NationStates Jolt Archive

The United Nations,

DECLARING that Chemical Weapons (CWs) are not required for national defense,

RECOGNIZING the existence of myriad alternative weapon systems to ensure national sovereignty,

CONCERNED of the danger of CWs used as Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) against civilian populations,

DESIRING to minimize or eliminate their use in committing attrocities of terror, genocide, civil repression, or during conduct of war,

DETERMINED to limit their production and proliferation,

UNDERSTANDING other UN Resolutions can exist, be introduced or repealed over the course of time which may affect more specifically the development, production, destruction, monitoring, reporting, curtailing, limiting or banning use of CWs,

DEFINING a 'Chemical Weapon (CW)' as a device specifically designed to cause death, serious injury, chronic or permanent harm through the toxic properties of chemical agents released as a result of their employment,

DEFINING a 'Chemical Weapon Agent' as a substance which, through its chemical action on life processes, can cause death, serious injury, chronic or permanent harm,

DEFINING a 'Precursor Chemical' as chemicals which, when combined with another substance during the discharge or detonation of CW, produce chemical weapons agents,

ACKNOWLEDGING the existence of devices and substances which use chemicals developed and designed to be non-lethal and non-persistent, which are unlikely to cause death, serious, chronic or permanent injury, yet have legitimate riot control, law enforcement, or personal self-defense applications,

DEFINING therefore such devices constitute a 'Riot Control Device' comprised of chemical substances which shall be referred to as 'Riot Control Agents,' and should not be construed as a CW,

ADMITTING technologically Riot Control Devices or Riot Control Agents can be modified for use as CW,

ADMITTING further many conventional and unconventional CW, CW agents, and precursor agents may be developed and invented in course of time,

UNDERSTANDING technological development will continue requiring the ongoing interpretation of new and novel inventions and applications of chemical substances which may be construed as CW,

FORSEEING the need to clearly and directly investigate and address actual or alleged violations by member states of any UN resolutions governing the controls placed over CW,

HEREBY authorizes the creation of a new standing UN Committee to coordinate activities related to CW on behalf of the United Nations,

NAMING the Chemical Weapons Compliance Commission (CWCC),

CHARGING the CWCC to:

a) interpret clearly for UN member nations what constitutes a 'chemical weapon (CW),' a 'chemical weapon agent,' a 'precursor chemical,' a 'riot control device,' a 'riot control agent,' and what does not fall under such provisions,

b) abide by all standing UN resolutions covering chemical weapons (CW), including but not limited to, their development, production, domestic or international sale or trafficking, stockpiling, accidental or purposeful use, destruction or decommissioning, and any regimes to monitor, control or ban CW-related materiel or facilities.

c) create a schedule of what substances or materiel were to be clearly ruled as CW agents or precursor agents, and what substances or material were to be ruled as CW-convertible because of their dual-use (civil and weapons-grade) nature,

d) establish a program to catalog and track CW production facilities and stockpiles in nation states,

e) compile evidence, conduct investigations, and otherwise monitor and report to the UN on the invention, development, production, instances of accidental discharge and purposeful use of CW,

f) report to the UN TPP on cases of CW used for genocide,

g) work with all member nations and any willing non-UN nations to develop programs and schedules for the safe destruction and decomissioning of CW.

Two words:

Character count?

3,852.

What is the limit?

We know we've been able to slip 3400 characters by, though we aren't sure exactly what is counted - the limit has been sited at everywhere between 3000 and 3400 characters.

Regardless, you're over.

Way too many ICs for my money. I think cut down on them, to get the character count to a reasonable level.

To His Excellencies,

I have ideas already on where to trim. What would your thoughts be?

