NationStates Jolt Archive

Here is the UNRAP, which has been pulled for further work on its form. Please pay particular attention to the asterisked sections, which are under revision.

Description: Co-Authorship: The Grand Duchy of Crushinatoria

Whereas the United Nations realizes the need to reduce the threat of nuclear, and chemical weapons, and
Whereas the United Nations wishes to ensure the safety of societies around the globe,
We, the member nations of the Nation States United Nations do hereby:

DESIGNATES that this proposal applies only to weapons of nuclear, or chemical natures hereafter known as NC.
DEFINES initiates as meaning 'first strike'.
*DESIGNATES that 'first strike' includes any offensive attack made with any weaponry that serves a severe risk to multiple lives.
ENCOURAGES all UN member nations to enact similar arms reduction pacts with their non-UN military allies.
**RECOGNIZE the previously passed resolution 'Elimination of Bio-Weapons'.
ADOPT the following terms of reduced arms:

First Strike Clause: All UN member nations will agree to abide by a policy that no NC will be used to initiate an attack against any other Nation State nation. All UN members will retain the right to: launch pre-emptive strikes with conventional arms of any type, and use NC weapons as retaliation against any NC attack.

'Declaration of War' Clause: Any initiated NC attack against any UN member will be considered a Declaration of War upon the whole UN and met with immediate retaliation.
SC A: Attacked member nations will be eligible for immediate aid of all forms.
SC B: Support shall not extend to UN member nations who initiate NC attacks against other nations.
SC C: Retaliatory attacks should be as minimally destructive as necessary to the defense and/or military success of the attacked member nation.

Arms Reduction Clause: Member nations commit to a 30% reduction of their individual stockpiles of nuclear, and chemical weapons within 10 years.
SC A:This reduction does not include stockpiles which have become unusable or unstable.

***International Oversight Council (IOC) Clause: All member nations will present an accounting as to the quantity and security of NC weapons biennially.
SC A: The UN will form the IOC to oversee these reports and security investigations. Any member nations in good standing may apply for positions in this council. The IOC will seat new members once every five years.
SC B: Nations with suspected security concern, receiving 3+ verifiable accusations of mishandling, will consent to security protocol inspections for a period of 2 years.
SC C: Member nations will submit biennial reports of reduction, showing actions taken to properly dispose of weaponry, and account for arms reduced due to aging and/or instability.

Space Exploration Clause: In the interest of advanced nations, all nuclear weapons in use and classified as 'space technologies' will be excluded from their stockpile numbers.
SC A: No country may keep more than twice the necessary number of nuclear weapons in their 'space technologies' programs. The necessary number will be accessed biennially and included in the stockpile reports submitted to the IOC.

Depleted Uranium Clause: The above terms do not currently include depleted uranium ammunitions or armaments.
SC A: Be it resolved that the matter of depleted uranium armaments will not be further addressed until an equally effective and financially viable option has been adopted individually by more than 45% of the UN member nations.

* Added designation of first strike. Seeking what constitutes a reasonable offensive attack.
** It has been suggested this line be removed. Any thoughts on this?
*** The section labeled IOC is in need of revision to be better accepted by the RP'ing NS UN society. Any avid and consistent NS UN RP'ers please contribute to the revision of this section.

Member nations commit to a 30% reduction of their individual stockpiles of nuclear, and chemical weapons within 10 years.

Right now our Republic's stockpile consists of 1 expiremental chemical bomb. If we get rid of it, can we build new ones later on?

What if conflict involves a non-UN member?

In regards to the "attack on one of us is an attack on all of us" part - can I seek clarification as to whether or not TilEnca would have to go to war in the event another UN member nation is attacked?

To the nation of Adam Island:
There is nothing within this proposal that would keep you from resupplying yourself with NC weaponry. Perhaps there needs to be something within the document that places a low end threshhold number on who this applies to, since your nation should not get rid of your only applicable device.

To the Nation of Tar Galadon:
Im not sure where your question applies. Please specify which section you are asking about with reference to non-UN members.

To the Naiton of TilEnca:
There is no definition within this proposal that says how much assistance a nation must provide another should one of our UN brethren be unprovokingly attacked by another nation with NC weaponry. However, the following is assumed in such an event:

1. The UN will provide whatever assistance is necessary to ensure the survival and safety of the attacked UN member nation(s).
2. Any good standing diplomacy between any UN member nation and the attacking nation will be placed on suspension, denying military assistance and stopping all trade. This is only in effect until such time as said nation withdraws its attack and makes the appropriate extension of peace towards the UN member nation it attacked.

