NationStates Jolt Archive

UNHCR
A resolution to create a working body for refugee’s known as the United Nations High Commission for Refugee’s.


Category: Social Justice
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: Giberland

Description: Humanity is plagued with war and ongoing violence, and as a result people are displaced or attempt to flee for their lives to safe nations. The creation of the UNHCR would add to resolution 65 the Refugee Protection Act, and create an operating body which would deploy into “hot spots” of war and civil unrest where people are being displaced or forced to leave their nation. The UNHCR would offer people seeking to leave their countries as refugees some help, by providing:
- papers for those in need
- temporary facilities until they can safely leave
- safe routes out of the country
- a nation willing to host them

Requirements of member nations:

1) Organize headquarters within one’s nation to facilitate the passage for refugees in accordance to resolution 65.

2) Offer current UN peacekeepers in the warring region to be designated as UNHCR officers (number of peacekeepers to be designated as UNHCR is up to the your government)

currently its on page 17

Oh great, so we're going to have to pay welfare for palestinian refugees for the next 60 years in NSUN too?

The Oppressed Peoples of Asshelmetta are oppressed enough, thank you very much.

We oppose this resolution.
Our UN delegate may have to be restrained to prevent him declaring war on your country if he reads it.

create an operating body which would deploy into ?hot spots? of war and civil unrest where people are being displaced or forced to leave their nation.
The UN cannot create a standing army, whether it be for refugee protection, enforcement of sanctions, or simple police work. Doesn't matter how noble your intentions, doesn't matter if you call them PeaceKeepers or Blue Helmets or the NationStates Politeness Police, it's a "crash and burn" offense.

Read Before you make a proposal (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=282176), preferably before you make a proposal.

if you don't want to host refugee's from a certain nation u don't have to, this in turn will help u limit the refugees destined for your nation, just opt out of recieving them (even though that is not recomended), when time comes around and the UNHCR asks for nations willing to host refugees, don't put your hand up, and they won't be kncoking at your door...another benefit of this program is that when issuing papers to a enter a country, u can declare how long they stay in the country

While we agree with out colegues on the issue of standing UN forces...

We wish to reassert that the Constitutional Republic is open to any and all refugees.

Perhapse making this "force" a duty of UN members, than a direct UN operation.

if you don't want to host refugee's from a certain nation u don't have to, this in turn will help u limit the refugees destined for your nation, just opt out of recieving them (even though that is not recomended), when time comes around and the UNHCR asks for nations willing to host refugees, don't put your hand up, and they won't be kncoking at your door...another benefit of this program is that when issuing papers to a enter a country, u can declare how long they stay in the country
I can already turn away refugees and decide how long visitors can stay in my country. Why add a bureaucracy where none is needed?

By the way, nobody can "opt out" of obeying UN resolutions. Regardless of my nation's utter disinterest in this whole process, we would be required to "1) Organize headquarters " and "2) designate a number of peacekeepers". Even if the HQ is that PortaPotty over there, and the number of peacekeepers is zero, it's still a totally pointless expense.

You do NOT have our support.

http://www.unhcr.ch/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/basics/+DwwBme0dIS_wwwwxwwwwwwwhFqA72ZR0gRfZNtFqtxw5oq5zFqtFEIfgIAFqA72ZR0gRfZNDzmxwwwwwww1FqtFEIfgI/opendoc.pdf

GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 428 (V ) OF 14 DECEMBER 1950

Just a note - if you are serious about making this into a proposal, it would be a good idea to actually use the entire title somewhere in your proposal. While many people know that UNHCR stands for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (or something along those lines), there are probably many people who don't.

You should note that the plural of "refugee" is "refugees". There's no apostrophe.

In principle, we like the idea. We're always open to refugees. What I would suggest is instead a resolution defining a refugee and obliging nations to accept them if they meet the definitions. I'm quite sure that a similar arrangement is used in real life for the signatories of the Geneva Convention.

Idea good, details need work.

A united nations 'refugee' force is unescessary. Nations willing to help refugees already have help and transport on the ground for those who need it. International intervention will confuse and complicate matters. I strongly oppose.