Sincerely,

Sir Nasciens d'Hermitage
UN Ambassador of the Kingdom of Listeneisse
UN Delegate for the Region of Warzone of the Defenders

The United Nations,

DECLARING that Chemical Weapons (CWs) are not required for national defense,

RECOGNIZING the existence of myriad alternative weapon systems to ensure national security and sovereignty,

CONCERNED of the danger of CWs used as Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs),

DESIRING to minimize or eliminate their use in committing acts of terror, genocide, civil repression, or war,

DETERMINED to limit their production and proliferation,

UNDERSTANDING other UN Resolutions can co-exist which may further affect development, production, destruction, monitoring, reporting, curtailing, limiting or banning use of CWs,

DEFINING a 'Chemical Weapon (CW)' as a device specifically designed to cause death, serious injury, chronic or permanent harm through the toxic properties of chemical agents released as a result of their employment,

DEFINING a 'Chemical Weapon Agent' as a substance which, through its chemical action on life processes, can cause death, serious injury, chronic or permanent harm,

DEFINING a 'Precursor Chemical' as a substance which, when combined with another substance during the discharge or detonation of a CW, produce CW agents,

DEFINING 'Dual-Use' as a term to describe any device or substance which may have legitimate civil uses as well as be used, modified or enhanced for use as a CW,

AFFIRMING the rights of nations to use chemically-based devices which are generally non-lethal and non-persistent for legitimate riot control, law enforcement, personal defense and other civil purposes, while acknowledging their dual-use potential for CW,

UNDERSTANDING many inventions, applications and incidents will arise in course of time, requiring the ongoing interpretation of such as CW-related for member states,

FORSEEING the need to clearly and directly investigate and address actual or alleged violations by member states of any UN resolutions governing the controls placed over CW,

HEREBY authorizes the creation of a new standing UN Committee to coordinate activities related to CW on behalf of the United Nations,

NAMING the Chemical Weapons Compliance Commission (CWCC),

CHARGING the CWCC to:

1. ADHERE to all standing UN resolutions covering chemical weapons (CW),

2. CREATE guidelines to clearly classify what constitutes CW and dual-use material, CW agents, precursor chemicals, what does not fall under such definitions,

3. MAINTAIN lists of known devices or substances that fall under such guidelines, and update such lists based continuing technological developments,

4. ENCOURAGE states to limit the development, production, stockpiling, domestic or international sale or trafficking of CW,

5. ESTABLISH a program to catalog and track CW production facilities and stockpiles in nation states,

6. ADMINISTER any UN regimes to monitor, control or ban CW-related materiel or facilities,

7. WORK with all member nations and any willing non-UN nations to develop programs and schedules for the safe destruction and decomissioning of CW,

8. TRACK the accidental or purposeful use of CW, conduct investigations, compile evidence and casualty reports, and deliver findings to the UN,

9. COORDINATE studies for development of defenses against CW, and medical treatment of injuries caused by CW.

Character Count: 3,204

Note:

To avoid a 'House of Cards' violation, I took out direct mention of the TPP.

Should the current resolution banning chemical weapons be repealed and our proposed replacement be adopted, Ausserland will enthusiastically support this fine proposal. It provides the mechanisms for adding specificity to our proposal, maintaining its currency with the state-of-the-art, and aiding nations in implementing it. All of these should have been included in our proposal, but could not be, due to space limits on proposals.

Our only hesitation (and it is only that, not an objection), is that this section may need some discussion:

4. ENCOURAGE states to limit the development, production, stockpiling, domestic or international sale or trafficking of CW,

We think this might pertain only to "dual-use" chemicals, and, if so, that should be stated. But we may be misunderstanding this.

There are also a couple of disconnects in definitions between our proposal and this one, but we are sure that we can easily work those out with the honorable delegate from Listeneisse.

Patrick T. Olembe
Minister for Foreign Affairs

Gladly to hear your endorsement!

To clarify:

4. ENCOURAGE states to limit the development, production, stockpiling, domestic or international sale or trafficking of CW,
This article specifically used the term 'states,' not member states.

While all states within the UN will be bound by UN Resolutions affecting CW, all nation states can be encouraged to limit CW proliferation.

This provision encourages all states, within or outside the UN, to limit their CW activities. We trust the UN would be glad to work with willing non-member states in their demobilization and disarmament of CW.

It is, of course, unforceable beyond the boundaries of UN member state jurisdiction, hence why it was worded modestly to simply encourage adherance to such goals.

We thank His Excellency, the Ambassador of Ausserland, for the chance to coment and clarify this particular point.

