Jump to content

UN Security Council Discussion


Triyun

Recommended Posts

"The Amazon Republic has lost our faith in the ability of the South American Organization to properly govern and care for the areas of South America fallen into wrack and ruin due to the comings and goings of governments as is the tendency of so many places on our world. As such is the case, the Amazon Republic formally requests that should the government of the Amazon Republic fall, the United Nations step in to ensure a proper protectorate under reasonable and mature guidance, the sort of guidance that is currently absent from the South American Organization."

 

- Ambassador Montessori

Hrm, certainly a reasonable request. Though we are offended that you would think that the Republica, Argentina, and other South American nations would not be able to care for the people of the protectorate as well as they always have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 631
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Its important for all parties to note here that very recently you were hurling insults at this very body as illegitimate and supporting someone who turned to first use of the most terrible weapons in the world against my nation.  I would suggest then, that rather than feel morally outraged you join the rest of the world in figuring out how to construct a world which is based on common sense principles and norms.  

 

It is our wish that this body above all reject moral subjectivism and the ideas that individual nations no matter how morally flawed are entitled to special protections which enable them to essentially have a political shield up until the point where they pose an existential threat to other states.  This logic of this as being either moral or just is spurious.  Its important that we recognize the primary legitimacy of the state come from providing security and freedom to the people.  Rulers are servants, their needs and wants are secondary.

 

We posit at the most basic level that human beings have basic rights and requirements which governments are obligated to provide, among these are the rights to food, water, shelter, health, and security.  No weapon more threatens these than the terrible use of nuclear weapons.  We therefore put to the security council the following binding agreement.

 

[b] UN SC Resolution 1: Testing, First Use, and Tactical Use of Nuclear Weapons[/b]

 

Preamble:  In recognition of the basic decency and rights of human beings as citizens and stewards of this World, we the United Nations Security Council hereby fulfill our duty on behalf of mankind recommit the World to the Universal Goal of the the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons.

 

Article I.  Universality of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

 

We hereby issue that the security council has the authority and moral obligation to compel all nations to adopt the standards of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.  We make the sole exception that the legality of nations with nuclear weapons is, that all nations that have tested weapons before this current date are considered legacy nuclear powers which now have obligations to reduce their arsenals.  Any new nuclear powers from here on will be treated as nations out of compliance and the UN authorizes all means of national power to bring these 'rogue' states into compliance.

 

Article II.  Universality of Spirit of Cooperation and Protection against Nuclear Apartheid

 

All nations have the right to peaceful use of nuclear energy both fusion and fission.  However, any nation which violates Article I will not be allowed to have access to nuclear power, either peaceful or dual use.  The security council hereby then authorizes all methods of national power to be used to end any nuclear program peaceful or otherwise, and authorizes the Empire of Tianxia, Athenian Federation, and any others with the sufficient technical means to compel third party actors to end assistance to the rogue state.

 

Article III.  Criminality of Tactical Nuclear Weapons

 

Tactical nuclear weapons shall be considered illegal for any nation to build and employ.  These weapons shall be defined as weapons with enhanced radiation, deployed as land mines, as artillery shells, and having firing ranges under 300 kilometers (if air dropped the range of the aircraft employable on them shall be judged as combat radius), and having yields under 100 kilotons.   Nations employing this technology shall measurable steps to declare these weapons to the security council.  Should they fail to do so within a timely basis the Security Council authorizes nations to use necessary force to compel compliance.

 

Article IV.  Universality of the MTCR

 

The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) shall be made a binding agreement universally.  Further, the Security Council shall outlaw the copying of weapon systems from copy right holders by third parties which violate he MTCR.  The Security Council authorizes the use of force by nations to bring rogue nations into compliance.

 

In other news we believe the American Commonwealth, Madagascar, and Prussia have now qualified for a seat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Paraguayan delegation, led by UN Ambassador Silandra Lopez, supports this UNSC resolution and hopes that all parties will agree. Ambassador Lopez would also like to reiterate that Paraguay has always opposed, both privately and publicly, its opposition to nuclear weapons.

