Whale Island: Bettencourt Conference (5535)

[Auditorii]

Timofei Ostroverkhov, Permanent Representative to the World Congress, Tsardom of Trigunia

The reform to the World Congress is always controversial.

The General Assembly is meant to be broad and should remain broad, parties, nations, organizations, and the like should remain actively involved. We’d be against the reintroduction of binding General Assembly Resolutions, as it would further defang and de-incentivize the Security Council.

We’d propose and alternative that the General Assembly gain the ability to pass motions (known as General Assembly Motions), these would be nonbinding and serve as a statement from those involved in the General Assembly as to what they believe the Security Council should take up and discuss. There is however absolutely no binding clause in this and the Security Council is free to address it or not address it however they wish.

These motions would be optionally open for commentary for 1 day, allowing for changes to the verbiage and the like and then for 3 days and each nation is allowed to vote on them should they wish (OOC: This means a player who controls the foreign ministry or other player agreed upon representative.) or other nation-based groups. (OOC: This means players who do not control the foreign ministry and are acting as a political party or other organization within that nation.) The total number of active nations or nation-based groups at the time of the vote is what is counted, and if those nations or nation-based groups are one in the same, they are only counted once. (OOC: Meaning if Greek controls Telamon and he votes as a nation he cannot come back and vote as the Telamonese Hummud Lovers Association, one vote per player. The only caveat could be that nations are permitted to have 2 vote if they control an in-game nation and a FBC.)

This would permit the General Assembly time and the means to allow all peoples of the world to be involved in the General Assembly, not limiting it to just nations.

In regard to the Security Council, we oppose to opening the Security Council to everyone, it serves better as a more exclusive body. We’d suggest that we add an addition 5 seats, these seats would be at-large seats and nations interested in taking a role within the Security Council can make themselves available for these 5 seats. These seats are not binding and can exist or not exist depending on interest, in the event there cannot be a consensus we could rely on those nations and vote counts. (OOC: This would provide for people who are interested to get involved with the SC and not be relegated to running popularity campaigns that are often a symptom of the SC elections.)

OOC: I’m opposed to forever running threads. We have 4/5 moderators right now, there’s no reason we can’t continue the system we’ve had. It makes for much better record keeping and delineation.

[Doc]

Dame Catherine Adams, Representative of The Foreign Minister of His Imperial Majesty, Emperor Fredrick II Ananto of the Empire of Ananto and Kalistan

Kalistan shall observe the proceedings as a representative of the Non Aligned Movement. I have been granted the authority to speak on behalf of the Emperor in this proceeding should such an opportunity arise.

[GreekIdiot]

Chief Operating Officer and Assistant General-Secretary from the Office of Administrative Affairs of the World Congress, Whale Island

We recognise the representatives from N&D, Kundrati, Ikradon, Trigunia and Kalistan as observers in this conference. We will be opening up commentary by all observers, shortly, as we would like to offer Security Council members to provide their statements on the matter, first.

To quickly address the statements already made by the representative from Trigunia,

- We believe we're in agreement in keeping the General Assembly's scope as broad as possible
- Likewise the introduction of a structure of motions for the WCGA that would then be passed to the WGSC for consideration (and nothing more)

-

OOC: Strong position loosely held on the forum structure, personally. In general, I'm inclined to look at past the current situation (i.e. having multiple mods) and think ahead in 1-2 years from now - mod team may diminish; total player base may not increase.

Also, you just had to go for a hummus lovers example, didn't ya, ahahah

[Drax]

Representative Georg Lourendorf, Bundesrepublik Dundorf:

We do not think Security Council should become an all nation body.

The root problems we see are slightly different than those suggested. The most important is after a long hiatus, can the World Congress become relevant to Terra again.

It is reentering the humanitarian relief sphere. Should it become proficient at that before undertaking another challenge or identify something else useful and try to become helpful with it too.

[_nicolo_02]

Elias II Aristocrat-Goldbloom, Homeland State's Representative:

We would think it'd be beneficial to proceed with the GA reform as presented by the Chief Operating Officer. Concerning the SC, we prefer the current structure (not open to everyone) would be better to maintain.

OOC: I agree with the "1 thread forever" thing for both GA and SC, as well as the bot.

[Luis1p]

Royal Minister of International Affairs, Rochelle Adegoke.

As staunch observers and followers of international law, the United Kingdom takes return carefully. We ask ourselves: is it efficient? Who will it effect? Will the effects be positive? And who's voice will be affected by our changes?

