changed the topic to the refugee crisis, reminding delegates that the Syrian Civil War also was contributing to the refugee crisis currently causing disruption in the Middle East and in Europe.
Following North Korea’s speech, the delegate of Chile changed the topic back to Sweden’s criticism of Turkey, again stating that Turkey was supporting ISIS. Spain, on the other voiced support of the commencement of “a Second Great Crusade” and the construction of “a great wall” along ISIL’s border, with nations supporting ISIL paying for it. Many delegates responded harshly to this speech, with Chile stating that the delegate of Spain had “his head in the clouds”.
This controversial speech was followed by a reminder from Belarus that the IMF has no military power and can only make recommendations. Following this largely unproductive segment of debate, the dais reminded delegates that the IMF should be focusing on combating ISIL monetarily.
Showing a return to the topic at hand, Libya called for an investigation into the funding of ISIL, and the possibility of economic sanctions on nations found to be aiding ISIL.
This possibility was then discussed at length, with the DPRK echoing the suggestion of earlier delegates for nations trading with ISIL to be sanctioned. However, this was opposed by Turkey, who implied that cutting off ISIL will mainly harm the innocent civilians within ISIL controlled territory, citing the DPRK as an example of the possible negative effects of economic sanctions.
This was fervently opposed by the delegate of Switzerland, who insisted that allowing nations to trade with ISIL will only strengthen the terrorist group.
In general, the committee session seemed very contentious, with multiple nations being unable to find common ground and others dismissing the ideas of other delegates in order to promote their own. This led to the committee being unable to make much progress towards a real solution. Additionally, many delegates needed constant reminders of the actual purpose and powers of the IMF.
If the IMF wishes to truly find economic means to combat ISIL, delegates in the future must be willing to work together and look past their differences in order to combat the real threat: the Islamic State.