10th General Assembly Session

[Arapaima13]

Xiptibagħl Lawan, Representative of Cildania

I am afraid to say that military action has been discussed. The Revolution Rouge of Lourenne said, and I quote: "We should support a revolution in Beitenyu... I say that all members of the GA-URSR that holds a paramilitary wing should send what troops they can spare to the Beitenyu revolution." Now regardless of whether this is the official position of the organisation or not, military action has been discussed and promoted by members of the organisation.

For this reason we would urge the General Secretariat to categorically put down any suggestions that military intervention will happen. This will undoubtedly be a good image for the URSR, and would show that it cares about peace and stability, especially within Majatra.

Again though, the URSR makes things up. There are no reports of imprisonment within Beiteynu, and to suggest so would be lying. Further to that, when the RWPB formed it paraded its 2000 strong militia (http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=52&start=330#p119932). This would undoubtedly would make the government worried about safety. For that reason, I think measures taken out by the Beitenyu government are not undemocratic. You disagree with their ideology - fine - but please don't twist the truth.

Finally, in regards to your claim that they are fascist, we believe this not to be true. We would agree they are religious fundamentalists, but fascist would be the wrong term. Some may argue that linking religion with fascism could be seen as discriminatory. Whilst we are sure that the URSR have no intent to do such a thing, I would point out that they should just be careful about the terminology they use, and not just fling round terms such as fascism.

[matthewleitch]

Gareth Yates, Baltusian Ambassador to the General Assembly:

General Assembly,

I am Gareth Yates, the new Baltusian Ambassador to the General Assembly. Regrettably, our nation has not be involved in diplomacy and discussion on the world stage recently, despite being a member of the Security Council in the past.

We are open and ready to begin addressing the important international issues once again, and would therefore request that I am informed about the recent events occurring across the Terra by another representative in order to begin assisting in international diplomacy.

Thank you.

OOC: We haven't had an ambassador for ages, I was away for a while and just wonder if someone could bring me up to speed? Thanks.

[Arapaima13]

Xiptibagħl Lawan, Representative of Cildania

May I take this opportunity to welcome Mr Yates, the new Baltusian Ambassador. In regards to current affairs, the World Congress is still stabilising from the nine-year Badaran Civil War. There is also an ongoing dispute over national sovereignty, and the role the Security Council plays regarding the extent of its power, though that has died down due to the absence of the representatives from Dorvik and Rildanor.

Current discussion is focused around Beiteynu and the URSR (Union of Revolutionary Socialist Republics - formed by the former communist government of Badara during the civil war), and possible military action being taken by the URSR. Currently the opposition party is part of the URSR and requested aid from its fellow members in order to overturn the democratically-elected government. Mind they themselves did not call for military intervention, only other members of the organisation. I would urge the Ambassador to read up about the URSR here, http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=7495, though I am sure he has done so already.

I hope this is an adequate fill in. I am sure other delegates will fill anything else that I may have missed, or may have been slightly biased.

[Govenor12]

Just to get everyone a cureent picture. The government of Beiteynu has demanded that the militia has to dissolve in accordance with the law which does not allow paramilitary troops. The socialist split group has denied that they have a militia and we now have referred this matter to the district court which soon will give a ruling on that matter and then both sides may appeal against it.

Should the RWPB have threatened with trying to overthrow this government, we will take actions depending on the ruling of the court and as in every government we would execute this ruling consequently. And let us just end by saying that in any civilized state there is no place for a militia because the rule of the law is executed by the government and courts.

Government of Beiteynu

[RedReaper]

The Secretariat of the GA-URSR;

We understand the reasoning behind the Cildanian representative's suggestion that the Secretariat state that military intervention will not happen. However, we are not going to lie to the WC about our intentions, or undermine the democratic principles of the Constitution of the URSR by giving our personal opinions on the matter. The Secretariat is impartial to debates within the GA-URSR and stating that we will or will not do something before debate has even ended or a proposal has been put forward would be disingenuous in the extreme. Ultimately the Secretariat is the messager of the URSR, not its leader. We do not make decisions, the General Assembly as a whole does. And the General Assembly is still currently undecided on the matter.

As for the validity of the Revolutionary Workers Party Of Beitenyu's grievances, that is also not the Secretariat's job to determine. Rather we will collectively decide if their grievances are valid by the actions that we take to meet their request.

And finally, concerning our labelling of the Democratic Yeudish Party as Fascist, the definitions vary immensely between different people and ideologies and hence the confusion is understandable. We however must firmly state the labelling of the DYP as Fascists is in no way intended to discriminate against the Yeudish religion or it's followers, and we strongly condemn any other parties that wish to conflate the policies of the party with the religion as a whole.

[Govenor12]

"As for the validity of the Revolutionary Workers Party Of Beitenyu's grievences, that is also not the Secretariat's job to determine. Rather we will collectively decide if their grievences are valid by the actions that we take to meet their request."

Let us just clarifie one thing: Your orgnization is nothing. You are not a legal body, your are not speaking for anyone. That is the legal position. We will therefore bring in a law stating that any connection with your organization is to be seen as treason.
The DYP has delt with many problems and we transformed our country. Be assured your organization is not the strongest enemy.
And finally a facist party is a middle of the road party seen out of the mind of a left-wing party.