 

- UN Paraguayan Delegation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5315dea4985e3e5b074cb707c9f44550.jpg
Protest march against the "Anti-White immigration Law" in Rhodesia Nyasaland

To the attention of the United Nations Security Council,
 
THE Afrikaner and Anglo-British community of Rhodesia Nyasaland is being discriminated by an Anti-White Immigration Bill partially enforced by the Provisional Military Government of Rhodesia Nyasaland. We, the members of the Afrikaner, Anglo-British and Indigenous communities of Rhodesia Nyasaland, petition the Security Council and request that our most basic human rights shall be respected regardless of our skin color.
 
The Anti-White Immigration Bill makes it extremely difficult for families to reunite, our friends and our parents, our sons, our daughters, our relatives are constantly denied access to Rhodesia Nyasaland due to the color of their skin. If this Security Council is the true heir of the United Nations Security Council, given the right of victimized, marginalized groups within a country to petition, we hereby submit the following case:
 
PETITION TO DECLARE THE "Anti-White Immigration Bill"
A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY
 
GIVEN the fact that a human right violation occurs when actions by state (or non-state) actors abuse, ignore, or deny basic human rights (including civil, political, cultural, social, and economic rights).
 
CONSIDERING the following articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 10, 1948, in Paris:
 
Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
 
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
 
Article 30.
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
 
And CONSIDERING the fact that on November 30, 1973, the United Nations General Assembly opened for signature and ratification the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid,
 
WE ASK the United Nations Security council to declare the Anti-White Immigration Bill a crime against humanity and enforce its abolition on the territory of the Federal Republic of Rhodesia Nyasaland.
 
Signed,
For Afrikaner Solidariteit, Clem Tholet (Singer)
For the Rhodesian African National Congress, Winnie Mandela (Prime Minister)
For the Afrikaner Nasionale Party, The Right Honourable Hendrik Verwoerd (Member of Parliament)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A consortium of Russian NGO officials would like to visit Rhodesia Nyasaland to investigate claims of apartheid and racial discrimination against Africans of European descent in that country. These NGO workers would be in the country without official sanction from the government and their findings may or may not reflect the official stance of the Russian government. Additionally Russia's Foreign Ministry requires Rhodesia Nyasaland to produce a copy of the so called Anti-White Immigration Bill for official review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're curious about the function of this bill and request clarification from Athens, are we to understand that the Athenian Federation is prohibiting family from visiting, or are we to understand that for example someone from Poland can't obtain a visa.  Without expressing approval of either, it would seem that the two are different.  

 

We'd also ask clarification from the Afrikaaner petitioners, since you are bringing this to us on the right of victimized or marginalized group are you claiming that current relatives living abroad be given right of return, such is your reference to divided family which I assume is a small number compared to the population in country, no?   Or are you saying that people from say... the Netherlands a caucasian country be allowed to immigrate?  If its the latter, I don't see how they are part of a marginalized group anymore than a african american in the American Commonwealth city of Detroit is part of your african population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The Amazon Republic can not in good faith give its support to the proposed resolution SC Resolution #1. We find it alarming that action can be taken against fellow nations without a prior vote of the General Assembly. We encourage the addition of language calling for a binding vote of the General Assembly after a suitable period of debate. Further we support the deletion of the clause authorizing certain nations the power to enforce this document. It is our belief that the enforcement of this document should be held universally in trust by all of the members of the United Nations.

 

We also at this time support the Tianxian request for clarification into the matter of this Anti-White Bill."

 

 

- Montessori

Edited by Tidy Bowl Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're curious about the function of this bill and request clarification from Athens, are we to understand that the Athenian Federation is prohibiting family from visiting, or are we to understand that for example someone from Poland can't obtain a visa.  Without expressing approval of either, it would seem that the two are different.  

