44th Security Council Session

[Aethan]

Milena Di Placido, temporary Istalian Ambassador

Dear colleagues, I'm here to represent the nation of Istalia. However, my presence here is only temporary as elections were called recently and new majorities have arisen. For this reason, the Istalian delegation cannot still totally fulfill its duties

[jamescfm]

Mr. Kis Vilmos, General-Secretary of the World Congress:

The World Congress welcomes the arrival of the temporary Istalian Ambassador and notes that all permanent and non-permanent members have now presented their representatives. At this time, the Security Council has still not appointed a President for this term. In the short run, I will continue to chair discussions and allow national representatives to drive the discussion.

[jamescfm]

Ms. Wardiyya al-Darwish, Jakanian Permanent Representative to the World Congress:

The Jakanian delegation would like to make a direct plea to our Hutorian and Istalian counterparts. Both of your countries share warm relations with our nation and we believe that this is the moment at which you can demonstrate your commitment to our shared values. Resolution 88 represents a new achievement for this institution. Not only does it make clear that international peace and security are desirable, it provides a framework for pursuing and achieving these objectives that has been shown to work.

The international order should be based on the principle of state sovereignty. Any other system will inevitably become a "survival of the fittest" situation in which powerful countries are able to impose their will on weaker nations, something that we know that Istalia in particular stands in opposition to. The Jakanian people have never forgotten how our southern Majatran ally came to our aid in our great hour of need when Deltarian imperialism once again raised its ugly head on our continent.

Hutori and Istalia have a clear choice in regards to Resolution 90. Either they can vote in favour and empower the troika of imperialists in Kazulia, Dorvik and Lourenne to wage unopposed war in the developing world or they can stand firmly on the side of sovereignty, justice and equality by vetoing the Resolution. The rest of the world will be watching closely.

[colonelvesica]

Jennifer Morrison
Hutorian Ambassador the World Congress

Greetings Honoured Delegates

After significant debate amongst the Hutorian Parliament I have been confirmed as the new Ambassador to the World Congress on behalf of Her Imperial Majesty Queen Sarah VI's Government and the Commonwealth of Hutori. I have been well briefed on Resolution 90, and the Hutorian Vote will be coming shortly. It will also be an honour to work with these fellow delegates in making Terra a more secure and prosperous place.

[Wu Han]

Her Royal Highness, Ratanaporn, Princess of Hanzen, Sister of His Royal Majesty the King, Hanzenese Permanent Representative to the World Congress:

On behalf of His Royal Majesty's government, the Hanzenese delegation wishes to convey our deepest gratitude to the representatives from Hutori. Specifically, we are profoundly appreciative of the pragmatic, balanced decisions reached by the Hutorian delegation with regard to their votes on Resolutions 89 and 90.

Our honoured colleagues have demonstrated through action, not words, their commitment to diplomacy. Moreover, the Hutorian delegation has proven that within the community of military superpowers there exists the opportunity for a foreign policy predicated on mutual understanding within the community of nations.

Ambassador Morrison, allow me to welcome you to this august chamber, and express my sincere thanks personally as well as on behalf of the Kingdom.

[jamescfm]

Ms. Wardiyya al-Darwish, Jakanian Permanent Representative to the World Congress:

As expressed in the General Assembly, the Jakanian delegation is grateful to Hutori for making the right decision and vetoing the Resolution. The rest of the world, particularly developing economies, will not forgot Hutori's decision to stand up for the sovereignty of all nations nor the decision by the other permanent members not to do so, for that matter.

Following up on the previous discussions in this chamber, it is pleasing to see that attempts to resolved the Lodamese conflict are being pushed by Yingdala and others. All parties to the conflict should be willing to come to the table to bring an end to hostilities.

With that said we note the decision by the Malivian government to permit the sale of arms to militant organisations in Zardugal. Although this may not be as destabilising as the active funding and support for these terrorists by Likatonia, it is still likely to disrupt the opportunity for peace in the region. As the elected Majatran representative in this institution, we utterly condemn the continued efforts by foreign powers to bring conflict and violence to our continent.

Aside from this we would be interested to return to the subject of preventing monetary support for terrorist organisations as initially raised by the Kazulian delegation. As a starting point, we would like to reiterate our concerns about Resolution 89 over the ambiguity it creates over what should constitute a terrorist organisation. Another potential issue is the broad nature of the phrasing around funds that are to be used to "in order to carry out terrorist and/or criminal acts". Jakania is distinctly aware that criminality is not always an impartial measure and we would be concerned that such measures might be used to punish those fighting against regimes that are involved heinous acts of genocide or other crimes against humanity.