Government of Beiteynu

[RedReaper]

The Secretariat of the GA-URSR;

The URSR currently contains three states within it, Badara, Lourenne and Jelbania, and has 11 parties in Agreement situated across the globe. To declare us as a non entity is simply to deny reality. As for the law, we were referring to the laws of the URSR determined by the Constitution of the URSR which has been signed and ratified by three sovereogn states. The Secretariat represents the URSR at its current capacity. The fact you state we don't exist and have no power while simultaneously gathering allies to defend yourself against us is incredibly hypocritical.
As for the Fascist comment, to declare fascists as the centre of politics is incomprehensible, even if the left right spectrum is itself up to interpretation. Historically Fascism have always been regarded by its supporters and its critics as Far-Right. I can only see the Fascists being the 'centre of politics' idea being feasible if you regard the left as the state and the right as business, but that's certainly not the distinctions that the left-right divide have traditionally been about; the divide between socialism (which contains social anarchists) and capitalism (which contains pro capitalist Statists).

[stuntmonkey]

Anton Clausewitz, Chief Plenipotentiary of the Imperial Crown Lands of Hulstria:

We welcome the decision by the government in Beiteynu to outlaw organisations and individuals associated with the URSR and will be looking at similar legislation as part of our plans to clamp down on communism in Hulstria.

It seems to me that the URSR is nothing more than a pan-wide militia with a so-called democratic mouthpiece and, as such, should be banned from any country that does not allow paramilitaries to exist.

We would ask the World Congress to warn off any violent revolutionary aggression by this organisation but as the Security Council seems broken at the moment it seems a pointless exercise. Are there any Security Council members able to assist member nations? Or should we take action into our own hands to prevent what many of us see as an existential thereat to our way of life?

[Arapaima13]

Xiptibagħl Lawan, Representative of Cildania

The Secretariat's interpretation of the political spectrum is both linear and narrow-minded. It forces upon us an attitude of us and them, and does not explore to a great depth, the variations within individual ideas, thoughts, and philosophies. This in itself is a microcosm of the Left's urge to gather thoughts and people and categorise them. This forms a very segregated community, and one that is neither beneficial for the whole group, nor the individuals within the group.

Let's take the blinding differences between my party and the Democratic Yeudish Party. Now, by your definition, we are both right wing. Probably, by your definition we are both extremely right wing. And yet despite this, the DYP supports regulations that we do not, and we support social liberties that they do not. In other words, we disagree on both the economy and social matters. So why therefore, do you group us into one idea.

Now, let us take a demonstration from the Left - though this granted is harder to do. Let us take communists and libertarian socialists. Economically, more moderate libertarian socialists may agree to privatisation, so long as the poor are provided for by the government. Further to that, they disagree with regulation. On a social level, they are for choice and small government to as large an extent as possible. On the contrary, communism is oppressive and regulative. They support only state owned industries, and operate a large state to monitor the lives of people (whether you believe this to be beneficial or not is regardless).

So, both these examples have highlighted that ideologies perhaps categorised on the same side of the spectrum, are actually not similar at all. In fact, General Secretariat, I would go as far as saying that your own ideology is more similar to that of the DYP than mine is. Meanwhile, I would argue that mine may be more compatible with a libertarian socialist than a "fascist" party.

Fascism itself does lie in the middle of the road. I would argue that it has a slight right-bent, due to its support of big businesses, yet it does not idolise the growth of the economy. It supports a form of trade unionism - through a State controlled organisation (something I would have though communists would quite like). However, I reject again the fact that the DYP is fascist at all.

Undoubtedly, the DYP is authoritarian. However, this does not make them fascist. Conservatives or traditionalists would be a more accurate term for them. You could even describe them as left-leaning statists. Of course, when you describe them fascists, you disregard the religious aspect of their nation and party. Fascism is an ideology that dislikes religion. Therefore, a more in depth look at the matter needs to be conducted.

Of course, one size most certainly does not fit all. The political centre, if you will, fluctuates in accordance to the country, conditions, and people. Ideologies evolve and shape other ideologies. Again this brings up the point that splitting policies into two distinct groups is wrong. The point of religion in particular does, granted, make the DYP incredibly difficult to pinpoint, however I would warn the Secretariat to be vigilant before making such sweeping, and frankly incorrect comments in the future.

[Arapaima13]

Xiptibagħl Lawan, Representative of Cildania

To General Plenipotentiary Clausewitz, I would advise against clamping down on communism as such. We must always permit freedom of thought and speech, and to ban an entire ideology would be nonsensical, and indeed financially inviolable. However, we would agree with controlling a dangerous, and terrorist-esc URSR organisation. Their pro-conflict stance is a threat towards free-thinking, and democratic nations in Terra, though I feel we should do our best to attempt to negotiate their disarmament first.

To the Secretariat, I understand that you are just a spokesperson, but undoubtedly you are a spokesperson who holds much regard and influence within your organisation. Should you express your distaste for the idea of military conflict, I feel it would sway other members of the URSR to come around. I understand your urge to remain bipartisan, however surely global peace is a price worth paying for breaking this neutrality?