 

We'd also ask clarification from the Afrikaaner petitioners, since you are bringing this to us on the right of victimized or marginalized group are you claiming that current relatives living abroad be given right of return, such is your reference to divided family which I assume is a small number compared to the population in country, no?   Or are you saying that people from say... the Netherlands a caucasian country be allowed to immigrate?  If its the latter, I don't see how they are part of a marginalized group anymore than a african american in the American Commonwealth city of Detroit is part of your african population.

The Anti-White Immigration bill is simple: The law says that anyone who happens to be white is denied a visa and a permission to cross the border. It isn't about family visiting, or being polish, it is about being white. Irrespective of nationality or cultural background. This law has horrendous consequences on our society and our families, which sometimes happen to be mixed. Someone from the Netherlands, or Poland, is allowed to immigrate as long as.. he is not white, as the law imposed by Athens says.

Athens forced us to approve this law against our own will - a clear violation of our national sovereignty - and now  the people are paying the consequences. There are mixed families in Rhodesia Nyasaland, in some families one parent happens to be white, and the other one happens to be black. If one of the parents worked abroad, he is technically stuck on the other side of the border until someone repels the anti-white immigration law. It isn't just one group to be victimized, but almost the entire population of Rhodesia Nyasaland, which makes it even more outrageous.

Of course, the number of the families involved is small, considering the small population of the country. But should that be less important or less wrong? Should we turn a blind eye on "a few families" and let this shame continue to take place in Rhodesia Nyasaland? We don't think so.

We need the UN help to repel the anti white immigration law, because the last time we tried, our capital city suffered a missile attack. 38 dead and 91 injured. We can't defend ourself.



 

Edited by Ian Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The japanese nation of Dai-Tōhoku supports UNSC Resolution #1, suggests however that the specific reference to Tianxia and Athens be removed from the resolution. The notion of "the Empire of Tianxia, Athenian Federation, and any others with the sufficient technical means" could be replaced simply by "any nation with the sufficient technical means", which would include Tianxia and Athens still, but does not imply that there is any difference in the struggle against these weapons of mass destruction, be it carried out by Tianxia or by any other country with the means necessary. To combat nuclear weaponry should be a responsibility of all member states of the UN that find themselves in the posession of the necessary means and it should be supported by all members, even those who do not have the capability to intervene directly on their own. Nuclear weaponry is a threat to us all and should be combatted by everyone, without differentiation.

 

Apart from this, we fully support this move to remove nuclear arms from the world to provide increased security for everyone and also for future generations.

 

In regards to the Rhodesian issue, our country would like to note that technically, the return of a citizen, who happened to have been abroad is not technically considered immigration, just as Dai-Tōhoku Japanese are not immigrants everytime they return from visits to Tokyo or holidays on Okinawa. Dai-Tōhoku would like to note that the differentiation of people's based on skin colour is not something we can in any way support, we would thus hope to be given explanation by Athens on what grounds the imposition of this law was justified and by what reasoning it could be considered not an infringement on the notion of equality of all human beings. Additionally, we would hope for a definition of the term "white". While the term could be construed as "of caucasian ethnicity", just alone from the shade of the skin colour, even East Asians could be affected by this measure. And while this has little to no effect on the legality of the law, it is just to note that the term "white" to us is ambigious."

-Katsura Kaede, permanent representative of the Dai-Tōhoku Renpō

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ General Assembly at large

 

"We are perplexed with how and why Rhodesia's immigration policy came to be as it is in the first place. Athens represents a vast multicultural nation, it seems quite unlike them to push this legislation for no apparent reason. What is the reasoning behind this policy and what is the chain of events that led up to its implementation. It seems unlikely they would demand it without a reason.

 

Athens? Your thoughts if you could spare a moment?"

 

 

@ Katsura Kaede

 

"Your thoughts on SC Resolution have great merit, we support your suggestions for the changing of the language in reference to Athens, Tianxia, and other, but still voice our concerns  for the apparent lack of a voting procedure for enacting this policy."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The fighting in Rhodesia represents a destabilization of the African continent. The security of one region being threatened is a threat to the security of all. The Amazon Republic requests an immediate emergency vote of the General Assembly for a binding resolution, to be affirmed by the Security Council of course, which calls for the blockading of Rhodesia to prevent the importing of weapons and munitions to help contain the fighting. Further, should the violence escalate the resolution would give the United Nations the sanction to deploy peacekeepers and inspections teams until the violence has been halted and the area pacified.