In general we would like to hear from other Security Council members and would also recommend that the Kazulian delegation seek feedback on their proposal in the General Assembly too.

[Maxington]

Mr. Zakarias Westermarck, Kazulian Ambassador to the World Congress

For the intentions of combating money laundering and terrorist financing, the Kingdom of Kazulia proposes the following resolution as an initial draft

The Security Council

Reaffirming: that terrorism in all shapes and figures constitutes one of the greatest threats to international peace and security and that any acts of terrorism are criminal and unjustifiable regardless of their motivations, whenever, wherever and by whomsoever committed.

Noting: with grave concern that organised criminal elements and terrorist groups raise funds through a variety of means, which include but are not limited to abuse of legitimate commercial enterprise, exploitation of natural resources, abuse of non-profit organizations, donations, crowdfunding and proceeds of criminal activity, including but not limited to: kidnapping for ransom, extortion, the illicit trade and trafficking in cultural property, trafficking in persons, including for the purpose of sexual exploitation, drug trafficking and the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons

Recognizing: that innovations in financial technologies, products and services may offer significant economic opportunities but also present a risk of being misused, including for terrorist financing.

Reminding: all States of their obligation to ensure that any person who participates in the financing, planning, preparation or perpetration of terrorist acts or in supporting terrorist acts is brought to justice and ensure that, in add ition to any other measures against them, such terrorist acts are established as serious criminal offences in domestic laws and regulations and that the punishment duly reflects the seriousness of such terrorist acts.

Does hereby moves to implement measures in support and maintenance of international peace and security through the pathways of mutual cooperation and understanding.

The Security Council issues the following mandate,

- that the facilitation of financing of terrorist and organised criminal elements in any capacity, through any entity might they be individual or stately, direct or indirect, is prohibited and can carry punishments ranging from condemnation to economic sanctions, based on the analysis of the security council.

- that states criminalize the wilful provision or collection, by any means, directly or indirectly, of funds by their nationals or in their territories with the intention that the funds should be used, or in the knowledge that they are to be used, in order to carry out terrorist and/or criminal acts.

- that states freeze without delay funds and other financial assets or economic resources of persons who commit, or attempt to commit, terrorist and/or criminal acts or participate in or facilitate the commission of terrorist and/or criminal acts; of entities owned or controlled directly or indirectly by such persons; and of persons and entities acting on behalf of, or at the direction of such persons and entities, including funds derived or generated from property owned or controlled directly or indirectly by such persons and associated persons and entities.

- that the World Congress establish the World Congress Financial Action Office (WCFAO) which shall exist with the intention of (i) investigating instances of terrorist financing and money-laundering (ii) have the power to recommend to the Security Council, provisions aimed at combating terrorist financing and money-laundering (iii) establish standards which shall judge whether a nation is compliant with anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing procedures (subject to the approval of the Security Council and the General Assembly) and (iv) assist national governments in ensuring that their respective nations have met pre-existing standards to be recognised as being compliant.

- that nations exchange information in accordance with international and domestic law and cooperate on administrative and judicial matters to prevent the commission of terrorist financing and money-laundering through the World Congress Financial Action Office.

[Wu Han]

Her Royal Highness, Ratanaporn, Princess of Hanzen, Sister of His Royal Majesty the King, Hanzenese Permanent Representative to the World Congress:

Like a mutt whose tail is tucked between its legs, the Kazulian delegation has been forced to participate in international relations, not international dictation. We thank Mr. Westermarck for submitting to this chamber the delegation's proposal, which was just rejected in a humiliating vote for our northernly colleagues.

First, what is the definition of "terrorism" used by the Security Council and the proposed resolution? Later in the proposal "criminal elements" are highlighted as another target of the resolution, which again demands clarity.

Second, we fully reject the introductory reaffirmation of the proposal which is far too expansive, and which expends far too much condemnation on the symptoms of a rotten international security system, as opposed to the system itself. What many regard to be "terrorism" is borne out of conditions which undermine international peace and security, and which are far greater than these isolated acts of brutality and violence.