His Excellency,

Sir Nasciens d'Hermitage
UN Ambassador, Kingdom of Listeneisse
UN Delegate, Warzone of the Defenders

http://bak42.notworksafe.com/images/NationStates/UNCards/AnotherUselessCommittee.JPG

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

HEREBY authorizes the creation of a new standing UN Committee to coordinate activities related to CW on behalf of the United Nations,

NAMING the Chemical Weapons Compliance Commission (CWCC),

CHARGING the CWCC to:

1. ADHERE to all standing UN resolutions covering chemical weapons (CW),

Otherwise known as the Compliance Ministry. We have that already, we don't need another one.

3. MAINTAIN lists of known devices or substances that fall under such guidelines, and update such lists based continuing technological developments,

What purpose does this serve? Either what does and does not fall under the guidelines is already established in whatever resolution creates the guidelines in the first place... in which case this is redundant, or it doesn't so establish what it's talking about in which case no independent commission has the authority to make that determination in any practical manner that would have any effect on the game without passing a resolution to that effect... which would of course just be it's own resolution and doesn't require this one.

4. ENCOURAGE states to limit the development, production, stockpiling, domestic or international sale or trafficking of CW,

Encourage away.

5. ESTABLISH a program to catalog and track CW production facilities and stockpiles in nation states,

Because?

6. ADMINISTER any UN regimes to monitor, control or ban CW-related materiel or facilities,

If there is currently a UN ban in place on chemical weapons the Compliance Ministry takes care of this already. If there is no ban in place then there's nothing to be done here.

Etc... We see no point to the existence of this committee.

The Compliance Ministry does a wonderful job when the Resolutions are first passed, but there are instances of member states who may purchase prohibited weapons on the international market in contravention of their pledges to the UN.

(Please do not act too shocked.)

Provision #3 covers the fact that new inventions occur from time to time. Perhaps some nations have never seen an original thought? However, be assured there are some rather clever countries constantly inventing new ways to kill their fellow humans. It would be the CWCC's job to track these new inventions, and, if they fell under the provision of their charter, to ensure the Compliance Ministry could root them out.

Provision #5 would, of course, help track where these things come from. It could have all sorts of law enforcement benefits, counter-terrorism benefits, and the like. And of course, make it somewhat easier to deal with if or when other provisions further restricting CW are passed.

The Compliance Ministry does a wonderful job when the Resolutions are first passed, but there are instances of member states who may purchase prohibited weapons on the international market in contravention of their pledges to the UN.

And if they do this in RP and there is some reson it can't be pointed out that the Compliance Ministry would not allow it... is there some reason that the CWCC has greater capabilities than the practically omnipresent CM and it's UN gnomes and thereby alters this state of affairs?

Provision #3 covers the fact that new inventions occur from time to time.

Yes, they do. But what is the committee actually, practically, supposed to do about it?

Nobody is going to have the authority after this resolution is passed to unilaterally declare that the CWCC has determined that some new weapon belongs on a previously established ban list. The only way that could be accomplished such that it would have any actual effect would be to pass a resolution stating such... which still leaves this as being a redundant measure.

ooc: My hope for this would be as a center of RP, like the TPP does for genocide.

Set up a committee, allow the seated member states to hear complaints in violation of various CW controls.

On the other side are 'national sovereigntists,' 'free trade' states, and those calling for 'scientific progress' -- those that might want to oppose the CWCC to promote development of new weapons.

So the CWCC would be a place to polarize political action for both sides on a smaller scale then the 'body as a whole'.

It would allow intrigue plots, chemical weapon smuggling, attempts to corrupt the CWCC to look the other way, courtroom drama, wars to be arbitrated, and so on.

It might also be possible to have a Bioweapons commission and a nuclear weapons commission, and wrap them all up in a nice bow some day. But because of the House of Cards rules, and because of the character limit on proposals, they all have to be done independently.

Perhaps in my draft, which is already rather long, it would need to have some structure for how the CWCC is actually organized -- how many members it should have, etc. -- but there's this problem of a word count.

It's not a 'mechanics' issue I'm asking for however.

What would others say about this?

