56th 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

Re: 56th Security Council Session

Postby Drax » Thu Jun 10, 2021 7:08 pm

Representative Ignac Stepanek, Velke Rise Deltarska

We may well vote for this proposal as an improvement over current situation which is SC Resolution 97 authorizing only Hutori, Yingdala, Dorvik and Vanaku to develop, store and otherways possess nuclear weapons as modified by SC Resolution 112 eliminating Vanaku.

There are at least two other things would like to discuss including which I will introduce - delivery platforms and degradation. We would also ask that Article III be examined to see if that is really list we want.
Neue Dundorfische Zentrumspartei (NDZP), Dundorf, Active
Deltarianska Narodna Strana (DNS), Deltaria, Active
Dedicated to the proposition.
User avatar
Drax
 
Posts: 1938
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2020 8:51 pm
Location: Alabama, USA

Re: 56th Security Council Session

Postby Liukupukki » Thu Jun 10, 2021 11:06 pm

Khan Fanggon Hala-i Banai, Bianjien Representative and President of the Security Council:
Order, please.
I must ask the Luthorian and Rowiet representatives to not steer off-topic, the discussion is on the nuclear stockpile limits. You may bring up other issues once we have come to a conclusion on this topic.
Your friendly neighborhood Lube bottle. Contact me on discord rather than on forums. > Liukupukki#2896
User avatar
Liukupukki
 
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 6:57 pm
Location: Finland

Re: 56th Security Council Session

Postby Liukupukki » Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:09 pm

Khan Fanggon Hala-i Banai, Bianjien Representative and President of the Security Council:
If the representatives have any further comments on the matter, please say them now. If not, could the Rowiet representative draft a revised version of the resolution proposed?
Your friendly neighborhood Lube bottle. Contact me on discord rather than on forums. > Liukupukki#2896
User avatar
Liukupukki
 
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 6:57 pm
Location: Finland

Re: 56th Security Council Session

Postby Drax » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:22 pm

Representative Ignac Stepanek, Velke Rise Deltarska

We do recognize this proposed resolution is much better than Resolution 97 as modified by Resolution 112 and so may vote for it but really believes some additional important matters could be addressed.

Unlike the penchant of Terran nations to sink each others ships, we have to date behaved quite well about responsible use of nuclear weapons. So what are the dangers? First, nuclear weapons mounted on delivery platforms will statistically eventually find some bozo stupid or insane enough to fire it. So the nuclear war danger is primarily mounted warheads ready for delivery. What I would propose is that no more than three nuclear warheads be actually mounted and those be for testing. Others may be stored. We like the suggested 30 total safely stored but are not wedded to it.

Second, there is environmental hazard. Once a nuclear warhead is produced it is an environmental hazard. Eventually it will degrade. We really think accounting for the degraded weapons that have already been produced is important. To date to our knowledge only two nations have done this. We think transparent accountability for handling degradation is necessary.

Third, while we have no real objection to the list of nuclear nations, we do have four comments. Again we are not necessarily opposed to this list. Second, it probably is no worse than the list used to make the list for Resolution 97. Third, Deltaria actually prefers no nations be allowed nuclear weapons. None. Fourth, our intelligence on nuclear weapons does not square with this list.

It is possible we could compare intelligence but this could take some time. Another solution would be go for transparency requiring both disclosure and inspections. Let any nation try but limit mounting for use to three and storage to thirty. But no one allowed undisclosed and uninspected production storage, delivery platform mounting, testing or use. We would have no problem with megaton limits but those nuclear powers actually storing warheads might.

Again, we do recognize this proposal on the floor as an improvement.
Neue Dundorfische Zentrumspartei (NDZP), Dundorf, Active
Deltarianska Narodna Strana (DNS), Deltaria, Active
Dedicated to the proposition.
User avatar
Drax
 
Posts: 1938
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2020 8:51 pm
Location: Alabama, USA

Re: 56th Security Council Session

Postby neoliberalbad » Fri Jun 11, 2021 8:41 pm

Jeon In-Seon, Representative of the 로동위원회 공산주의 공화국 연방 to the World Congress

In this case, perhaps a global prohibition of nuclear weapons is in order? However, nuclear weapons are valuable deterrents against war and foreign intervention. We need to weigh their merits before calling for a unilateral removal and ban.

