Jump to content

UN Security Council Discussion


Triyun

Recommended Posts

[OOC- the UNSC is granted special powers by the Charter of the Un to act accordingly in order to keep peace and security. This however in the real world would have been composed of opposing idealistic groups, not all 5 permanent members being allies]

"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 government of Paraguay agrees with the above statement. We also agree to support a blockade in Rhodesia in order to quell the violence in the region. We must also keep in mind that thousands of innocent civilians are caught between the cross-fire of this civil war and must be protected, failure to do so is a crime against humanity.

The Paraguayan Agency for International Development is willing to provide healthcare providers and equipment for civilians in the country, as well as future peacekeepers (both law enforcement and military) in conjunction with fellow UN members.

- UN Ambassador Silandra Lopez
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 631
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

"In regards to reform of the Security Council, while we do not discourage discussion of the matter, given that only through reflecting and analysis may potential problems be discovered, but at the current time, Dai-Tōhoku does not support any such general extension of the powers of the Security Council onto the General Assembly. While this would be a democratic ideal, it seems to us highly impractical and utopian. The Security Council as it stands is a body consisting out of the combination of certain powers that are essential for world order and thus ought to be represented at the Council permanently, and regional representatives, to keep the amount of delegates reasonable, while allowing all countries to have at least indirect representation.

 

Nations wishing to assist in the execution of UNSC resolutions may approach the UNSC in order to be taken into consideration for a mandate, and it may be of great help if responsibilities can be handed to regional trustworthy actors. However it should be the UNSC to decide who is allowed to contribute to a mandate, not any individual nation."

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

 

OOC: The choice for the permanent five seats IRL was US, UK, France, USSR and RoC when it was formed. Back then, all five were in an alliance stemming from WWII against the Axis and they were deemed the most deserving countries for the responsibility. It only was the Cold War, when suddenly the USSR was opposing the western powers and the change from RoC to PRC that caused China to assume a position as not-ally of the NATO. The UNSC after all was not formed on the grounds of having the whole spectrum of political opinions present, but to have those that actually matter and who can actually work out a global order.

 

And even if we had not some convenient explanation that the current permanent members are legitimised as successors of the former members, you'd find this triad in the UNSC, because these are countries that actually can make a global order. This is the reason why Triyun, cent and the Russians are in the SC, and why MGL and the British dude are not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"In regards to reform of the Security Council, while we do not discourage discussion of the matter, given that only through reflecting and analysis may potential problems be discovered, but at the current time, Dai-Tōhoku does not support any such general extension of the powers of the Security Council onto the General Assembly. While this would be a democratic ideal, it seems to us highly impractical and utopian. The Security Council as it stands is a body consisting out of the combination of certain powers that are essential for world order and thus ought to be represented at the Council permanently, and regional representatives, to keep the amount of delegates reasonable, while allowing all countries to have at least indirect representation.

 

Nations wishing to assist in the execution of UNSC resolutions may approach the UNSC in order to be taken into consideration for a mandate, and it may be of great help if responsibilities can be handed to regional trustworthy actors. However it should be the UNSC to decide who is allowed to contribute to a mandate, not any individual nation."

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

Again, what is practical and what is utopian in the eyes of the Japanese delegation is hypocritical. How can one promote democracy in other nations as well as hold it to such a high standard, yet when it comes to the international forum, not allow it? This Global Order is to promote democracy, human rights, and peace. How can this process occur without a democratic process in an international organization? What the Japanese delegation calls a "Utopian" idea, is then a "Utopian" idea for every nation. Thus according to the Japanese delegation, each country should be ruled by the powerful elites, not the people.