[Which makes it illegal. The way I read the rules, role played committees are illegal. This 'TPP' you speak of appears to come before the rules change. There might be a reason for this.]

I was reading about Roleplaying and the NationStates United Nations (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8974410&postcount=7) where it talked about using UN Organizations to enhance forum-based RPing.

Sounded fun to me.

The Pretenama Panel (TPP) -- Genocide Court (http://s3.invisionfree.com/UN_Organizations/index.php?showtopic=69)

They're open for business. But how will they get any business?

Maybe we can have a nice incident of chemical genocide? I'm sure we can find a few tyrannical dictators lying around.

The CWCC can investigate the incident, and hand it over to the TPP for judicial ruling.

There is also the UN Committee on Illicit Arms Trafficking (http://s3.invisionfree.com/UN_Organizations/index.php?act=SC&c=7)

Listeneisse just joined the UNA (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/United_Nations_Association) tonight.

So it is far from 'illegal' to propose UN committees, and for some people, it even seems quite fun.

The CWCC cannot be an official, UN-backed organization under current rules. Thank the TPP for that. You will have to do some research, but my own points to disgruntled members unhappy with how the TPP turned out nearly causing all committees to be banned. The other side wanted them to stay as they were. The current rules are a compromise.

This, combined with a tendency of the UN to rely on committees, has resulted in a committee float and the disgruntled members having a mountain of evidence to point to. From current rules, it appears the TPP is not operating legally under UN rules anyway, as it affects UN members and previous posts indicate it to be expanded by an amendment, something which was apparently illegal back then.

I'm still doing my research, but by all the evidence I see the TPP itself is not a legal UN organization in its operation. I am unsure about repeal efforts, though.

[Which makes it illegal. The way I read the rules, role played committees are illegal. This 'TPP' you speak of appears to come before the rules change. There might be a reason for this.]
Having resolutions which mandate role-played committees (such as having nations sit on them) is illegal. However, role-playing a committee is not illegal. It's just that the mods don't want a resolution to seem try people into role-playing, or be some sort of a game mechanics change.

Reading over the UNO site, and especially the TPP, it looks like they are still working through some kinks but are active.

It sounds like you are trying to 'illegally' drive a new player away from submitting a UN proposal.

Can you point out to me any specific post where the mods have said that new committees of the UN are banned? Or that RP-based committees specifically are banned?

As far as I can see in their own forum, TPP#003, held in August, hit a road bump because it required a large number (15) of members and has a chair process which needed to be streamlined.

As far as I can see in the NS forum, I see no rules barring roleplaying-based committees.

So the burden of proof goes back to you, if you please.

Yes, for the vast majority of players, the Compliance Ministry will finagle a few bits as soon as it is enacted if the resolution passes. It will come and go.

However, this might be grist for the mill of the power-hungry two-bit tyrants who want to face war crimes trials in years to come. Which can be a fun source of roleplaying and plotting for both sides of the fence.

Whoops! I had just gotten done with over an hour's researching and peeking to find what the PHC just answered.

Which is fair enough.

Yes, I agree. No 'mandated' roleplaying. It's like 'enforced happy hour.'

As Orwellian as you can imagine.

No, I figured we'd have a sort of loose confederation of do-gooders that pass a 'breathalyzer' type test: can you find our forum and post in anything more coherent than 1337-speak?

I'll go ask the mods more about this.

Having resolutions which mandate role-played committees (such as having nations sit on them) is illegal. However, role-playing a committee is not illegal. It's just that the mods don't want a resolution to seem try people into role-playing, or be some sort of a game mechanics change.

The rules say:

Committees may be created, as long as certain things are kept in mind: nations do not sit on committees, they are staffed by mystical beings that instantly spring into existance and live only to serve on said committee. Committees are also bound by the above MetaGame rules. Also, keep in mind that Committees are additions to Proposals; they shouldn't be all the Proposal does.

It specifically states the opposite of what you are saying. Please provide a link that backs up your statement.

Reading over the UNO site, and especially the TPP, it looks like they are still working through some kinks but are active.

That they are. There is also the one on space. Both are great examples of why such committees are probably now banned.

