NationStates Jolt Archive

A resolution to initiate the formation and maintaining of the MOP (Ministry Of Peace)

RECOGNIZING-the need to promote peace throughout the world as well as to aid in the peaceful resolution of international conflict and crisis management.

REALIZING- the benefits of such a ministry which shall be defined below

Duties

1. To ensure the peaceful resolution of international conflicts between any and all UN member nations.
2. To aid in the peaceful defusing of an international crisis such as an international hostage situation.
3. To work toward the gradual but steady stockpiling and destruction of any weapons of mass destruction.
4. To engage in diplomatic talks with non-member nations in order to promote peace in those nations.

Funding-shall come from individual member regions paying an equal amount of $1,000,000 per calendar year.

Therefore-supplying over $1.8 billion to the ministry every year as there are about 1800 UN delegates

Purpose of the Funds-the funds received by the ministry shall be used for only non-military purposes and only for pacifistic purposes.

ADDITIONAL FUNDING-if needed, additional funding shall be requested by the CFPUF (defined below) chairman or chairwomen to the UN. The UN shall decide rather the request for additional funding is valid. The decision shall be based only on the duties of the MOP as outlined above.

HERBY-appoints the Committee for the Proper Use of Funds (CFPUF) to make sure funds are being used in the proper manner.

RECOGNIZING-the need to promote peace throughout the world as well as to aid in the peaceful resolution of international conflict and crisis management.
I'll preface my remarks by saying we agree with this aim, which is why we disagree with this proposal: it's not an objection to its general intent, but rather its specific content.
1. To ensure the peaceful resolution of international conflicts between any and all UN member nations.
This is the approximate equivalent of setting up a committee whose purpose 'to cure all known diseases', 'to solve all environmental problems', or 'to eradicate hunger, poverty, and Rosie O'Donnell'. All worthy, worthy aims, but the detail would be the issue. How is it going to ensure the peaceful resolution of such conflicts? Sending negotiators, financial incentives, overwhelming military forces, what?
2. To aid in the peaceful defusing of an international crisis such as an international hostage situation.
As above: you need to specify how it's going to do this.
3. To work toward the gradual but steady stockpiling and destruction of any weapons of mass destruction.
This probably belongs in a separate proposal, though mild as it stands I suppose it's fair enough.
4. To engage in diplomatic talks with non-member nations in order to promote peace in those nations.
A reasonable provision, though again more detail couldn't hurt.

You really need to lay out how MOP is going to accomplish its aims: simply stating its objectives seems rather blindly utopian.
Funding-shall come from individual member regions paying an equal amount of $1,000,000 per calendar year.
You're going to establish world peace using £1.8 billion dollars (I'd also note it's best to avoid reference to $, mainly to avoid interminable arguments over its existence)? Bear in mind the military budget of a single goat-obsessed nation amounts to over twenty times this (and I dread to think what some of the larger nations pack).
ADDITIONAL FUNDING-if needed, additional funding shall be requested by the CFPUF (defined below) chairman or chairwomen to the UN. The UN shall decide rather the request for additional funding is valid. The decision shall be based only on the duties of the MOP as outlined above.
This may stray into MetaGaming.

Forget all the stuff about funding etc., and first out work out the tactics MOP will adopt to bring about peace. Only then can this be anything more than a nice idea.

-- George Madison
Legislative Director
Quintessence of Dust Department of UN Affairs

Funding-shall come from individual member regions paying an equal amount of $1,000,000 per calendar year.

Therefore-supplying over $1.8 billion to the ministry every year as there are about 1800 UN delegates.

Regions don't belong to the UN, Nations do. Phrasing is vital.

about 1800 - This figures varies all the time, and has no business in a proposal. That's also true for the dollar values, as you have no idea how the code of the proposal will affect any given nation. It's quite possible that the UN will take a percentage of GNP from members. For a tiny nation, that might be $20,000. For a venerable and wealthy nation, it could be $200 billion. You don't know, so we don't allow dollar figures in proposals.

You also need to include the category and strength in this thread. I think prior versions were posted as Furtherment of Democracy or Social Justice. Having your category match your text is perhaps the most vital test in determining legality.

We would endorse everything that Ambassador Madison has said, and add one further comment; we have a severe allergy to the name. The United Nations does not have ministries. It has committees, panels, and of course the redoubtable Building Maintenance Department, but it does not have ministeries; a ministery implies a minister, after all, which is certainly not the case in the UN.

Besides, our knee-jerk reaction to the appearance of anything called Minipax would be to ask Sheik Nottap bin Cluich some leading questions about the pin-point accuracy of his Death Star.

I actually had thought of the idea a long time ago and hope to do a TG campagin on it soon:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=522199

It sets up the UN War Prevention Council, a pet idea, but has no funding for it (no need, really). It also defines how peacekeeping operations can be done, which I feel is far more important than a Council. It is still not that strong, so it is International Security, Mild. If you would like, please look at it, and I hope you would endorse it maybe soon, or give me some more ideas and suggestions to improve it.