 

- - UN Ambassador Silandra Lopez

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Security Council represents every continent equally, and as I recall you recently issued a decree that you supported the legitimacy not just of the UN but the UN Security Council, are you now doubting it?  Are you views so quick to change when you did not win a seat?  That seems awfully disturbing.  In regards to democracy, no system is a perfect democracy.  It however, must balance representation of capability and representation generally.  Regions are given equal voice with one another, however, it is important to represent the states with the preponderance of capability and upon whom the burden of a successful and credible council rests in a satisfactory manner.  Its a simple fact that the Security Council to be a global institution requires Tianxia, Athens, and Russia to cooperate or at least not get involved in countering, such was the case with the original council as well.  If at some point other states have capability equivalent to the current P3 they will be considered.  Also considered will be if a time comes where the rest of the world can actually organize a military campaign.  However, its been proven by South America's own recent history that the rest of the world simply lacks the capability, skill sets, and political will to act.  Therefore the P-3 must remain in place, and beyond that we expect nations to stick to their word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Security Council represents every continent equally, and as I recall you recently issued a decree that you supported the legitimacy not just of the UN but the UN Security Council, are you now doubting it?  Are you views so quick to change when you did not win a seat?  That seems awfully disturbing.  In regards to democracy, no system is a perfect democracy.  It however, must balance representation of capability and representation generally.  Regions are given equal voice with one another, however, it is important to represent the states with the preponderance of capability and upon whom the burden of a successful and credible council rests in a satisfactory manner.  Its a simple fact that the Security Council to be a global institution requires Tianxia, Athens, and Russia to cooperate or at least not get involved in countering, such was the case with the original council as well.  If at some point other states have capability equivalent to the current P3 they will be considered.  Also considered will be if a time comes where the rest of the world can actually organize a military campaign.  However, its been proven by South America's own recent history that the rest of the world simply lacks the capability, skill sets, and political will to act.  Therefore the P-3 must remain in place, and beyond that we expect nations to stick to their word.

The Paraguayan government continues to recognize the UNSC's jurisdiction when it involves matters of international security and peace, per the UN Charter. The Paraguayan government just wants to be able to voice its concerns to it and have the opportunity to contribute to peace.

 

- UN Ambassador Silandra Lopez

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will but the UNSC and the UN Charter do not give the responsibility of voting on matters of the security council to the General Assembly, but too the Security Council.  Any support to the idea the GA votes in lieau or in addition to the security council is undermining the council and contrary to the statement you just made.  Make up your mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"As previously stated, the P-3 are the permanent seats, so how would a nation voicing it concerns and opinions in the General Assembly be undermining the security council? People are always going to say something somebody else doesn't like, the trick is to talk it out and come to a solution based on compromise.

 

If Tianxia is truly faithful to this organization as a permanent member of its security council, it must show more restraint in its words and be more apathetic towards its member states concerns in the General Assembly.

 

Fear is not the same as respect, and in a global organization such as this, respect goes far further than fear, snappy retorts and churlish responses to genuine concerns brought forward by the Assembly will not garner any respect for Tianxia or the P-3 as a whole."

 

The Norse representative sat back down on his seat in the GA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, what is practical and what is utopian in the eyes of the Japanese delegation is hypocritical. How can one promote democracy in other nations as well as hold it to such a high standard, yet when it comes to the international forum, not allow it? This Global Order is to promote democracy, human rights, and peace. How can this process occur without a democratic process in an international organization? What the Japanese delegation calls a "Utopian" idea, is then a "Utopian" idea for every nation. Thus according to the Japanese delegation, each country should be ruled by the powerful elites, not the people.

 

- - UN Ambassador Silandra Lopez

The Paraguayan government continues to recognize the UNSC's jurisdiction when it involves matters of international security and peace, per the UN Charter. The Paraguayan government just wants to be able to voice its concerns to it and have the opportunity to contribute to peace.

 

- UN Ambassador Silandra Lopez

"Every country of the world that recognises the UN is represented equally at the UNSC, through elected regional representatives. To claim that this is not a democratic institution is to claim your own parliament isn't one either. But just like not every Paraguayan cannot themselves be involved in all decisions that need to be made to keep Paraguay running, so can we not involve every country on this planet, if we want to uphold a certain functionality. There is no hypocrisy in this. If Paraguay wants to contribute to the global peace and order more, we would advise it to do it in another way than formulating arguments that seem to attempt to cast doubts on the legitimacy of our institution."

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OOC: Actually the United Nations and its security council were formed primarily by the 5 victorious parties from the second world war. At the time it was formed these five states were very much allies.

 

OOC: So you are justifying excluding any other power with a difference in opinion just because the real UN did it when it was formed? To me that seems like something we would learn from - not try to reenact.