 

The Amazon Republic, in advance, will commit a Ranger Brigade, Combat Air Group, and a Logistical Support and Services Brigade to this effort should it be authorized."

 

 

ooc- this is not a call for the invasion of Rhodesia, but for the blocking of arms and munitions  first and then sending in peacekeepers if the fighting doesn't stop second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ooc- this is not a call for the invasion of Rhodesia, but for the blocking of arms and munitions  first and then sending in peacekeepers if the fighting doesn't stop second.

OOC: Thank you. For the sake of RP i kindly ask all players to not send Peacekeepers into the country until the war is over - due to the fact the roleplay will evolve according to IG war results - just asking you to respect the nature of the civil war being strictly related with IG mechanics - after the war i will RP accordingly with RP interventions, peacekeepers etc. So i'm not refusing to recognize anything or refuse to rp, i just want the civil war to follow IG results and RP accordingly - nothing prevents you from posting diplomacy or reactions in the civil war thread, i always welcome roleplay and interactions between nations. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


"The fighting in Rhodesia represents a destabilization of the African continent. The security of one region being threatened is a threat to the security of all. The Amazon Republic requests an immediate emergency vote of the General Assembly for a binding resolution, to be affirmed by the Security Council of course, which calls for the blockading of Rhodesia to prevent the importing of weapons and munitions to help contain the fighting. Further, should the violence escalate the resolution would give the United Nations the sanction to deploy peacekeepers and inspections teams until the violence has been halted and the area pacified.

 

The Amazon Republic, in advance, will commit a Ranger Brigade, Combat Air Group, and a Logistical Support and Services Brigade to this effort should it be authorized."

 

 

ooc- this is not a call for the invasion of Rhodesia, but for the blocking of arms and munitions  first and then sending in peacekeepers if the fighting doesn't stop second.

 

 

 

 

The République although looking to be impartial, despite the proximity of the conflict questions the Amazon Republic's judgement in asking to send such vast military forces against a nation in turmoil. Your decision does lead to questioning the soundness of your leadershipp. We also would like to say, the République is fully in support of Rhodesian armed forces to quell this.

Edited by High Emperor Aggron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SC not the GA has authority on enforcing the peace and security.  If nations wish to have a general enforcement mechanism it does however necessarily mean a more bloody method of enforcement.  We're fine with this.

 

"The burden of world peace and the enforcement of international law must be an international responsibility. We wish to see a voting process in which situations such as the one unfolding in Rhodesia can be debated and voted upon prior to being acted upon. We also desire that nations wishing to volunteer troops and aid be allowed to do so in tandem with their United Nations brothers in arms."

 

 



 

 


 

 

 

The République although looking to be impartial, despite the proximity of the conflict questions the Amazon Republic's judgement in asking to send such vast military forces against a nation in turmoil. Your decision does lead to questioning the soundness of your leadershipp. We also would like to say, the République is fully in support of Rhodesian armed forces to quell this.

 

"You are absolutely free to question it, the population of the Amazon Republic, the voices that matter to our government, do not."

Edited by Tidy Bowl Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The Athenian Federation fully support resolution #1 in its current draft and furthermore believes articles 41 and 42 provide sufficient securities for the global peace and security to be guaranteed. While a vote by the General Assembly would be ideal having it as a requirement limits the ability of the United Nations to act quickly in a developing situation."

 

"As for Rhodesia-Nyasaland, the findings and conclusions of the Committee on Rhodesia-Nyasaland operating under the Office of the Exarch of Africa call for the imposing of quotas on immigration to correct past violations and guarantee future balance. While this measure admittedly goes against the general interpretation of equality it follows it in spirit by correcting past inequality. As my fellow delegates most likely know affirmative action has a history in most of our states and is seen as a justified tool to correct historical wrongdoings.

