NationStates Jolt Archive

Proposed Resolution on Biotechnology

14-10-2003, 21:41
The Kingdom of Ursoria recognises that many important issues were raised during the debate over the "Geneticorp Resolution" (which failed). Having opposed that resolution, we are considering offering a substitute. But first we would invite feedback both as to the content of the proposed Resolution, and also as to which category it should be placed under, if submitted.


WHEREAS science has recently developed new forms of genetic manipulation, including cloning and gene splicing, which have raised issues not yet adequately addressed by the international community; and

WHEREAS past experience has demonstrated that the introduction of new species can have seriously adverse environmental consequences; and

WHEREAS there exists a profound difference of opinion, both within the scientific community and among the general public, as to the ethics and wisdom of much of the new genetic technology;

THEREFORE be it resolved by the United Nations as follows:

1) As soon as possible after the passage of this Resolution, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) shall appoint a Commission composed of distinguished scientists, ethicists, physicians, activists and entrepreneurs, representing both the public and private sectors of member nations as well as non-profit groups, to consider the ethical implications of new forms of biotechnology; whether additional international regulation of such technology is needed; and, if such regulation is needed, what form it should take.

2) The Commission shall submit in a timely fashion to the United Nations a Report detailing its findings and recommendations. Members of the Commission who dissent from its findings and recommendations shall be entitled to submit a Minority Report (or Reports).

3) All further Resolutions concerning civilian biotechnology shall be put on abeyance until the Commission has completed its work. Nothing herein shall be construed, however, as preventing the United Nations from taking action to restrict or eliminate biological weapons, or dealing with emergency public health situations.
14-10-2003, 23:01
We in Gurthark would happily be part of such a commission (in, say, the NationStates or International Incidents forum), and would voluntarily observe a moratorium on proposals dealing with genetic engineering until such time as the commission issued its report.

However, we believe that the proposal is beyond the scope of the NationStates U.N., because it effectively involves changing game rules. There is no in-game mechanism for the creation of a U.N. commission, nor is there any way to enforce a moratorium on a certain sort of proposal.

Javier Hootenany
Undersecretary to the United Nations Ambassador for NationStates Rules and Regulations
Community of Gurthark

Support "Reduce Antibiotic Resistance" ( for a healthier world!
15-10-2003, 00:22
Ursoria feels that, with a little creativity, the spirit of the Resolution could be achieved. Here's how:

1) A temporary region could be set up, composed of member states who wished to participate in the dialogue about biotechnology. Such a region could be called the "UNESCO Commission on Biotechnology", or something similar. Naturally, some sort of evidence of basic scientific knowledge could be required of nations wishing to join such a region--but we don't think it should be pushed too far--and there shouldn't be any attempt to mandate ideological conformity.

2) After a period of time, the Commission could issue a report in the U.N. Forum, and could submit a proposed substantive resolution. Minority reports could also be posted on the forum.

3) We recognise that there would be no way of enforcing a moratorium on biotechnology resolutions until the Commission issued its report. However, we feel that our resolution--plus the existence of the Commission--would exert a strong moral and persuasive force.