Should we proceed to go with the current stockpile cap, we would duly accept the Deltarian representative's main suggestions - these primarily being a mounting cap of 3 and a stockpile cap of 30.
neoliberalbad
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2020 8:36 pm

Re: 56th Security Council Session

Postby Liukupukki » Sun Jun 13, 2021 2:22 am

Khan Fanggon Hala-i Banai, Bianjien Representative and President of the Security Council:

Total prohibition, although helpful in the eyes of global peace and while it would be perhaps best from the standpoint of human lives, a total prohibition would be out of the question. Nations would only do nuclear programs in secret, and when they are disallowed, those who regardless decide to adopt a program would be not limited to a world-congress decided cap. And another issue would be raised by this, what if a nation would successfully develop a nuclear program with a total prohibition in place? There would be no nations to match their strength, and there would be the risk of nuclear warfare being born, rather than nuclear weaponry only being used as a deterrent of war. That being said, I personally thing that a total prohibition never should happen, even if it would be beneficial to Terra.

As no further comments seemed to arise, I would like to ask representative Jeon In-Seon to draft another proposal for the proposed treaty, which takes into account the problems and suggestion of the Security Council representatives.
Your friendly neighborhood Lube bottle. Contact me on discord rather than on forums. > Liukupukki#2896
User avatar
Liukupukki
 
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 6:57 pm
Location: Finland

Re: 56th Security Council Session

Postby neoliberalbad » Sun Jun 13, 2021 3:36 am

Jeon In-Seon, Representative of the 로동위원회 공산주의 공화국 연방 to the World Congress

Comrades, we believe the recent secession of Gao-Soto is more urgent for the time being. The revised VI points will be reintroduced at a later date, but for now let us consider how to react to Gao-Soto's leaving.
neoliberalbad
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2020 8:36 pm

Re: 56th Security Council Session

Postby Liukupukki » Sun Jun 13, 2021 3:42 am

Khan Fanggon Hala-i Banai, Bianjien Representative and President of the Security Council:

This issue is indeed a more urgent matter than the stockpile limit, and we should tackle the issue as soon as possible.

The current topic is the Resignation of the World Congress of Gao-Soto, and the Security Council representatives shall give their insight on the topic and possible actions.
Your friendly neighborhood Lube bottle. Contact me on discord rather than on forums. > Liukupukki#2896
User avatar
Liukupukki
 
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 6:57 pm
Location: Finland

Re: 56th Security Council Session

Postby Drax » Sun Jun 13, 2021 4:01 am

Representative Havel Slavik, Velke Rise Deltarska

We are not sure the departure of the Empire of Gao Soto is more important than whether we can more adequately address nuclear weapons use, but we certainly agree it is time to address what to do about Resolution 3.

Hulstria and Gao Soto leaves the World Congress because The Security Council dares to call slavery what it is. We do not see how that is a reason not to do proceed as Resolution 3 calls upon us to do. Call for the civilized to sever all relations diplomatic and economic.

Hulstria and Gao Soto did not use the second chance offered by the Security Council to repeal the offending laws, answer the questions of the committee, allow the committee access to see how the law and practice actually worked or offer any mitigating circumstances to consider.

As indicated, we believe Resolution 3 tells us precisely what to do.
Neue Dundorfische Zentrumspartei (NDZP), Dundorf, Active
Deltarianska Narodna Strana (DNS), Deltaria, Active
Dedicated to the proposition.
User avatar
Drax
 
Posts: 1938
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2020 8:51 pm
Location: Alabama, USA

Re: 56th Security Council Session

Postby Drax » Sun Jun 13, 2021 4:14 pm

Representative Havel Slavik, Velke Rise Deltarska

Sorry to return to the nuclear weapons limitation issue; however, believe drafting a resolution should include whether it repeals, amends or replaces Resolution 97 and Resolution 112.
Neue Dundorfische Zentrumspartei (NDZP), Dundorf, Active
Deltarianska Narodna Strana (DNS), Deltaria, Active
Dedicated to the proposition.
User avatar
Drax
 
Posts: 1938
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2020 8:51 pm
Location: Alabama, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Sessions Archive

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests