NationStates Jolt Archive

I urge all members to support the following resolution:

Disarmament and Non-Aggression

A resolution to slash worldwide military spending.


Category: Global Disarmament


Strength: Strong


Proposed by: Peace-Loving States

Description: THE UNITED NATIONS,

TAKING NOTE of all its previous resolutions, including The Nuclear Terrorism Act, Reduce Black Market Arms Sales, Rights and Duties of UN States and Elimination of Bio Weapons,

COMMITTED to the advancement of global peace and stability,

AWARE of the highly destructive nature of war amongst member states that threaten the well-being of innocent civilians,

ALARMED by the destructive nature of warfare involving weapons of mass destruction,

FINDING that nuclear and chemical weapons are inherently incompatible with concern for human rights,

1. DETERMINES that United Nations member states are obligated to exercise their ability to abstain from all war and aggression against other United Nations member states;

2. PROCLAIMS that it is unlawful for United Nations member states to:
a. Possess chemical weapons;
b. Seek to develop or acquire chemical weapons;
c. Authorize, permit or otherwise encourage any kind of chemical weapons proliferation;

3. DECLARES that is it unlawful for United Nations member states to:
a. Participate in the international trade of nuclear weapons;
b. Develop or possess any forms of nuclear weapons to threaten a United Nations member state or any other non-aggressor;
c. Develop or possess a nuclear weapon whose explosive yield exceeds the equivalent of one megaton of TNT;
d. Sanction, permit or otherwise encourage any kind of nuclear weapons proliferation by non-state individuals or groups;
e. Develop or deploy nuclear weapons in a manner that directly targets civilians or has a disproportionate impact upon civilians;
f. Deploy nuclear weapons when circumstances to not necessitate such action;

4. CALLS UPON all member states to:
a. Monitor the peaceful use of materials capable of being used in the production of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons;
b. Report all information relative to chemical, biological or nuclear weapons and materials to the United Nations;

5. NOTES that while some actions with regard to war and weapons proliferation are not prohibited by this resolution, this does not create any kind of right to such activities and that they may be restricted or proscribed by future resolutions;

6. EXPRESSES ITS HOPE that all forms of warfare and nuclear weapons proliferation can eventually be banned.

Approvals: 7 (Republic of Freedonia, Korstan, JS Nijmegen, The Derrak Quadrant, Gaiah, Arendstan, Oleria)

Status: Lacking Support (requires 139 more approvals)

Voting Ends: Thu Feb 24 2005

Description: THE UNITED NATIONS,

TAKING NOTE of all its previous resolutions, including The Nuclear Terrorism Act, Reduce Black Market Arms Sales, Rights and Duties of UN States and Elimination of Bio Weapons,

Good citations.

COMMITTED to the advancement of global peace and stability,

AWARE of the highly destructive nature of war amongst member states that threaten the well-being of innocent civilians,

ALARMED by the destructive nature of warfare involving weapons of mass destruction,

Lots of things are destructive and part of life. You can't ban all of them. Besides, war is a good population control method.

FINDING that nuclear and chemical weapons are inherently incompatible with concern for human rights,

I find they are perfectly compatible. Without them, the smoking craters that will be the remains of the UN will have a hard time managing to continue fighting for civil rights.

1. DETERMINES that United Nations member states are obligated to exercise their ability to abstain from all war and aggression against other United Nations member states;

Contradicts the Humanitarian Intervention resolution and, thus, potentially illegal.

2. PROCLAIMS that it is unlawful for United Nations member states to:
a. Possess chemical weapons;
b. Seek to develop or acquire chemical weapons;
c. Authorize, permit or otherwise encourage any kind of chemical weapons proliferation;

Some chemical weapons are designed to incompacitate instead of kill. Guess it's back to using bombs and other weapons to kill every living thing I come across...

3. DECLARES that is it unlawful for United Nations member states to:
a. Participate in the international trade of nuclear weapons;
b. Develop or possess any forms of nuclear weapons to threaten a United Nations member state or any other non-aggressor;
c. Develop or possess a nuclear weapon whose explosive yield exceeds the equivalent of one megaton of TNT;
d. Sanction, permit or otherwise encourage any kind of nuclear weapons proliferation by non-state individuals or groups;
e. Develop or deploy nuclear weapons in a manner that directly targets civilians or has a disproportionate impact upon civilians;
f. Deploy nuclear weapons when circumstances to not necessitate such action;

What a suicidal option.

On the one hand, we have the admirable but naive wish for world peace. On the other, we have the fact most nations are not in the UN and that there are quite a few with massive nuclear stockpiles that hate the UN and are looking for an opportunity to destroy it. World peace or survival... What a tough call.

4. CALLS UPON all member states to:
a. Monitor the peaceful use of materials capable of being used in the production of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons;
b. Report all information relative to chemical, biological or nuclear weapons and materials to the United Nations;

Useless. Remove.

5. NOTES that while some actions with regard to war and weapons proliferation are not prohibited by this resolution, this does not create any kind of right to such activities and that they may be restricted or proscribed by future resolutions;

Unnecessary and worthless. Remove.

6. EXPRESSES ITS HOPE that all forms of warfare and nuclear weapons proliferation can eventually be banned.

They can't. As long as nations remain outside the UN, those items will continue to exist.

It is a interesting resolution. I belive there are to many Right Winged UN members to pass. But nicely done.

It is a interesting resolution. I belive there are to many Right Winged UN members to pass. But nicely done.
Hey, I'm rather far left-wing, and I oppose it, so in that case it would seem it wouldn't get though at all.

Why do people assume left-wing means stupid and suicidal?

Most left-wingers demonstrate the tendency, and where a pattern of behavior exists....

Most left-wingers demonstrate the tendency, and where a pattern of behavior exists....
...a stereotype is created.

Now, I'm on the left-wing, but this has got Buckley's chance of passing. Not because there are too many right-wingers (the bias is usually argued as being the other way round) but simply because of the overwhelming threat of attack by non-UN countries. You will face certain devastation if you have no army. I know it is nice to hold an ideal of a better world with no guns, but the chances of that happening (in NS or the Real World) are infinitesimal.

Krioval: home of proud left-wing militarists!