NationStates Jolt Archive

About two weeks ago a issue was given to my government before I joined the UN and it passed. It was on the subject of tying Humanitarian aid to trade concessions. Personally I think it is a wonderful idea, but for the sake of the sensitivities of my esteemed fellow UN members, I will modify the proposal. If I get the Backing I wish to propose that Humainiarian Aid to Nations hit by man-made disasters caused by government corruption, incompitence, neglect/apathy, or official policy, be tied to Trade concessions given to nations responding. :D What I hope from this proposal is manyfold. First it will give large economically powerful nations an incentive to help out others. Second this will open up marketplaces for goods and services,and help build up the infostructure of a receiver nation(gotta have good roads to get the aid to the people and goods to the market). Third perhaps it will cause nations to fix their own problems and stop using foriegn aid as a way to make up for shortfalls. Let me make it perfectly clear this is for man-made disasters only not natural ones like earthquakes, locust plagues, tsunamis, volcanos, ect. Thank you and I hope this causes some considerations to be made :cool:

Excelsior,
Emperor Captain Spaulding I
Holy Empire of the Palentine

Short reply:

Every parent has the right to choose and the government should not be able to do anything about it. Passing this bill or even supporting this proposal would be an act against human, civil, and religous rights.

I know you meant good with this, but the fact is you can't take away ones right to choose.

We stand firmly against this extremely troubling proposal.

Mathieu Vergniaud
Deputy Speaker to the UN

The Telidian government second the comments of the Ecopoeian member; Telidian support will not be forthcoming.

Respectfully
Lydia Cornwall, UN Ambassador
Office of UN Relations, Dept for Foreign Affairs
HM Government of Telidia

Maybe its just me but I'm confused Vincinia. :headbang: When I stated the proposed proposal I don't have anything about a parent's right to choose, or a person's right to choose. I personally don't really care what a person chooses to do as long as a minor or animal isn't involved, or if the person isn't commiting a crime. This proposal seeks to give some mesure of reimbursement for humanitarian aid, if a disaster is caused by a nation's own government incompitance, apathy, corruption or official policy. The form of reinbursement asked for is trade considerations. You know like opening new markets to new products( I can think of the Palentine's own Booming Arms Manufacturing industry,but others could be used.) I'm not sugessting taking over a nation's industry, or bringing back colonialism. Maybe this would wake some nations up, and make them to start to think of how to get out of their messes insted of looking for a free handout. TANSTAAFL. Plus dont some of the nations on the left complain that richer nations aren't doing their fare share of helping the one in need. What could be a better inducement than the almighty greenback, dollar, doubloon, whatever. The free market is an excellent iducement for good behavior. It tends to weed out the truly unscrupulous. And after all, everyone knows that we evil conservatives will only help if there is something for us. Besides the reciever nation is not forced to ask for help from the international community. :D

Krioval already does tend to direct foreign aid to places where it will likely be of future use to Krioval, but we are loath to dictate policy to other nations. We don't pretend to know what should work best for other people, after all.

We do not understand the hyperbole about this very simple issue. It would be doable if we passed a resolution giving nations incentives to participate in such trade agreements, rather than "dictating" such a policy to sovereign nations. And I really don't know why certain nations have called "troubling" a very simple proposal to assure that foreign-aid money is not wasted.

#36: International Community Comes Doorknocking [Guadalcanal]

The Issue
The international community has appealed to @@NAME@@ to increase humanitarian aid to the world's poorer nations.

The Debate
1. "We must increase foreign aid," says beaded local peace activist @@RANDOMNAME@@. "Compared to some of these nations, @@NAME@@ is swimming in @@CURRENCY@@s. Let's face it, not every nation in the world is lucky enough to have a government like ours. Let's show some compassion to our less economically gifted neighbors."

2. "Talk about a way to flush @@CURRENCY@@s straight down the toilet," argues Think Tank member @@RANDOMNAME@@. "What I've noticed is that whenever we do give something, it's never enough: a few years later they're back asking for more. The best way to help these poor nations is to stop shielding them from the logical consequences of their idiotic, long-debunked socialist economic policies."

3. "Relief wouldn't hurt us... if we 'relieved' the right countries," suggests government advisor @@RANDOMNAME@@. "We give them a little humanitarian aid, they give us access to their @@MAJORINDUSTRY@@ markets... it's win-win. Nothing wrong with a little quid pro quo, especially for a good cause."
I always choose option #3.

One great incentive is the free market. All the nations involved benefit. Markets open up for the donor's products, or protectionist tarriff are lowered. In the reciever's country once they get bach on their feet cave new prodects to purchase. Plus, I, for one, would be intersted in buying from a nation that would open their markets to me. This would also help out the reciever nation by creating new demands for their products, thus creating jobs and prosperity. I will admit that unscrupolous nations would try to take advantage of the situation. But here again is where the free market comes to play. Those nations who would do this, would find few nations wanting their help. To use an analogy, You live in a path of a hurricane. You need plywood and supplies and their are 2 stores with the supplies. Store #1 is gouging people for all the market will bare to make a huge profit. Store#2 also stocked up on supplies but is not gouging the people and are doing all they can to help. I guarentee store#1 will be out of business soon. You may be force to buy from then once, but their reputation will get around and people will stop shopping there. Store#2, on the other hand recived a good reputation, and will have future customers. Plus since some of you in the UN just love excesive regulation, you can come up with some great punative sanctions against Nations who commit abuse. :cool:

Excelsior,
Emperor Captain Spaulding I
Holy Empire of the Palentine

We do not understand the hyperbole about this very simple issue. It would be doable if we passed a resolution giving nations incentives to participate in such trade agreements, rather than "dictating" such a policy to sovereign nations. And I really don't know why certain nations have called "troubling" a very simple proposal to assure that foreign-aid money is not wasted.

Our office concurs with the fine ambassador from Omigodtheykilledkenny.

Deputy Minister of UN Affairs
Thomas Smith