We do believe that the Chief Operating Officer's plan to restore a continuous stretch of activity in the World Congress is essential. We are with the proposed changes for the General Assembly. In the quest for efficiency, we believe the Security Council's current responsibilities are suitable and just not be changed. We must not amend that of which is not broken.

[GreekIdiot]

Chief Operating Officer and Assistant General-Secretary from the Office of Administrative Affairs of the World Congress, Whale Island

We appreciate the statements by Security Council members.

Seems like a simple motion-centric GA reform is the way to go.

SC should remain as is. Though setting, say a 4-year term (OOC: Bot automation), and deputies to extend the SC's viability has not been opposed.

-

Floor is open to observers for comments.

[jadouljonathan]

Elle Meers, fixed representative to the WCGA

First, i want to thank you all for letting us be here and listen to our reasoning,we support the changes and understand that motions who have been passed in the general assembly can't be binding and are more of an suggestion to the internationalcommunity, but we would like to suggest to add that if a motion passes in the general assembly, it should be instantly presented to the SC, so atleast they take notice and are forced to talk about it.

Otherwise we would feel more like we are in a therapy session and hoping that are therapist is caring and listening.

[Doc]

Dame Catherine Adams, Representative of The Foreign Minister of His Imperial Majesty, Emperor Fredrick II Ananto of the Empire of Ananto and Kalistan

Kalistan doesn't participate in the WC for a number of reasons:

1) We as a matter of principle do not participate in Collective Security Agreements, as they force war on our nation when we may not want war;
2) The Security Council is a major powers' club which Kalistan has never been permitted to join, primarily by various major powers, even if we ever sought to do so, and as a matter of fact, most members of the Non Aligned Movement seem to be in the same boat. Major Powers do not join NAM, as they get more utility out of carving the world into various alliances, and using the WC to give them legitimacy for doing what they would do anyway without it. and
3) The General Assembly is easily ignored.

Therefore there is no reason to participate if Kalistan will perpetually be relegated to the status of "ultimately irrelevant".

That said: It is clear that reform of this body could be beneficial. As a representative of the Non-Aligned Movement, we believe that the best thing this Body could do would be to create the body as more like a bi-cameral international legislature, where actions need to pass both bodies to take effect. And at the same time, abolish the one-country veto (if it has not been abolished already, if it has, please forgive me, I haven't followed the WC in a long time). However you do that, one country should not count more than the majority of the world.

This way, as a matter of compromise, the Major Powers would still have a say in the security of the world, but the minor powers of the world would have a reason to want to participate in the deliberations.

I believe that something like this was proposed above.

It is an idea that gives countries who do not just have aircraft carriers a reason to buy into the body: If we know that 1) things that the General Assembly proposes can make their way through the security council and see the light of day while one Security Council member can't just veto it, and 2) the Security Council can count on the support of the Majority (because it passed the GA too) in enforcing its will, this body will, I think function a bit more like what it is supposed to function as, which is a deliberative international body aimed at avoiding war through diplomacy and sanctioning defection from the international order.

A reform of this type will make this body immeasurably more democratic, and give smaller States, who are perpetually relegated to the General Assembly, a reason to actively work within the Structure of the World Congress, rather than striking out on their own.

We put forward this statement in good faith. Kalistan will never join the World Congress, but we appreciate the opportunity to address this august body nonetheless and we wish you well in your attempts at reform. It is long overdue.

[Drax]

Representative Georg Lourendorff, Bundesrepublik Dundorf:

The suggestions proposed as operating rules for the General Assembly by the Chief Operating Officer and Assistant General-Secretary from the Office of Administrative Affairs of the World Congress, Whale Island, are not ones the Bundesrepublik will support although we commend their comprehensive and innovative nature.

We did not think much of the ideas introduced for the Security Council either. But that's just us. In fairness, it would be nice if there were ongoing normal time limits for passage as suggested.

We also very much favor the position advocated by the Tsardom of Trigunia and the Royaume Uni de Lourenne of a small Security Council although we do note returning to the concept of permanent members discarded many years ago would not be a fair way to do that. Terms limits is probably a good idea coupled with the current system of election.

The view of Kalistan is shared by many. The Bundesrepublik believes reconsideration of the role of the General Assembly should be undertaken. Why? In the most recent serious matter considered by the World Congress all effort to solve the problem was in the General Assembly. It is thus more likely relevance can be generated by reconsidering its role than elsewhere.