 

That being said, the Committee had never suggested such sweeping measures as Rhodesia-Nyasaland opted to implement and this state did not attempt to negotiate with the Exarch on an arrangement. For example the text of the report allows for limited immigration of Caucasian individuals as long as policies are undertaken to further promote the immigration of African individuals to the state."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The Athenian Federation fully support resolution #1 in its current draft and furthermore believes articles 41 and 42 provide sufficient securities for the global peace and security to be guaranteed. While a vote by the General Assembly would be ideal having it as a requirement limits the ability of the United Nations to act quickly in a developing situation."

 

"As for Rhodesia-Nyasaland, the findings and conclusions of the Committee on Rhodesia-Nyasaland operating under the Office of the Exarch of Africa call for the imposing of quotas on immigration to correct past violations and guarantee future balance. While this measure admittedly goes against the general interpretation of equality it follows it in spirit by correcting past inequality. As my fellow delegates most likely know affirmative action has a history in most of our states and is seen as a justified tool to correct historical wrongdoings.

 

That being said, the Committee had never suggested such sweeping measures as Rhodesia-Nyasaland opted to implement and this state did not attempt to negotiate with the Exarch on an arrangement. For example the text of the report allows for limited immigration of Caucasian individuals as long as policies are undertaken to further promote the immigration of African individuals to the state."

We have asked several times to see proofs of the aforementioned "findings" in Rhodesia Nyasaland, but all our requests have been constantly ignored.

Quotas on immigration according to skin color is a policy reminiscent of nazism - which happens to be a product of European mentality, just like apartheid. We wonder what Europe has done to correct the past wrongdoings (many, looking back at the history of Europe) other than enforcing apartheid on blacks, and then on whites, in Africa.

We don't force people to move to Rhodesia Nyasaland, and our immigration policies promote the immigration of individuals who plan to stay here and become citizens in order to contribute to the social and material progress of the country, irrespective of color. We have special policies to promote the immigration of former citizens of Transvaal due to the cultural and historical link with South Africa, but our policies don't take skin color into account when promoting such immigrations.

Edited by Ian Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Perhaps you can show the demographic data and income distribution of the various ethnic groups in Rhodesia? Further, my government and I'm sure others would as well, are quite interested to know the source of Rhodesia's discontent as evidenced by media reports of an ongoing campaign of violence and terror between what appears to be different ethnic groups inside of Rhodesia.

 

Please provide this information, it is the understanding of my government and myself that Athens has a long history of multiculturalism and fair treatment of minority groups within their own borders. I doubt they'd take their current stance without sufficient cause for alarm. And per their statement, your nation elected to take this policy onto itself, which leads me to include that your invocation of Nazism to be a tired, boorish, and highly unnecessary comment in light of your actions. The Amazon Republic would hope that Rhodesia would apologize for this unfortunate comment no doubt brought on by the stress of the developing crisis within the borders of Rhosdesia."

Edited by Tidy Bowl Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Perhaps you can show the demographic data and income distribution of the various ethnic groups in Rhodesia? Further, my government and I'm sure others would as well, are quite interested to know the source of Rhodesia's discontent as evidenced by media reports of an ongoing campaign of violence and terror between what appears to be different ethnic groups inside of Rhodesia.

 

Please provide this information, it is the understanding of my government and myself that Athens has a long history of multiculturalism and fair treatment of minority groups within their own borders. I doubt they'd take their current stance without sufficient cause for alarm. And per their statement, your nation elected to take this policy onto itself, which leads me to include that your invocation of Nazism to be a tired, boorish, and highly unnecessary comment in light of your actions. The Amazon Republic would hope that Rhodesia would apologize for this unfortunate comment no doubt brought on by the stress of the developing crisis within the borders of Rhosdesia."