It sounds like you are trying to 'illegally' drive a new player away from submitting a UN proposal.

I'm new to this myself.

Can you point out to me any specific post where the mods have said that new committees of the UN are banned? Or that RP-based committees specifically are banned?

The exact quote:

Committees may be created, as long as certain things are kept in mind: nations do not sit on committees, they are staffed by mystical beings that instantly spring into existance and live only to serve on said committee. Committees are also bound by the above MetaGame rules. Also, keep in mind that Committees are additions to Proposals; they shouldn't be all the Proposal does.

Unofficial committees are not covered by this. It is found under MetaGaming, the subheading Creating Stuff, on this topic: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=420465

As far as I can see in their own forum, TPP#003, held in August, hit a road bump because it required a large number (15) of members and has a chair process which needed to be streamlined.

As far as I can see in the NS forum, I see no rules barring roleplaying-based committees.

There is a specific rule against the UN creating roleplayed committees. Nothing against the committees themselves. I wouldn't have brought this up if it wasn't an issue. As for the TPP: They are having plenty of problems.

So the burden of proof goes back to you, if you please.

Next time, double check the existing rules.

Yes, for the vast majority of players, the Compliance Ministry will finagle a few bits as soon as it is enacted if the resolution passes. It will come and go.

However, this might be grist for the mill of the power-hungry two-bit tyrants who want to face war crimes trials in years to come. Which can be a fun source of roleplaying and plotting for both sides of the fence.

It can be. But, as the rules are stated, you can't do it officially. Nothing is stopping you from doing it unofficially. Besides, unofficially, you're not bound by a UN resolution and can adapt better.

Submitted to the mods. (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9586021)
____

UN Committees (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/UN_Committees)

These committees are official UN committees.

Those that are 'overseen UN members' are the roleplaying ones. Those run by the secretariat seem to be the ones put in place by the Compliance Ministry and then forgotten for the most part.

But from what I've read, if anyone wanted to earnestly create and keep updated a Forum at the USO site, the mods probably would give them one.. even the organ donor one.

I'll wait for the official ruling of the mods, though. Seems like they're open the possibilities.

It specifically states the opposite of what you are saying. Please provide a link that backs up your statement.No, remember what you're quoting: the UN proposal writing guide. It is illegal for a proposal to be written so that nations sit on the committee (because this is a perceived metagame/gamemechanics violantion--which is supported by the fact, I think, that it's under "Game Mechanics"). These rules do not cover Role-play, which remains as free as it has ever been.

There's a difference between writing it into a proposal, and doing it on this forum or an off-site forum. writing it into a proposal is illegal, doing it on your own volition is perfectly legal.

No, remember what you're quoting: the UN proposal writing guide. It is illegal for a proposal to be written so that nations sit on the committee (because this is a perceived metagame/gamemechanics violantion--which is supported by the fact, I think, that it's under "Game Mechanics"). These rules do not cover Role-play, which remains as free as it has ever been.

There's a difference between writing it into a proposal, and doing it on this forum or an off-site forum. writing it into a proposal is illegal, doing it on your own volition is perfectly legal.

Hmm. The error is on my end. Looks like I am incorrect in my interpretation of your intended meaning.

Under the thread, a UN Committee must... UN Committees for Roleplaying (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9586021#post9586021),
Be an addition to the proposal. A proposal MUST do more than just make a committee.
So in this case, I'll rewrite the proposal to add a bit more teeth to it. Call them 'wisdom teeth.'

And I'll make the Commission more of a 'side-dish' than the main course.

Expect this to come down the pike instead as a 'Chemical Weapons Management' Resolution.

With the new draft proposal of Chemical Weapons Management (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=442528), this draft proposal is hereby made obsolescent.

Hmm. The error is on my end. Looks like I am incorrect in my interpretation of your intended meaning.
I'm also at fault for not having described it well. I only made a very subtle distinction in my first post (something like "you can roleplay it, but you can't write it as roleplayable") between the two, and I'm pretty sure I didn't explain it very well. Sorry, about that. I was just in a bit of a rush, Ergh, Sorry.