8th Security Council Session

An archive of previous sessions of both the General Assembly and Security Council as well as various ad hoc consultations and meetings.

Moderator: RP Committee

8th Security Council Session

Postby jamescfm » Wed May 31, 2017 10:55 pm

Below are the archived discussions of the 8th Security Council Session, which lasted from 4219 to 4234.

Mariana Fonseca, General Secretary of the World Congress:
Following the 4219 Security Council elections, the members of the Security Council are: Dorvik, Istalia, Kalistan, Hutori and Baltusia.

Due to the altered composition of the Security Council, resolutions on which voting remains outstanding are declared NOT PASSED.
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 5474
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: Security Council (OOC: Authorised Participants Only)

Postby stuntmonkey » Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:31 pm

Isobella Descartes, Baltusian Ambassador to World Congress:

Fellow Members of the Security Council,

I have just opened up a debate on the floor of the General Assembly concerning nuclear disarmament. I would greatly value your input.

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=7318&p=116488#p116488
“I venture to suggest that patriotism is not a short and frenzied outburst of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime.”

― AES II

Current party - Haruzuterēchisuku Refonpātī
stuntmonkey
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: Security Council (OOC: Authorised Participants Only)

Postby jamescfm » Tue Jun 13, 2017 5:08 pm

Clement Middlesex, President of the Security Council:
I welcome this proposal from the Baltusian ambassador; international peace and stability is one of the fundamental aims of the World Congress. Developed nations like those on the Security Council should provide incentives for the rest of Terra to disarm or to avoid procuring nuclear technology. In reality, this might mean seeking mutual defence and non-aggression agreements so that smaller countries feel secure without nuclear weapons or it may mean offering favourable economic agreements. I ask that the rest of the Security Council make clear whether they would be interested in pursuing arrangements such as those I have described.
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 5474
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: Security Council (OOC: Authorised Participants Only)

Postby Axxell » Fri Jun 16, 2017 1:45 pm

Giorgia Pellegrini, new appointed Istalian Ambassador to the World Congress

A very interesting debate to present myself to the World Congress and to the Security Council, I hope to work with the best harmony with the my collegues.
So... recently the previous istalian parliament has prohibited the use of nuclear weapons by part of our Armed Forces but I cannot for the moment say what the next Government will be on the matter. However, I would like express the concern of the outgoing Government: we think that are not the most developed nation the issue, the Istalian Government is concerned by the fact that unfortunately we are sure that many nation will refuse to adhere to this initiative, which will be considered as a new assault of the pro-globalism forces that try to attempt to the sovereignty of the nations. And from the experience we can say also that most of the nation so concerned by their sovereignty are usually nations where the democracy and the respect of the most basic rights of the people have a very limited development, due to political forces quite extremist. And we are concerned in the Majatran continent by almost three nations which we are quite sure will ignore this initiative if not will criticize it in the way which I already exposed.
And so, what if all these nations will maintain their arsenals while free and democratic nations will have not?
Alleanza Radicale (Radical Alliance) - Istalia (Active)
User avatar
Axxell
 
Posts: 1495
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 8:08 am

Re: Security Council (OOC: Authorised Participants Only)

Postby jamescfm » Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:07 pm

Clement Middlesex, President of the Security Council:
The Istalian ambassador raises obvious and valid concerns. Firstly, with regard to undermining sovereignty, it seems to me that the work of the World Congress, particularly in the realms of defence and international security, will always be viewed with some degree of cynicism. However, I don't believe that this should prevent us from taking action to promote our values of security and diplomacy. On the matter of exposing the free and democratic world to danger by leaving them relatively under-powered when compared to the totalitarian and militaristic regimes of Terra I am sympathetic. Perhaps any agreement we pursue should provide for some nations to retain their nuclear capability initially until such a time as it is safe to completely disarm?
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 5474
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: Security Council (OOC: Authorised Participants Only)

Postby stuntmonkey » Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:57 pm

Isabella Descartes, Baltusian Ambassador to World Congress:

We concur, Mr President. Perhaps disarmament in stages down to zero for those nations that possess nuclear weapons, with a select few trusted and long-standing democratic countries able to keep a certain number in reserve to offset nuclear blackmail from rogue or non compliant states.