Edited by PresidentDavid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The Amazon Republic wishes everyone to remember that quality discourse should never be directed in a personal direction, not taken personally. This discussion needs to be candid and healthy in order to promote long term growth and provide for a more stable global unity. The United Nations and the state of the planet are simply not the same as they were at the end of the Second World War. For decades this august body has been defunct, ignored, and abandoned. While Tianxia has a point about hampering the ability of the Security Council to respond to emergencies, the General Assembly should not be a toothless body.

 

Perhaps the room for a compromise exists given the changed state of the world since the end of the Second World War. With the sheer number of horrifying nuclear incidents, terrorist acts, genocides, plagues, biological attacks, famines, and acts of natural disasters. The negligence of the entire world, including the Security Council in not acting to preserve the integrity of the United Nations in light of these terrible incidents demonstrates to the Amazon Republic that now is the time for an open and candid conversation and now is the time for compromise to ensure the responsibility for world stability is not held in the hands of a few specific powers.

 

As for the nation of Rhodesia, you've yet to show the income distribution of the different ethnic groups. It is the suspicion of my government that the fighting part in stems from the arrival of new wealth from recent European immigrants. The favoring of and catering to these wealthier newly arrived immigrants no doubt has spurred a immense reaction from the disenfranchised native population."

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

"The Amazon Republic wishes everyone to remember that quality discourse should never be directed in a personal direction, not taken personally. This discussion needs to be candid and healthy in order to promote long term growth and provide for a more stable global unity. The United Nations and the state of the planet are simply not the same as they were at the end of the Second World War. For decades this august body has been defunct, ignored, and abandoned. While Tianxia has a point about hampering the ability of the Security Council to respond to emergencies, the General Assembly should not be a toothless body.

Perhaps the room for a compromise exists given the changed state of the world since the end of the Second World War. With the sheer number of horrifying nuclear incidents, terrorist acts, genocides, plagues, biological attacks, famines, and acts of natural disasters. The negligence of the entire world, including the Security Council in not acting to preserve the integrity of the United Nations in light of these terrible incidents demonstrates to the Amazon Republic that now is the time for an open and candid conversation and now is the time for compromise to ensure the responsibility for world stability is not held in the hands of a few specific powers.


Paraguay agrees with its South American neighbor.

- UN Ambassador Silandra Lopez
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The permanent seat you now occupy was utterly covered with dust and forgotten in the ash bin of history no less than a month ago. If this entire body is to be successful, now is the time to examine it and carefully make the required changes to make it successful. Holding power in the hands of the few in the form of permanent seats smacks of elitism and avoids the democratic process for the regions in which those permanent seats exist.

 

What the Amazon Republic wishes is the power for the enforcing security be jointly shared in a more democratic process between the GA and the SC. That being said, it recognizes that certain emergency powers need to be held by the Security Council for suddenly developing situations but also calls for limits on the duration of those powers and the size and scope of them. Exceeding those limits would require the approval of the entire General Assembly."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tianxia did not threaten anyone.  However, the delegate from Paraguay would be reminded that he made agreements with Athens on our behalf for forgiveness in exchange for his nation's very recent backing of a regime that just launched a nuclear missile at us.  Our patience for giving that forgiveness is somewhat limited and his nation should learn gratefulness when it receives mercy.  When we are wronged we are within our right to take action, we have chosen not to, but we in exchange expect the nation of Paraguay to stick to its word and not try and alter deals.

 

In regards to the so called democratic process.  If we are going by true democratic process or rule of the people, Tianxia gets over a quarter of the votes to itself, as befitting the sheer population of the Empire's territories and dependencies... I somehow doubt you truly mean that.  What you mean is representative process where all nations regardless of size, population, or contribution are given an equal voice.  And here is the rub, that in and of itself is elitism, an elitism to assume you're entitled not just to representation but to dictate much more than your risk.  

 

Its not going to be small 3rd world nations kicking in the doors of a rogue states integrated air defense system, or its billions of dollars in precision guided munitions to do a disarming counterforce strike.  Nor likely will it be to their capital that a device missed may head.  Nor will they have to service the strategic defense initiative to stop it.  

