56th Security Council Session

[Drax]

Representative Ignac Stepanek, Velke Rise Deltarska

We concur with Jeon In-Seon, Representative of the 로동위원회 공산주의 공화국 연방 to the World Congress. We believe this is a sensible way to proceed.

Do you think this action taken here is sufficient notice to the government of Hulstria and Gao Soto or should written notice be sent from the Security Council?

[Liukupukki]

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

To answer representative Ignac Stepanek, to make sure they will get the required message, we should make them a written notice.

Before continuing from this issue, I'd like to put the motion to vote

[Liukupukki]

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

Now that the motion is in voting, I'd like to give representative Jeon In-Seon the opportunity to present his issue concerning nuclear stockpile limits

[neoliberalbad]

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

I believe I speak for all the peoples of Terra when I say that war is the most criminal, barbaric, and horrific institution to ever be waged by man on man. It turns his creative genius, his highest powers, against his fellow living, breathing human beings. No matter how righteous the cause or call to battle, war has still leveled villages to the ground, made orphans of happy families, and made humans pay the ultimate price - their lives.

Nuclear weapons are powerful deterrents against the tides of war. They guarantee the right of every state to exist, and safeguard against incursions of imperialism.

At the same time, I believe I speak for humanity when I also say that nuclear weapons ought to be regulated and controlled in a safe, transparent, and accountable manner. I understand that nuclear programs are often an incredibly sensitive topic, for one reason or another. Our nuclear program itself was kept secret, out of fear that the nations of the world would react despicably and attempt possible regime change. We want to ensure a world where sovereign nations can pursue similar programs undeterred, and where nuclear powers may freely hold each other accountable.

Currently, along with the UCCR, Yingdala, Vanuku, Hutori, and Trigunia are confirmed to possess active nuclear stockpiles. To ensure international peace and co-operation, the UCCR firmly believes all existing nuclear states should work together to pursue a coherent policy of peace and accountability at all times. There can be no double-dealing or disparities on topics this serious.

This is why we have thus prepared the 6 points of our nuclear cap proposal.

I - All nuclear-armed nations shall keep a stock of no more than 30 warheads. These warheads can be varied and primarily of the nation's choosing, but none shall have a yield of more than 5 Megatons.

II - All stocks shall be inspected by WC authorities on a bi-annual checkup. World Congress authorities reserve the right to inspect any nuclear facilities at any given time. However, all information to be seen shall be strictly confidential to guarantee the nation's right to maintain an independent nuclear program. The only acceptable time for information to be leaked is if it is observed that the nation of interest has violated the warhead cap.

III - All nations in the future must apply to the Security Council if they wish to develop a nuclear program. The SC must vote against or for program development for valid and pertinent reasons, rather than for geopolitical favoritism or bias. This permit may only be overturned by the SC after an 8 year mandate, and a program denial may be overturned by majority vote in the General Assembly, with a quorum of 7 nations.

IV - All future and current Nuclear development programs shall be conducted under World Congress supervision, and a regulatory agency shall be set up in all continents to help regulate development and stockpiles.

V - The World Congress may revoke a nation's right to own nuclear weapons if they are deemed a threat to word peace. Such a motion requires approval from both the General Assembly and Security Council.

VI - Violation of these terms shall incur sanctions to be decided by the General Assembly.

We request the Security Council consider our proposals, for a nationally independent - but peaceful and accountable future for all Terra.

[Liukupukki]

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

Bianjie would happily support this proposal, however, in sections III, V and VI, voting and sanctions should be left to the elected Security Council, rather than leave it up to the General Assembly, which is in no way elected. The General Assembly is for bringing up discussions, and may I remind you, is not authorized to vote on matters, only to bring up important issues to the Security Council.

[neoliberalbad]

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

We will keep this in mind.

[Edmund]

Mr. Richard Asterton, Luthorian permanent representative to the World Congress:

I am officially announcing Luthori's intention to pursue a nuclear programme, which we are already in the early stages of, to the Security Council. This has been planned for quite a few years now, but recent events in this chamber mean we can leave it no longer.

Representative Jeon speaks of wanting to "ensure a world where sovereign nations can pursue similar programs undeterred", yet demands that these sovereign nations kowtow before the Security Council and beg the right to do so, lest they face undefined sanctions. Having climbed up the ladder into the clubhouse, Dranland now wishes to lift it up; no matter, some of us will still climb in through the window instead, regardless of the consequences.