I would also like to commission independent experts to provide World Congress with as up to date a report on which nations currently possess nuclear weapons and, if possible, quantity and type. Would it be over stepping the mark for this organisation to gather information for such a dossier?
“I venture to suggest that patriotism is not a short and frenzied outburst of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime.”

― AES II

Current party - Haruzuterēchisuku Refonpātī
stuntmonkey
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: Security Council (OOC: Authorised Participants Only)

Postby jamescfm » Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:11 pm

Clement Middlesex, President of the Security Council:
Such data would obviously be extremely beneficial for the World Congress to have access to though you correctly note that this could be difficult. While I don't think it is overstepping the mark, as such, we are of course limited in the authority which we have to request information like whether or not a nation possesses nuclear weaponry. Nonetheless, it is certainly possible that we can begin to catalogue information about those nations which have banned such weaponry, those which claim to possess it, and those for which we have seen evidence of possession. At which point, it may become a 'filling-in-the-blanks' exercise.
User avatar
jamescfm
 
Posts: 5474
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 3:41 pm

Re: Security Council (OOC: Authorised Participants Only)

Postby Pragma » Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:20 am

Claudia Fährmann, chosen by the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs To Represent Dorvik in the Security Council:

We too would support a presentation of such data. The process of stable management of nuclear weaponry hinges on first of all curtailing excessive stockpiles and stockpiles held by those problematic nations being contained. We need to work with extremist nations which pose a threat and have nuclear stockpiles. Clearly, there is not yet a end in sight of a world without nuclear weapons, but we must take the first steps quickly. I think the most beneficial thing we could do is try to get as many nations as possible over to a 'second-use-only' protocol.
Currently playing in: Cildania

Image Vascanian Empire
User avatar
Pragma
 
Posts: 1416
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2017 2:29 pm
Location: your mother

Re: Security Council (OOC: Authorised Participants Only)

Postby stuntmonkey » Mon Jun 19, 2017 1:18 pm

Isobella Descartes, Baltusian Ambassador to World Congress:

I thank Ambassador Fährmann from Dorvik for her comments on this matter. Can I clarify the specifics of your "Second Use Protocol" idea.

By this do you mean a nation:

a) Shall never use nuclear weapons in warfare unless another nation uses them first.
b) Will only use nuclear weapons in retaliation to a nuclear, chemical or biological attack.
c) Reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in retaliation to any attack.

The problem I foresee with (a) and, in some, cases (b) is that by taking away a pre-emptive nuclear attack a nation could leave itself susceptible to chemical or biological attack or to a vastly superior conventional force. This fear could precipitate a growth in chemical or biological weaponry or nations vastly expanding their armed forces to counter nuclear threats from rogue or non-compliant states.

Therefore, I would see (c) as the first-step option if we went down this route, which is most likely to be accepted by countries if it is presented to them as an international treaty. I know it is only a small step but one in the right direction.

“I venture to suggest that patriotism is not a short and frenzied outburst of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime.”

― AES II

Current party - Haruzuterēchisuku Refonpātī
stuntmonkey
 
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 1:37 pm

Re: Security Council (OOC: Authorised Participants Only)

Postby Pragma » Mon Jun 19, 2017 1:26 pm

Claudia Fährmann responds:

Yes, sorry for being a bit vague. We would say that this should be the bare minimum, and the standard for all nations. It is important to keep Nuclear weapons as a 're-active weapon' only and not an 'active weapon'. We understand your concerns about the other two options, although in some circumstances perhaps (b) would be better, depending on the geo-political situation for that nation.
Currently playing in: Cildania

Image Vascanian Empire
User avatar
Pragma
 
Posts: 1416
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2017 2:29 pm
Location: your mother

Next

Return to Sessions Archive

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest