NationStates Jolt Archive

UN Peacekeeping Coalition?

The Zoogie People
05-12-2003, 03:20
Why go to so much trouble? You could call a press conference, and have the president of the nation broadcast worldwide personally burying a silver landmine to commemorate the designation of a new defensive zone.

What is anybody going to do to stop you? The UN has no enforcement branch that I am aware of. All that can be done is to huff and puff and make lots of noise, easily toned out.

The power of the UN is granted only by the willing participation of its members. If a member chooses to disregard UN policy, there is nothing to stop itfrom doing so.

If the nations in the UN can so easily blatantly ignore resolutions, with the worst possible outcome ejection from the UN, what is the purpose of resolutions? The above was from the thread "If the Resolution is Passed" If there is no UN enforcement of the law, what's to say that any and all nations can ignore any resolution they don't like?

My answer would be a worldwide peacekeeping/law-enforcing UN force, able to be deployed to any region to enforce peace. They would be made up of UN nations' militaries, I guess, and governed by urgent resolutions.

Of course, there are lots and lots and lots of problems with that, and how that would work - so I'm looking for feedback. Is this a good idea, if so, how would we make it work?
05-12-2003, 03:33
OOC: I did not support the Labor unions proposal, and was not happy at what happened to my country when it passed. BUT what can you do, the action of the resolution is inflicted on your country, for better or for worse as soon as it is passed.

But in reality, once that action is inflicted, you are free to go back to doing whatever you want. Not three days after the labor unions resolution passed, I was able in one of my issues to effectively disband all unions, and give companies the right to fire at will. So, from a strictly game mechanics point of view, the resolutions are NOT enforceable.