NationStates Jolt Archive

Warmest greetings to all UN delegates,

I hope all of you would spare 30 seconds of your time to read, review, and ultimately my proposal to establish centers of counter-terrorism in every region. While it is available on page 9 of the proposal list page, I think it's best if I included it here:

Center for Counter-Terrorism
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Valaron

Description: This bill is to propose the establishment of Center for Counter-Terrorism (CCT) in every region.

The United Nations,

NOTING that the war on terror is futile if it is addressed on case-by-case, ad hoc basis without any significant infrastructure placed for prevention of acts of terrorism in the future.

ACKNOWLEDGING that terrorism is a global problem and that all countries are adversely affected by terrorism; either directly or indirectly.

IDENTIFYING the need of a regional hub to store and process information on terrorists and their operations rather than rely on the initiative of individual nations which may result in inefficient and inaccurate counter-terrorism methods; thus, posing a greater threat to the stability and security of any given region and the nations under its jurisdiction.

DEMANDING that at least one (1) but not limited to Center for Counter-Terrorism (CCT) to be established in every region of the world to serve as the hub for counter-terrorism operation which include but are not limited to intelligence gathering, personnel training, and mission command centers. These regional CCTs will also be inter-linked to one another to better coordinate strategic intelligence data, creating a more global network of counter-terrorism intelligence.

CALLS UPON all member states to provide financial and logistical support to (i) establish the CCT, and (ii) ensure a CCT’s smooth operations. There are no minimum standards of contributions specified, and in regions most susceptible to terrorism a larger contribution is expected due to the presence of greater threats.

MAINTAINING that this initiative would not impact any country’s finances severely, as it is a collective efforts of the various nations in a region, and that their resources are pooled together will mean less spending on member states in a region facing critical threats of terrorism.

REQUESTS that all member states to vote in favor of this bill to help alleviate the threat of terrorism and ensure a more stable, peaceful, and secure world.

Voting Ends: Fri Mar 18 2005

I hope all delegates would be kind enough to endorse this proposal so we all can vote and ultimately adopt this resolution. A world without terror is a world of the future.

Regards,

Hafidz Ismail
Prime Minister & Minister of Home/Internal Affairs,
Empire of Valaron

NOTING that the war on terror is futile if it is addressed on case-by-case, ad hoc basis without any significant infrastructure placed for prevention of acts of terrorism in the future.

ACKNOWLEDGING that terrorism is a global problem and that all countries are adversely affected by terrorism; either directly or indirectly.

What war on terror? We never subscribed to any such war. Indeed, there are many groups around the world which are described by some governments as terrorists, but which we support, and we would be more inclined to view some of those governments as terrorist in nature.

Some states need to be violently opposed, and your proposal does not take into account the oft-repeated but still true saying - one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

I do share Myopia concerns; perhaps a clause could be included that defines terrorism, perhaps as such:
DEFINING terrorism as the use of militant and other violent means to inflict a view held by a group whose aims and views are against the majority of those inhabiting either a nation, colony, region, or national district.
Apart from that, Cobdenia would support this. Our military is having huge problems fighting our war on terrorism, personified in our case by Dr Vijay C. J. Petrehpetel and his Legion of Protectionistic-Communards.

Rear-Admiral The Honourable Leslie Featherstonehaigh-Michelwhaite CMG DSO
HM Deputy Governor-General to the Dominion of Cobdenia

DEFINING terrorism as the use of militant and other violent means to inflict a view held by a group whose aims and views are against the majority of those inhabiting either a nation, colony, region, or national district.

Just because a cause is in the minority doesn't make it wrong. If the majority of the citizens under an oppressive regime are willing to submit to the abuse of their rights and freedoms, that doesn't make it any less right for a minority to oppose that government and attempt to overthrow it.

Plus - I'm not sure if this is intentional - you've caught a lot of governments. Almost all states enforce their laws and judgements by force or threat of force, and so all it takes is one unpopular decision to define them as a terrorist group.

No that wasn't intentional. Governments need to be excluded from a definition of terrorist.
The wording was intented to allow non-violent protest

No that wasn't intentional. Governments need to be excluded from a definition of terrorist.
The wording was intented to allow non-violent protest
Why must governments be excluded? If a government is authorising attacks on its own civilians, but not using the standard military, surely that counts as terror?

Conderns understood, I suppose that a good word to describe terrorists would be paramiltary.

Conderns understood, I suppose that a good word to describe terrorists would be paramiltary.
I think the proposal needs a definition of terrorism we can all argue over.

acts of war by nongovernmental organizations targeting civilians
That's the best I have but it doesn't deal with intent at all, which seems odd for a word rooted in terror.

No that wasn't intentional. Governments need to be excluded from a definition of terrorist.
The wording was intented to allow non-violent protest

I agree with Enn that governments can be equally worthy of the label terrorist. Plus - nobody's explained to me why violent opposition to government is necessarily a bad thing.

I suppose that a good word to describe terrorists would be paramiltary.

par·a·mil·i·tar·y ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-ml-tr)
adj.
Of, relating to, or being a group of civilians organized in a military fashion, especially to operate in place of or assist regular army troops.

This casts a net even wider than your previous definition, whilst managing to still exclude military forces used by states in a terrorist fashion.

NOTING that the war on terror is futile if it is addressed on case-by-case, ad hoc basis without any significant infrastructure placed for prevention of acts of terrorism in the future.

The war on terror is futile because my country, nor my neighbors or colonies, are fighting one either.

ACKNOWLEDGING that terrorism is a global problem and that all countries are adversely affected by terrorism; either directly or indirectly.

Did you take a poll of UN nations to see if terror is affecting them? Can you prove this is the case? I highly doubt it.

IDENTIFYING the need of a regional hub to store and process information on terrorists and their operations rather than rely on the initiative of individual nations which may result in inefficient and inaccurate counter-terrorism methods; thus, posing a greater threat to the stability and security of any given region and the nations under its jurisdiction.

I'm sorry, but if a terrorist organization in my country is only operating with the sole purpose to destroy my country and what it stands for, this is an internal matter not worldwide issue and we will deal with accordingly. If the group is stationed elsewhere, working for worldwide destruction, then, we have a real proble, but as stated in the previous response, this isn't the case currently in the NS world.

DEMANDING that at least one (1) but not limited to Center for Counter-Terrorism (CCT) to be established in every region of the world to serve as the hub for counter-terrorism operation which include but are not limited to intelligence gathering, personnel training, and mission command centers.

How does your proposal define the "regions" of the world?

MAINTAINING that this initiative would not impact any country’s finances severely, as it is a collective efforts of the various nations in a region, and that their resources are pooled together will mean less spending on member states in a region facing critical threats of terrorism.

How does funding a CTC unit not impact an individual country's finances? That's illogical at best.

REQUESTS that all member states to vote in favor of this bill to help alleviate the threat of terrorism and ensure a more stable, peaceful, and secure world.

I don't know about you, but my country and region see a pretty nice, peaceful day and age with security and stability... I see no reason to support or aid this proposal as written as it's not warranted at this time.