[neoliberalbad]

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

We have no objection at the present moment to the Luthorian development of nuclear weapons, only on the condition that they be supervised to avoid the development of a bomb with a yield larger than 5 megatons. Furthermore, we understand that our proposed points would only have the Security Council prohibit programs if significant threat to world peace and chances of nuclear war were speculated to increase following said nation's obtainment of nuclear arms. "Undeterred" means that a nation should not fear having to ask for approval, and should risk nor incur no penalty for announcing it's intents to do so. Previously, if any nation announced that it wanted these weapons, there was a chance a whole flurry of sanctions would be thrust upon it. The proposals aim to end sporadic and often chaotic geopolitical shenanigans that ensue after a nation's announced their intent, and to not cow any nations that wish to have a program of their own. On the subject of the representative's concerns that sanctions are unspecified, there's a reason behind it - it allows the SC to determine the level of threat posed by a violating party and to act accordingly. Certain offenses and stages are worthy of greater punishment than others, one size does not fit all. Returning to the topic of sovereignty, we understand that there's a thin line between overreach and execution of powers, but on such a high-profile topic, no compromises can be made. One nuclear arm is enough to wipe out an entire city of people. Take that in for a moment. Everyone you know in one city, murdered in
a matter of seconds. The parks, schools - all leveled to the ground. How can one argue that the production and storing of these weapons should not be regulated?. Political principles should not take precedent over humanitarian concern. If the representative is so concerned about sovereignty, why join the Congress at all? Surely, a proud government that values total national sovereignty would not partake on this council - one of the organs responsible for passage of internationally binding resolutions and actions. This is a contradiction.

The proposals are not an evil commie plot launched to take away freedoms, they're a way to ensure that nations can responsibly develop and maintain nuclear weapons, minimizing the chances of Armageddon. On the accusations of perceived double-dealing, had a similar policy been in place before we chose to pursue a program, we would've undoubtable applied before this body even if we were not a member. If we truly were that obsessed with keeping ourselves in "the nuclear club", as the Luthorian representative asserted, we would've accelerated the growth of our program and have never thought to propose regulations, only developing a greater stockpile further. We have clearly not done this, and have actually prematurely reduced our stock to just 25 weapons, so that even if this motion fails, it remains a precedent. The reason we push for accountable measures on these sorts of things is that they have tremendous potential to go haywire, and leaving everyone to their own devices would risk possibility of possible human extinction. To make this topic, one with the real potential to wipe out millions of human beings if used incorrectly and to destroy Terra multiple times over, a petty game about geopolitics and insulting the integrity of our government for the Luthorian government's (and presumably the Ord's) cheap gain is inappropriate, and we'll leave it at that.

This is a digression, but I am ethnically Kyo, and the term "Dranland" typically refers to the Draddwyr-dominated regions of Lwybr Hawl and Talaith Rhynach. The Luthorian representative may use the term, but I think he should know that it sounds quite foreign and unnatural to the ears of native speakers and our nationals when addressed to people of our type.

[Edmund]

Mr. Richard Asterton, Luthorian permanent representative to the World Congress:

Mr. Jeon, your grandstanding is unnecessary and transparent. You should certainly not try to pretend as though this is in fact helpful to governments seeking to protect their countries, as though it would stop 'sporadic and often chaotic geopolitical shenanigans'. You can talk about how votes 'must' be made for "valid and pertinent reasons, rather than for geopolitical favoritism or bias", but I am fairly sure you and your government do not actually believe that is the way the world works; you may be communists, but you have survived this long.

Do not lecture me about how Luthori should leave the World Congress if it believes in sovereignty. If you have these humanitarian concerns, why allow nuclear weapons to exist at all? 'No compromises can be made', and yet you are already making compromises. But that, like your complaint about me using the Luthorian name for Dranland instead of - what? - a communist or Kyo nationalist invention, is besides the point.

Everything you do is a geopolitical game. I do not begrudge you for it; it is merely the way things work, and you are hardly alone in playing at it.

[neoliberalbad]

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

Before I respond I would like to note that I don't actually have much control over the positions of the International Affairs department, which is determined by the Council instead. I merely represent the Rowiet government and it's positions. Anyhow, on with the response.

We would actually voluntarily dismantle our nuclear program, but were afraid that no-one else would and that the move would mean nothing internationally. If the security council and nuclear nations are mostly on board with it, that's actually the best solution. We could draft points for consideration, and then - providing SC approval - dismantle all stockpiles in all nations. However, we understand that these weapons may be integral to the maintaining of national independence, so we would get it if no other government is willing to go so far. As was said earlier, nukes can also provide a key deterrent against war in the first place, our main reason for all previous motions regarding nuclear weapons. Some would argue that a small amount are better than none.

I must admit, and I apologize, my Luthorian is still quite poor, that I did not understand some of the Luthorian representative's comments surrounding the presence of Communism on our peninsula. It was mentioned multiple times, but I couldn't tell if it was merely descriptive or meant to convey a greater message. If it attempted to do so, I would request that the Luthorian representative clarify their statements to make it a bit more clear to our delegation, which remains quite confused on as to why our political system in particular was mentioned.

On the subject of Dranland, it's still fine if a bit weird and culturally inappropriate for you to use the name. But it's rather hurtful and disrespectful to see a foreigner be told of our cultural customs and traditions, and for them to actively ignore them. For instance, it would be perfectly acceptable to call my fellow delegate, Mr. Badders, Dranish, and to use Dranland because he is of Draddwyr descent. (If it's better for this Council, we could switch places to avoid more naming confusion.) One would call our Chairman, Comrade Hernandez, Dranian, and use the term Drania because he is of Draniano descent. We apologize if it seems strange to those who don't speak Kyo, Draddwyr, or Draniano, but these things are common in our languages and society, and it can be jarring to hear otherwise. It is fully excusable by persons who aren't aware, but it's insulting for foreigners to be told of these customs and then to insist on continuing the ignorant ways.