This resolution assumes precidence over any contractual obligation existing between UN member nations and their allies (both UN and non-UN) and only in the case of NC attacks.

I hope this answers your questions.

To the Naiton of TilEnca:
There is no definition within this proposal that says how much assistance a nation must provide another should one of our UN brethren be unprovokingly attacked by another nation with NC weaponry. However, the following is assumed in such an event:

1. The UN will provide whatever assistance is necessary to ensure the survival and safety of the attacked UN member nation(s).
2. Any good standing diplomacy between any UN member nation and the attacking nation will be placed on suspension, denying military assistance and stopping all trade. This is only in effect until such time as said nation withdraws its attack and makes the appropriate extension of peace towards the UN member nation it attacked.


Here's the thing - GeminiLand attacks LeoLand in contravention of this proposal, but it turns out that GeminiLand actually had a pretty good reason for doing so. Would we be forced to support LeoLand, even though we openly agree with what GeminiLand did?

Secondly - "whatever assistance is necessary" is a pretty big commitment to ask. And one that TilEnca would not be prepared to commit to, unless we can limit it to civilian and humanitarian aid.

To the Nation of TilEnca:

Remember, "whatever assistance necessary" goes on to read "to ensure SAFETY AND SURVIVAL" of the attacked member nation.
Additionally, it is assumed that unless the whole world does go MAD, the UN as a whole will not be seeing alot of cases of need, which allows that need to be spread evenly among its members and not press too harshly on one. Again, there is no definition of HOW the assistance must be given, and how much must be offered by other nations. It is assumed we do what we can to collectively ensure the safety and survival of the attacked member nation.

And yes, regardless of reason (barring that the 'attacked' nation sent written request to do so from its governing body, at which point it is not an offensive attack) if any nation uses NC weapons for a first strike effort, then we support the NS UN member nation who was attacked.

To the Nation of TilEnca:

Remember, "whatever assistance necessary" goes on to read "to ensure SAFETY AND SURVIVAL" of the attacked member nation.
Additionally, it is assumed that unless the whole world does go MAD, the UN as a whole will not be seeing alot of cases of need, which allows that need to be spread evenly among its members and not press too harshly on one. Again, there is no definition of HOW the assistance must be given, and how much must be offered by other nations. It is assumed we do what we can to collectively ensure the safety and survival of the attacked member nation.

And yes, regardless of reason (barring that the 'attacked' nation sent written request to do so from its governing body, at which point it is not an offensive attack) if any nation uses NC weapons for a first strike effort, then we support the NS UN member nation who was attacked.

The first part is fine - if I am not required to provide military aid, or go to war, then I have no problem supporting a nation in need.

The second part is not so good. I do not condone the use of NC weapons, nor the idea of war in general, but I can forsee a situation where GeminiLand is attacked, but totally and utterly deserves it. An analogy (if a bad one) would be the kid who teases another kid at school, then runs to the teacher when the second kid punches him.

In such an instance we would like the right to remain neutral - not siding with those who used the NC weapons, but not opposing them by supporting the other side either.

Your right. That is a bad analogy. And unless you can come up with something more definitive and concrete as to why we would idly stand by and let one of our UN brethren be attacked by NC weapons and NOT assist them fully, then we will not see eye-to-eye on this issue.

Your right. That is a bad analogy. And unless you can come up with something more definitive and concrete as to why we would idly stand by and let one of our UN brethren be attacked by NC weapons and NOT assist them fully, then we will not see eye-to-eye on this issue.

Because it would plunge me in to a war I know nothing about, forcing me to make moral judgements about the two (or more) nations involved and committing my people to fight and die for a cause we might find reprehensible.

That's why I want to stand idly by.

There are several reasons why this section was included in this proposal.

1. In the original drafting efforts, responding member nations wanted assurances that reducing their nuclear and chemical weaponry would not leave them under-defended against such attacks from others. Therefore it is included that should a UN-member nation be unprovokingly and offensively attacked by another nation with weapons of a chemical or nuclear nature that the UN as a whole will not stand by and allow them to be destroyed.

If your nation was attacked by weapons of this nature, and you had not made an offensive attack to provoke such things, then we would also be there to help YOU.

Compared to everything else, that reason is the most important.

There is also the morality of using NC weaponry for a 'first strike' or even to threaten such attacks. No one says you cant bomb the hell out of another nation, and this resolution does not call for our involvement in war for all attacks. It is specifically limited to chemical and nuclear weaponry, which is aptly considered WMD.

There are several reasons why this section was included in this proposal.