 

The nations who pay the price tag for defense, who put their soldiers in first to bleed, are the ones whom ultimately truly have to internalize the costs of enacting and enforcing UN resolutions.  This is not a burden that's shared equally among all countries and thus all countries should not expect equal representation.  The P-3 are selected not only because of our political will to restart this body, but because of the unique burden which we alone shoulder.  The General Assembly is entitled to make its voice heard, but it is not the contributors of military forces and therefore is not on the same league as the security council.  Your voice can be heard equally as mine in the General Assembly, but when it comes to actual force, there are reasons why things are as they are.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tianxia did not threaten anyone.  However, the delegate from Paraguay would be reminded that he made agreements with Athens on our behalf for forgiveness in exchange for his nation's very recent backing of a regime that just launched a nuclear missile at us.  Our patience for giving that forgiveness is somewhat limited and his nation should learn gratefulness when it receives mercy.  When we are wronged we are within our right to take action, we have chosen not to, but we in exchange expect the nation of Paraguay to stick to its word and not try and alter deals.

When the hell was a nuclear weapon launched from Bolivia to Tianxia?

 

The nations who pay the price tag for defense, who put their soldiers in first to bleed, are the ones whom ultimately truly have to internalize the costs of enacting and enforcing UN resolutions.  This is not a burden that's shared equally among all countries and thus all countries should not expect equal representation.  The P-3 are selected not only because of our political will to restart this body, but because of the unique burden which we alone shoulder.  The General Assembly is entitled to make its voice heard, but it is not the contributors of military forces and therefore is not on the same league as the security council.  Your voice can be heard equally as mine in the General Assembly, but when it comes to actual force, there are reasons why things are as they are.

It is your choice to do so, not ours. And all GA nations have the right to contribute to international security through means of peacekeeping. So now you are saying there is no equal representation in the UNSC and is therefore occupied by elites?

 

- UN Ambassador Silandra Lopez

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We intercepted it before it could strike targets in the Galapagos.  The target was destroyed by a kinetic kill vehicle, but they get points for trying.  

 

However, you're talking about peacekeeping.  Thats not what I'm talking about.  I'm talking about instruments of coercion, compellence and war fighting.  There are phases of successfully winning in conflict, the crisis then application of coercion to change the behavior of the crisis instigator then their capitulation then winning the peace.  Peace keeping is the final stage.  Its got nothing to do with being able to enter into and dominate a contested environment.  And if we ware talking about applying military force to solve a political problem, the ability to actually use that force is critical.  You lack that capability which is by far the riskiest and costly, we have it.  

 

This is not about elites this is about practicality.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The Amazon Republic wishes everyone to remember that quality discourse should never be directed in a personal direction, not taken personally. This discussion needs to be candid and healthy in order to promote long term growth and provide for a more stable global unity. The United Nations and the state of the planet are simply not the same as they were at the end of the Second World War. For decades this august body has been defunct, ignored, and abandoned. While Tianxia has a point about hampering the ability of the Security Council to respond to emergencies, the General Assembly should not be a toothless body.

 

Perhaps the room for a compromise exists given the changed state of the world since the end of the Second World War. With the sheer number of horrifying nuclear incidents, terrorist acts, genocides, plagues, biological attacks, famines, and acts of natural disasters. The negligence of the entire world, including the Security Council in not acting to preserve the integrity of the United Nations in light of these terrible incidents demonstrates to the Amazon Republic that now is the time for an open and candid conversation and now is the time for compromise to ensure the responsibility for world stability is not held in the hands of a few specific powers.

 

As for the nation of Rhodesia, you've yet to show the income distribution of the different ethnic groups. It is the suspicion of my government that the fighting part in stems from the arrival of new wealth from recent European immigrants. The favoring of and catering to these wealthier newly arrived immigrants no doubt has spurred a immense reaction from the disenfranchised native population."

 

We have no data for the income of "different ethnic groups". The Rhodesian Government doesen't even conduct such studies. We have a free market economy based on private initiative. 
 