The fight against terrorism in Rhodesia has nothing to do with ethnic groups, and has no ethnical background. Infact the Rhodesian Army has no restrictions regarding skin color, neither does the Airforce or the Secret Services. It isn't whites against blacks, but whites and blacks against extreme left-wing terrorists who pose a threat to our democracy and our freedom. The last thing we need is a marxist single party state.
 
Regarding to demographics, this is the last census in our archives. However it does not map the entire population of Rhodesia Nyasaland and is restricted only to major urban areas and natural parks where several indigenous tribes live according to their ancient cultural values. 

These statistics are not accurate, anymore. 


2013 CENSUS DATA - as of October 11, 2013

TOTAL POPULATION: 8,676 
 
WHITE RHODESIANS = 5534 (63,78%) 
 
3773 Afrikaaners (43,48%)
1725 Anglo-British Rhodesians (19,88%)
 
BLACK RHODESIANS = 3142 (36,21%)
 
1066 Shona (12,28%)
832 Ndele (9,59%)
789 Coloureds (9,09%)
455 Malawians (5,24%)
 
According to the last result.. Yes, in Rhodesia Nyasaland there is a white majority. However, skin color does not equal more privileges or less privileges in Rhodesia Nyasaland. The Athenian Federation claimed that the Rhodesian government implicitly carried out ethnic cleansing - however, our requests to see the proofs of said ethnic cleansings have always been ignored. We have invited foreign diplomats to visit Rhodesia Nyasaland, and those who visited our country have confirmed that Rhodesia Nyasaland is a multicultural nation, based on the rule of law, equality and justice for all irrespective of color.
 
The constitution protects the rights of all individuals. The Athenian Federation forced Rhodesia Nyasaland to implement the anti white immigration law - a law that we think it's reminiscent of nazism, a law that we have enforced after 38 people died in a cruise missiles attack launched on our Capital City by the Athenian Federation, a law that we despise and that we are ashamed of. The reason why we are asking the UN to repel this law, is due to the fact that we lack the support and the authority to do it alone. We cannot defend ourself against foreign impositions and we believe the UN has the authority to deal with our situation.
Edited by Ian Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fight against terrorism in Rhodesia has nothing to do with ethnic groups, and has no ethnical background. Infact the Rhodesian Army has no restrictions regarding skin color, neither does the Airforce or the Secret Services. It isn't whites against blacks, but whites and blacks against extreme left-wing terrorists who pose a threat to our democracy and our freedom. The last thing we need is a marxist single party state.
 
Regarding to demographics, this is the last census in our archives. However it does not map the entire population of Rhodesia Nyasaland and is restricted only to major urban areas and natural parks where several indigenous tribes live according to their ancient cultural values. 

These statistics are not accurate, anymore. 


2013 CENSUS DATA - as of October 11, 2013

TOTAL POPULATION: 8,676 
 
WHITE RHODESIANS = 5534 (63,78%) 
 
3773 Afrikaaners (43,48%)
1725 Anglo-British Rhodesians (19,88%)
 
BLACK RHODESIANS = 3142 (36,21%)
 
1066 Shona (12,28%)
832 Ndele (9,59%)
789 Coloureds (9,09%)
455 Malawians (5,24%)
 
According to the last result.. Yes, in Rhodesia Nyasaland there is a white majority. However, skin color does not equal more privileges or less privileges in Rhodesia Nyasaland. The Athenian Federation claimed that the Rhodesian government implicitly carried out ethnic cleansing - however, our requests to see the proofs of said ethnic cleansings have always been ignored. We have invited foreign diplomats to visit Rhodesia Nyasaland, and those who visited our country have confirmed that Rhodesia Nyasaland is a multicultural nation, based on the rule of law, equality and justice for all irrespective of color.
 
The constitution protects the rights of all individuals. The Athenian Federation forced Rhodesia Nyasaland to implement the anti white immigration law - a law that we think it's reminiscent of nazism, a law that we have enforced after 38 people died in a cruise missiles attack launched on our Capital City by the Athenian Federation, a law that we despise and that we are ashamed of. The reason why we are asking the UN to repel this law, is due to the fact that we lack the support and the authority to do it alone. We cannot defend ourself against foreign impositions and we believe the UN has the authority to deal with our situation.