1. In the original drafting efforts, responding member nations wanted assurances that reducing their nuclear and chemical weaponry would not leave them under-defended against such attacks from others. Therefore it is included that should a UN-member nation be unprovokingly and offensively attacked by another nation with weapons of a chemical or nuclear nature that the UN as a whole will not stand by and allow them to be destroyed.


I understand that - it would be a concern of mine as well. And I also understand the unprovokingly and offensively part of the attack as well. But - and this is just supposition - wars start quickly. And if one day GeminiLand is attacked by TaurusLand. It is a horrible attack, NC weapons and everything. So the whole of the UN rallys round GeminiLand and begins a war on TaurusLand.

Then - five years in to the war, after millions of people are dead - it turns out that GeminiLand arranged for the genocide of ten thousand people in TaurusLand, but kept it secret. And of course TaurusLand tried to tell the UN this, but they had just had war declared on them by almost thirty six thousand nations, and no one was really listening.

So we spend millions of lives and five years of our time defending a nation that should have been left to die.


If your nation was attacked by weapons of this nature, and you had not made an offensive attack to provoke such things, then we would also be there to help YOU.


Unless I had slaughtered ten thousand people, and covered it up so no one knew about it. Then I would expect everything I get.


There is also the morality of using NC weaponry for a 'first strike' or even to threaten such attacks. No one says you cant bomb the hell out of another nation, and this resolution does not call for our involvement in war for all attacks. It is specifically limited to chemical and nuclear weaponry, which is aptly considered WMD.

Honestly I don't think my nation is in a position to judge the morals of other nations. I don't find it acceptable to wipe out a whole country, but I have never been in a position where I would need to do so.

I can't support this proposal if it is going to force me to go to war with any nation. It's not something my people would be willing to do.

I actually have been thinking that in addition to needed a convention on genocide that the NS UN has been in need to two other important things: a convention restricting the use of chemical weapons and a UN elections commission. It is good to see that many of us are thinking the same thing.

That said, my first batch of comments are actually "formatting" and "structural".

There are two ways to take a resolution, either to write a standard "resolution" or to work on a longer convention format. Conventions are better when there are sub-sections or themes. Resolutions are better for more general statements, like "Marriage should be open to all!"

Here is how I can see the proposal being rewritten (just a suggestion):


Description: {M-note: insert a hard return here}
Co-Authorship: The Grand Duchy of Crushinatoria

Whereas the United Nations has adopted resolutions calling upon nations to eliminate bio-weapons and landmines,

Whereas the United Nations realizes the need to reduce the threat of nuclear and chemical weapons, and wishes to ensure the safety of societies, {M-note: I deleted the reference to the globe, it is a hot button for some nations}

We, the member nations of the NationStates United Nations do hereby proclaim the {insert resolutions full name}:

Article 1: Definitions and Scope

Article 2: First Strike Limitations

Article 3: Declaration of War

Article 4: Arms Reduction Efforts

Article 5: Oversight and Implementation

Article 6: Space Exploration

Article 7: Depleted Uranium


That is more of an outline, but you can add the text of each section via sub-clauses (which you've done) pretty easily.

If I had my way, my nation wouldn't be in compliance with any of the U.N.'s obtuse rules and regulations. Self-determination is the key to advancing a nation and a people. If there was a way to bring about a bill to abolish the U.N. and the dictators who run it I would die happy. What's good for Gaytopia is not necessarily good for Kaintucky. So all of the globalists out there can go to hell and take your utopian vision of one world government with you.The phrase "don't tread on me" still lives, don't take it lightly.

To the Nation of Kaintucky:

I would like to offer this small bit of advice to you, seeing as how you disapprove of the UN so greatly. Withdraw you nation. Participation in the UN is completely voluntary, and there is no penalty for running your nation outside the scope of the UN.

Should this already be true for you, as you are not a UN member, then what are you complaining about? The UN rules, regulations, and standards are not applicable to you.

Thank you very much for your considerations in this matter.

Kestral Lei

To the Esteemed Nation of Mikitivity:

I am most honored at your suggestions for this matter, and would be most honored to receive any further information you can offer.

I would also like to offer this resolution to your office for rewrite, as I must admit I am unlearned as to how to execute a convention and therefpre do not believe I could give it justice.

Additionally, I am more than willing to allow your nation, or any within your network rights to submission on this proposal. My only request would be that the work of my offices and the now defunct nation of Crushinatoria be honored within the proposal.

Our people feel strongly that it does not matter who submits this proposal, or who fights for its passing. Our only concern is that it does come to pass.

Thank you again, and I look forward to hearing from your offices.

Sincerely,

Kestral Lei