NationStates Jolt Archive

With the current proposal before the UN concerning ship ballast water, the UN is attempting to overstep its' bounds and reason for inception.

The UN has no right to dictate to any member state how they will run their nation, nor does the UN have any right to force trade rules and limitations on the world.

All member states should remember - national sovereignty comes before anything else.

This resolution must be rejected.

The UN has no right to dictate to any member state how they will run their nation, nor does the UN have any right to force trade rules and limitations on the world.

All member states should remember - national sovereignty comes before anything else.

*ahem* then what are you doing in the UN? Every decision the nationstates UN makes or is able to make only has one real effect - to fiddle with the statistics that determine what member nations are like, because the game doesn't recognise, and therefore cannot actually regulate, the relationships between nations (except for regional organisations). Thus every resolution is an infringement on national sovereignty. The game makers gave the nationstates UN the right to do what it likes in these areas, so these things do not overstep boundaries envisaged at the organisation's inception - remember, this is not the real UN, and its purpose is not the same as the real UN. In fact, it was designed to allow players with majority support to fiddle with other nations and reshape member nations how they see fit:

So I'm a UN member. Now what?

The UN is your chance to mold the rest of the world to your vision

The UN in nationstates cannot actually fulfil the main task of the real UN - namely, controlling armed conflict and attempting to bring about peace - because the game doesn't officially recognise war, and there is no mechanism for the game, through the UN, to control the role-play wars that are fought on the forums.

So we fulfil some of the other tasks performed by the real UN, such as upholding human rights, and we also perform the jobs of a multitude of other international bodies and agreements, such as the WHO, WTO, environmental summits, disarmament treaties, and international security organisations. Of course, we do these with more force than those real organisations, first because a UN resolution tends to be a blunt weapon (the game forces nations to comply, so a resolution cannot really be a suggestion) and second because it's more fun. Tell me what you would suggest that we deal with, and I'll bet that it's not nearly as interesting as many of the debates I've had on this forum about the merits of socialism and capitalism and individual sovereignty. That, in the end, is what is important - interesting topics, even if in real life, the UN wouldn't try to intervene in them.



P.S. I actually feel that basic human rights and social justices and individual sovereignty come before national sovereignty, and to some extent so should environmental protection measures such as the real life Kyoto Treaty.

Yes, I know.

As a world leader I am concerned with gaining advantage for my country, through the auspices of the UN.

Ceding sovereignty to an international authority that is not answerable to anyone is certainly not in the best interests of my (or any other) nation.

I know that this UN on Nation States has an impact on each nation. That's fine, so long as the UN resolutions stay within the bounds of the UN mandate, and telling me how I'm going to run business within my own nation is waaaaay outside of the mandate.

Grrr, lets call this my pre-double-post... :wink:

- The Rep of Komokom.

Yes, I know.

I don't think you do... judging by the rest of the post... :?

As a world leader I am concerned with gaining advantage for my country, through the auspices of the UN.

Best of luck to you, personally, its a valid reason for me to stomp about the U.N. forums, un-officially keeping a random eye on the rules, while also putting in my two Almighty Komok Dollars, that and its all very mentally stimulating... :wink:

Ceding sovereignty to an international authority that is not answerable to anyone is certainly not in the best interests of my (or any other) nation.

Very true, but what international authority are you talking about?

Last I checked, the point of *this* international authority was to make the world a better place, or some such similar pie in sky stuff which we all liked the sound of.

In case you did not realise, like the real U.N. it makes law.

International law, which applies to nations.

Nations which are members.

The members make the law.

By voting.

On the proposals submitted, this means that members vote, the votes tally, and we find out if another set of laws get made to effect us.

Simply, you pays your money, you makes you choice, you see if you win.

Ironic really, this being a game anyway, albeit maybe more one of chance then we always think... :wink:

I know that this UN on Nation States has an impact on each nation. That's fine, so long as the UN resolutions stay within the bounds of the UN mandate, and telling me how I'm going to run business within my own nation is waaaaay outside of the mandate.

Yes it does, and yes it will, because the entire point is to make the world, well, at least the bits of the world who joined, a better place. And it does it with laws, the unique game mechanics enforce these laws 100%, albeit theoretically, but still 100%. And that, is that.

In conclusion, get over it, but I say this in the nice-est way possible.

:wink:

- The Rep of Komokom.

I know that this UN on Nation States has an impact on each nation. That's fine, so long as the UN resolutions stay within the bounds of the UN mandate,
But who decides what the UN mandate is? That's right, the UN members. If we think something is important enough for the UN to consider, then, by and large, we will consider it.

More specifically, this proposal is internationally important, because unless you are entirely self-sustaining, you will need to trade. If you have a seaport, then the most efficient way to trade is by ship. Because of this, the Council of Enn believes that this issue is worthy of discussion within the United Nations.

We're really confused as to why you singled out this proposal, since it deals with matters that are clearly international. All environmental issues are, to an extent, but it's easier to defend killing your own tigers or polluting your own rivers because, well, those are inside your territory. These ships are in international waters, and pass from one nation to another. So it's an international issue. Once an issue is international, talk of national sovereignty is no longer relevant. And to be quite frank, the UN has mandated on issues far less clearly international in the past.

I've no idea where you got the idea that the UN can't regulate trade. It's right there in the game mechanics.

Here's a news flash for you, killer. When your ship dumps its ballast water in my port, its become an international issue. When that ballast water contains organisms from your water that proceeds to shatter the delicate ecosystem in my harbors, its an even bigger international issue. When every nation in the world consumes some good that has at one time been transported via transoceanic shipping, its all of the sudden a globe-encompassing issue.

Holy quit-your-bitching, Batman! An international issue!

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs

definitely international.

see zebra mussels and quaaga mussels for a few examples of invasive species from international waters.

it affects everyone. and some of us in the UN would like to take measures to remedy the problem. not being able to control the whole world is fine. guaifenasin has elected not to allow noncompliant nations to utilize our ports (should this ballast water proposal pass, which it appears it will). hopefully they will learn. but we refuse to sit back and say "there are so many other nations that don't care" because that's not the kind of attitude the people of guaifenasin wish to promote.

The enviroment effects all nations, so all nations should contribute to improving it.

The Un should enact a resolution to improve the and protect the bio-diversity of the world's oceans for future generations forever.

Enviroment Minister
Commonwealth of Gallafrey