We refer the Rhodesian delegation to their own earlier demographic report.

 

2013 CENSUS DATA - as of October 5, 2013
 
TOTAL POPULATION: 6,451
 
WHITE RHODESIANS = 3,309 (51.3%)
 
1725 Anglo-British Rhodesians (26,7%)
1548 Afrikaaners (23,9%)
 
BLACK RHODESIANS = 3142 (48,7%)

1066 Shona (16,5%)
832 Ndele (12,8%)
789 Coloureds (12,2%)
455 Malawians (7,1%)
 
As these reports clearly show in the period of a week there was apparently an increase of well over 2,000 Afrikaners. An increase unlikely in itself already due to the simple fact that the probability of a state within Africa to only attract white people is so minimal it is nearly impossible. Furthermore residents of neighbouring areas had reported great difficulty in achieving the proper visa to enter Rhodesia-Nyasaland while they were apparently given out easily to Afrikaners. 
 
We must also once again reiterate that Rhodesia-Nyasaland opted for the most extreme implementation of the report and that a complete ban on all white immigration was never imposed by either the Exarch or the Athenian Federation.
 
As for what Europe has done? I obviously cannot speak for my neighbours but the Athenian Federation has implemented policies to guarantee access to all resources and institutions for minorities, we have restructured our territories to match historical structure rather than the ones imposed in the 18th century and we have implemented immigration policies to make passage for oppressed groups easier and less expensive"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We refer the Rhodesian delegation to their own earlier demographic report.

 

2013 CENSUS DATA - as of October 5, 2013
 
TOTAL POPULATION: 6,451
 
WHITE RHODESIANS = 3,309 (51.3%)
 
1725 Anglo-British Rhodesians (26,7%)
1548 Afrikaaners (23,9%)
 
BLACK RHODESIANS = 3142 (48,7%)

1066 Shona (16,5%)
832 Ndele (12,8%)
789 Coloureds (12,2%)
455 Malawians (7,1%)
 
As these reports clearly show in the period of a week there was apparently an increase of well over 2,000 Afrikaners. An increase unlikely in itself already due to the simple fact that the probability of a state within Africa to only attract white people is so minimal it is nearly impossible. Furthermore residents of neighbouring areas had reported great difficulty in achieving the proper visa to enter Rhodesia-Nyasaland while they were apparently given out easily to Afrikaners. 
 
We must also once again reiterate that Rhodesia-Nyasaland opted for the most extreme implementation of the report and that a complete ban on all white immigration was never imposed by either the Exarch or the Athenian Federation.
 
As for what Europe has done? I obviously cannot speak for my neighbours but the Athenian Federation has implemented policies to guarantee access to all resources and institutions for minorities, we have restructured our territories to match historical structure rather than the ones imposed in the 18th century and we have implemented immigration policies to make passage for oppressed groups easier and less expensive"

The increase is simply due to the fact that not all of the Rhodesian territory was mapped back then, and not even today. It is a long process and it requires time. Not all the people who were included in the new census were immigrants, but simply citizens who were not registered by the previous census due to the limited resources of the Federal Government to conduct such large scale census operations.

Such privileges for the Afrikaner population of Rodesia have never taken place, because they simply didn't exist and don't exist today when it comes to immigration. The committee of the Exarch has never asked Rhodesian authorities informations on immigration policies or the way the census were carried out, if they were complete, partial or slightly inaccurate, and the quick conslusions were explicitly unfair towards Rhodesia, accused of committing ethnic cleansing or privileging certain ethnic groups without actually investigating on the reasons of such a sudden increase. 

The probability of an African nation to attract white immigrants - who live on the African continent since the 18th century, are the same that new greco-roman empire rises in Europe 600 years after the fall of the Eastern Roman Empire - low odds, but apparently possible.