Third, given the opaque and unclear definitions of the resolution, we reject the idea that the Security Council should be so emboldened to level economic sanctions against a state given a particular interpretation of this hodgepodge Kazulian proposal. Such a violent and deadly decision, like levelling economic sanctions, should only occur after a state has met a clear and universally-understood set of criteria which demonstrates that state's threat to the broader global community. In other words, how is a state determined to be assisting either "terrorism," "organized criminal elements," or both of these activities?

Thank you.

[Yolo04]

Allesandru Jisepu, Representative of the Kingdom of Keymon to the World Congress

Let me start this statement by thanking Mr. Darwish for his invitation to discuss matters that are occurring within this body.

The government of Keymon shares the opinions I am about to state, so do not see me as a representative gone rogue or as a man with an agenda. See me as a man who is following his obligations…to my King and to my government.

Resolution 88 is the intentional butchering of the Security Council’s ability to react to international incidences. Resolution 88 prevents the security council from intervening in “the affairs of other states on matters that do not concern international peace and security”. This article of Resoltuon 88 has now doomed millions of oppressed minorities to hatred, segregation, and genocide. Because of this resolution the Security Council can no longer intervene in nations that practice the acts of slavery, genocide, and/or the funding of domestic terrorism. This Security Council has been defanged, declawed and has been reduced to nothing but a joke by the Jakanian, Hanzen, Valruzian, and Hutorian delegations.

If I am not mistaken, this Security Council has, on numerous occasions, intervened in domestic situations in foreign countries with good results. And yet now, my fellow delegates want to make it nearly impossible for the Security Council to intervene in almost any conflict zone. And for what reason? Because it’s “imperialist”. Let me address this as bluntly as possible, in as fair a way as I can. This body has always been made up of an ethnically, racially, politically, and religiously diverse group. This bodied main intention is to defend global peace and stability. And when the delegate from Hanzen or the delegate from Jakania use the term “imperialist” to describe the Security Council’s attempts to combat crimes against humanity and slavery, it raises some questions. The main one being, why is Jakania, Hutori, Valruzia, and Hanzen actively attempting to neuter the Security Council’s ability to respond to global threats? I believe the answer is clear. These nations want to make the Security Council and ineffective and useless organization for their own selfish and militaristic ideals. But perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps the delegates mentioned above are just incompetent and don’t understand the goals of the Security Council.

I would now like to give a special condemnation to the Hutorian delegate, Mrs. Morrison. When it appeared as though the Security Council had come to its senses and when it looked like Resolution 88 was about to be repealed, the Hutorian delegate vetoed the proceedings so that NONE of the voices of the other nations in the Security Council would matter. Our votes don’t matter to Mrs. Morrison nor to the government she represents. Mrs. Morrison, are you sure you’re satisfied with vetoing our proceedings and throwing our votes in the trash? Are you certain you don’t want to spit in our fucking faces? Because that’s what your veto feels like to me and to the rest of the delegates who voted yes.

Ultimately, the four nations who voted no either have ulterior motives or are just incompetent on how the workings of the Security Council should be handled. I am disappointed to see this kind of ineptitude in the Security Council, but I am not surprised. This body has now become a paper tiger, who’s resolutions mean nothing anymore and now has certain members that now actively approve of genocide and of the internal oppression of individuals. Congratulations.

[Maxington]

Mr. Zakarias Westermarck, Kazulian Ambassador to the World Congress

Notwithstanding the fact that some members can't resist scoring cheap political points, we begin.

In treating with the definition of terrorism we seek to introduce an amendment as follows:
Recognising that pursuant to deliberation, terrorism shall be defined as any act(s), which may seriously damage a country or an international organisation where committed with the aim of seriously intimidating a population; or unduly compelling a Government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act; or seriously destabilising or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation

With respect to "criminal element" we seek to introduce an amendment as follows:
Replace criminal elements with criminal organisations, thus the mandate will read: that the facilitation of financing of terrorism and organised criminal organisations in any capacity

As mentioned in the resolution, maybe it might have passed the eye of the representative from Hanzen. It clearly states: establish standards which shall judge whether a nation is compliant with anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing procedures (subject to the approval of the Security Council). That in itself has been amended to state: (subject to the approval of the Security Council and the General Assembly).

You can't have specificity in international law recognising that one shoe cannot fit all. To that extent, we do not intend on defining "organised criminal organisation" because the lack of definition is intended to allow for broader applicability of the Resolution to new types of crime that emerge constantly as global, regional and local conditions change over time.