The suspicions of your government are completely wrong and manipulated since not one single immigrant from Europe ever crossed the border into Rhodesia. Therefore there is no such thing as "wealthy newly arrived immigrants, favoured by the government" in Rhodesia Nyasaland. This is a simple manipulation of reality, and we'd rather withdraw the petition and abolish the law ourself than being falsely accused of depriving our black citizens of their rights, or privileging "europeans". It is our impression that the Amazon Republic believes our black population is not capable of defending their rights or vote for their representatives in the Federal Assembly simply due to their skin color. Everyone has the same rights and duties in Rhodesia Nyasaland, irrespective of color.
 
"White" does not equal "European". There are Africans who happen to be white. There is no such thing as a "dinsenfranchised native population", we have never said the RNU-PF terrorists are all "black", this is an assumption made by the Amazon Republic where the idea that blacks in Africa are still oppressed by the white man is very alive - things have changed. Contrary to popular beliefs, black people in Rhodesia Nyasaland are not chained to a tree and have the same rights as anyone else, if they don't like the government they can vote for another Prime MInister in the next elections, as Rhodesia Nyasaland, contrary to popular beliefs, is also a democratic country. 
 
The RNU-PF is a marxist-leninist terrorist group, and their ideology has nothing to do with racialism. 

To answer the requests of Russian NGO: They can enter Rhodesia Nyasaland, we asked them before the "verdict" of the Exarch and all the world ignored us, even when we asked for help against the athenian aggression, but you are still welcome. The text of the law is simple: anyone who happens to be white can't cross the border. As requested explicitly by the Athenian Federation after they bombed our capital city to overturn the verdict of the Rhodesian Constitutional Court (
http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/118992-constitutional-court-delivers-final-verdict-on-anti-white-immigration-bill/). The Athenian Federation also congratulated the government upon approval of the anti white immigration bill, stating that "the government has aknowledge its past wrongdoings" - wrongdoings that have never occured in the first place. 

 
Edited by Ian Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OOC:  I agree it reads ambiguous but at worse you could say hey were positioning to launch at and we blew it up on the launcher which is the same thing and fully justified under the laws governing military preemption and thus the point still stands.

Edited by Triyun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The permanent seat you now occupy was utterly covered with dust and forgotten in the ash bin of history no less than a month ago. If this entire body is to be successful, now is the time to examine it and carefully make the required changes to make it successful. Holding power in the hands of the few in the form of permanent seats smacks of elitism and avoids the democratic process for the regions in which those permanent seats exist.

 

What the Amazon Republic wishes is the power for the enforcing security be jointly shared in a more democratic process between the GA and the SC. That being said, it recognizes that certain emergency powers need to be held by the Security Council for suddenly developing situations but also calls for limits on the duration of those powers and the size and scope of them. Exceeding those limits would require the approval of the entire General Assembly."

"The quality of a democracy is not merely measured by the means of input, but also by its output, meaning the results created by the system. While certain measures may appear as elitism to Amazonia, they are necessary to keep the institution running. The Empire of Tianxia is a country that is central to the stability of global order and which, by virtue of its political, economic and military might cannot be excluded from the decision-making processes of this world and which due to its importance cannot be ignored if it brings forth an objection to measures of the security council. Thus, the Empire of Tianxia and the two other nations of similar importance are granted extraordinary powers as permanent members of the Security Council, in order to adress these facts. Would the UN attempt to ever exclude one or more of these countries, we would be in a situation not unlike the historic League of Nations, an example that should demonstrate how little our organisation could do if we go along this route. Thus Dai-Tōhoku opposes any such radical reform that would threaten the functionality of this institution."

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The people and government of Paraguay asks very affirmly that the UNSC immediately sends in a team to dismantle the nuclear weapons in Bolivia. We do not want these horrible weapons, and the local population does not either. They wish for this situation to be dealt with immediately and swiftly in order for them to return to normacy, or at least close to it. Thousands have fled in fear of military strikes and nuclear annihilation. They wish to be ruled by their freely elected governors and to be able to send thier children to school without fear of a nuclear accident or bomb/missle attack.

 

The government of Paraguay strongly supports the UNSC to send in a team to dismantle and secure any nuclear material."

 

State of Pando: Governor Honorato Pomar(PCS)

State of Beni: Governor Veronica Antunez(NUIC)

State of Santa Cruz: Governor Matias Dorantes(NRA)

State of San Andres: Governor Estefany Cortez(NRA)

UN Ambassador Silandra Lopez

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...