Once again, we want to see the proofs of the aforementioned ethnic cleansing and the fact that Rhodesian authorities privileged white immigrants - again, not all the people mapped by the last census were immigrants, they simply lived in areas and neighborhoods not reached by the previous census - because simple accusations aren't a proof according to law, accusations must be backed by facts and we want to see the facts, the undisputable proofs, of Rhodesian authorities privileging whites over blacks - it simply never occured. 

 

Rhodesia Nyasaland is a multicultural nation where whites and blacks put their past hatred aside and decided to work togheter, for a better future. If some countries don't believe this is possible, well they are invited to Rhodesia to see it themself. We are not "europeans" or "natives", we are Rhodesians. We are Africans, irregardless of our skin color. Some of us are white, their families lived on this land for over 200 years, but if we aren't Africans then what are we? As for our black population, well yes we had our clashes in the past, we all made our mistakes. But we corrected our wrongdoings, today black people have the same rights as white people. Voting, freedom of expression, of movement, of opinion, of association. We don't look at people as whites or blacks, we are all citizens of the same Rhodesian nation.
 
No such thing as "manouvered" immigration policies occured in Rhodesia Nyasaland, there is no proof to back this slanderous accusation against us, and if there is, we want to see it.
Edited by Ian Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is also quite peculiar that the long time and respected ally of Athens seems to be avoiding the issue at hand which is the official petition to the United Nations in regards to this anti white immigration policy being enacted by the Exarch of Africa against Rhodesia.

 

Nordboerne Kongedømme also supports the measures suggested by The Amazon Republic in regards to blockade and sanctions to prevent the supply of arms and munitions to fuel the civil war, although we believe peacekeeping forces at this time are not required.

 

In regards to UNSC resolution one, Nordboerne Kongedømme echos the words of The Amazon Republic.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Security Council and the General Assembly are not synonymous bodies and never were.  Specific powers have been attributed to the Security Council and have been invoked in every UN intervention since the Korean War, this is not true with the General Assembly.  If someone wishes to bring a reform of powers before the Security Council for the Security Council to cede power to the General Assembly it will be taken up by the Council for debate and a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The japanese nation of Dai-Tōhoku would like to comment that it sees it as a certain right of everyone to live wherever they want, regardless of the colour of their skin, their religious beliefs, their sexual orientation, their political opinion, their sex or gender. There should be no inherent law to prohibit anyone from living within Rhodesia, be it a caucasian, a black african, an Arab, a Persian, a Mongol, a Soshone or whoever comes into mind. To restrict movements in demography in this manner is a dangerous action, as it not removes racist stereotyping and thought, but it reinforces the belief in inherent differences between hman beings of different ethnicity. Thus, to blindly impose such legislation is a problematic precedent.

 

However, while this should be true, such freedoms can only be claimed and allowed as long as the societies affected are not affected in a negative way. If the society of a host country is able to accommodate the people that want to immigrate, without trouble, then ethnicity can be disregarded. However, what we currently see in Rhodesia, is violence, civil war and a humanitarian catastrophe indicative of deeper social problems within Rhodesian society. We cannot help but suspect a certain racial aspect in the sudden trouble the Rhodesian state is facing, be it directly through racism or indirectly through an overextension of social capacities to accommodate for these new citizens. In such a case, regardless of whether it is the former or the latter, immigration policy into Rhodesia has to be reviewed to prevent further issues.

 

Our opinion on this matter is that for the time being, the UN is to station observers in Rhodesia, to monitor the events as they unfold and to alarm the UNSC the moment this internal struggle devolves into a humanitarian crisis. With all due respect to Rhodesian sovereignity, should the rebellion in Rhodesia start to inflict heavy casualties on the civil population, it should not be ignored. In the matter of the immigration, we think it best, if the UNSC would task a commission with investigating the causes of the civil unrest and the implications of the demographic change for Rhodesian society. Based on the findings, further measures can be taken afterwards."

-Katsura Kaede, permanent representative of the Dai-Tōhoku Renpō

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...