NationStates Jolt Archive


Draft: Interceptor Rights Act

Ritico
03-02-2007, 06:14
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant

The General Assembly of the United Nations,

ACCEPTING that nations have a right to, and often due, maintain large stockpiles of nuclear weapons deliverable via ICBM.

AGREEING that nuclear deterrence has it's place in the world, and that nations large stockpiles tend to be for that reason.

REALIZING that having large missile interceptor programs would effectively destroy the concept of nuclear deterrence between well-developed nations capable of affording themselves large interceptor programs.

STATING that every nation has a right to said program, which would create a new type of deterrence less dependent upon nuclear arms and further dependent on conventional non-ICBM weaponry as they would need new innovations to make ways around interceptor programs.

UNDERSTANDING that this shift will greatly help smaller nations in the world which could easily develop interceptor programs without having to develop large nuclear arsenals to ensure their own safety.

Hereby Enacts the Following:
1. All nations have a right to own missile interceptor programs, at their own cost, and with their own technological research.
Ritico
03-02-2007, 06:15
If an admin could, upon seeing this, change it to say "Interceptor Rights Act" in the title as opposed to the mis-spelling. Thank you.
The Most Glorious Hack
03-02-2007, 06:42
Title changed. As for the rest, I think you're really overestimating this by categorizing it as "Strong".
Ritico
03-02-2007, 06:46
Change made to significant. Otherwise, is the language ok, and is this suitable for support?
Krioval
03-02-2007, 07:14
Our government must sadly oppose the inclusion of the following:

2. Nations must, for the sake of international security, make known that they have said program so that when international conflict arises, each side can know the status of mutually-assured destruction.

We are not normally enthusiastic about reporting on the nature of our classified military research, especially as it concerns our the defense of our territory. I see no reason why any nation should be compelled to disclose information to one's enemies about the status of one's military readiness. Please inform me if I am misreading the intent of this clause.

Ambassador Jevo Telovar-kan
Free Lands of Krioval
Ritico
03-02-2007, 07:22
Upon re-reading it, I am removing clause 2 in it's entirety. Thank you.
Enrir
03-02-2007, 16:43
seems acceptable. I would vote for it.
Ritico
03-02-2007, 21:23
The Interceptor Rights Act has been proposed by the Democratic Republic of Ritico to the United Nations. I'm asking that regional delegates immediately vote to support the resolution, and I'm asking that a telegram campaign immediately begin from the supporters of this resolution.

President Jade Walker of Ritico
The Democratic Republic of Ritico
Member: Conservative Republics
Cluichstan
05-02-2007, 15:29
You should've brought this draft to UN DEFCON (http://s15.invisionfree.com/UN_DEFCON) before submitting it. The good folks there probably could've helped you a great deal. If it fails to make quorum this time around, you might take my suggestion before resubmitting it.

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN