[DEFEATED] Nuclear Proliferation Accords

[United Federation of Canada]

Would you consider nuclear devices being used to propel as spacecraft to be WARHEADS? Would these be weaponized, or another form of nuclear device? There are differences.

For example: The GADGET was not a weaponized version of a nuclear device, as it was undeliverable. FATMAN was the weaponized version of that device making it a WARHEAD.

The act clearly states only WARHEADS are CONSIDERED being limited.

The gadget was still a nuclear bomb. It wasn't deliverable, therefore wasn't a deployable weapon, but it was still a weapon even if just a prototype.

Most nuclear pulse propulsion designs involve detonating nuclear bombs. Either dropped behind to detonate on a pusher plate or launched ahead to detonate on a kind of solar sail. "Warhead" is simply the term for an explosive material and detonator designed for use in a bomb, missile, etc so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up.

So if they're not considered to be weapons this entire proposal is pointless since anyone can simply say that all of the nuclear weapons they have are propulsion devices and build ten thousand nuclear bombs.

Fair enough comment Ambassador,

If we were to change it to DEPLOYABLE WEAPONS connected to a delivery system, would that be more acceptable? We could limit the number of delivery vehicles and systems very much like the SALT 2 treaty did between the US and Soviets.

[Dagguerro]

The gadget was still a nuclear bomb. It wasn't deliverable, therefore wasn't a deployable weapon, but it was still a weapon even if just a prototype.

Most nuclear pulse propulsion designs involve detonating nuclear bombs. Either dropped behind to detonate on a pusher plate or launched ahead to detonate on a kind of solar sail. "Warhead" is simply the term for an explosive material and detonator designed for use in a bomb, missile, etc so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up.

So if they're not considered to be weapons this entire proposal is pointless since anyone can simply say that all of the nuclear weapons they have are propulsion devices and build ten thousand nuclear bombs.

Fair enough comment Ambassador,

If we were to change it to DEPLOYABLE WEAPONS connected to a delivery system, would that be more acceptable? We could limit the number of delivery vehicles and systems very much like the SALT 2 treaty did between the US and Soviets.

That would probably be more viable. Although I still have no idea how to work the numbers on this thing.

[United Federation of Canada]

Fair enough comment Ambassador,

If we were to change it to DEPLOYABLE WEAPONS connected to a delivery system, would that be more acceptable? We could limit the number of delivery vehicles and systems very much like the SALT 2 treaty did between the US and Soviets.

That would probably be more viable. Although I still have no idea how to work the numbers on this thing.

Lets say 2% GDP on Delivery Vehicles and weaponization of nuclear devices. Would that be a start?

[Senkaku]

Well, if some states use, say, cruise missiles, and then just tweak them a bit and stuff an H-bomb into them, then no.

[United Federation of Canada]

Well, if some states use, say, cruise missiles, and then just tweak them a bit and stuff an H-bomb into them, then no.

But... then that cruise missile would become a delivery vehicle and would be limited under the convention. This could actually work as it would FORCE nations to actually make a decision on what level of a deterrent they want to keep under limitations.

Do you keep only tactical weapons, or do you keep a strategic deterrent? That would then be the question.

[Alqania]

"So if an economic recession causes a nation's GDP to decline a bit, the nation may be forced to get rid of a few nuclear warheads and later when the economy gets back on track then their limit increases?" Princess Christine asked in a tone of childish curiosity mixed with sarcastic scepticism. "And why exactly would anyone think that that makes any sense? Sorry, the Queendom remains generally sceptical towards arbitrary numbers and making a limit for nuclear weaponry relative to the member state's economy seems entirely arbitrary and rather inappropriate."

[United Federation of Canada]

"So if an economic recession causes a nation's GDP to decline a bit, the nation may be forced to get rid of a few nuclear warheads and later when the economy gets back on track then their limit increases?" Princess Christine asked in a tone of childish curiosity mixed with sarcastic scepticism. "And why exactly would anyone think that that makes any sense? Sorry, the Queendom remains generally sceptical towards arbitrary numbers and making a limit for nuclear weaponry relative to the member state's economy seems entirely arbitrary and rather inappropriate."

No if ones GDP declined they would not be forced to get rid of weapons that they already had under the convention. Nations will be required to meet convention protocols when it comes into effect only.

[United Federation of Canada]

Updated and added a non-proliferation clause.

[Alqania]

"So if an economic recession causes a nation's GDP to decline a bit, the nation may be forced to get rid of a few nuclear warheads and later when the economy gets back on track then their limit increases?" Princess Christine asked in a tone of childish curiosity mixed with sarcastic scepticism. "And why exactly would anyone think that that makes any sense? Sorry, the Queendom remains generally sceptical towards arbitrary numbers and making a limit for nuclear weaponry relative to the member state's economy seems entirely arbitrary and rather inappropriate."

No if ones GDP declined they would not be forced to get rid of weapons that they already had under the convention. Nations will be required to meet convention protocols when it comes into effect only.

Princess Christine smiled. "I pray Your Excellency will forgive me for forgetting that the United Federal Canadian Delegation is rather new to this assembly. That is not how compliance works. A member state must be compliant with all extant resolutions at any and all times that said state retains WA membership."

[United Federation of Canada]

No if ones GDP declined they would not be forced to get rid of weapons that they already had under the convention. Nations will be required to meet convention protocols when it comes into effect only.

Princess Christine smiled. "I pray Your Excellency will forgive me for forgetting that the United Federal Canadian Delegation is rather new to this assembly. That is not how compliance works. A member state must be compliant with all extant resolutions at any and all times that said state retains WA membership."

Would the fine Princess Christine have any suggestions on how she would like to to see limits imposed then?

[Alqania]

Princess Christine smiled. "I pray Your Excellency will forgive me for forgetting that the United Federal Canadian Delegation is rather new to this assembly. That is not how compliance works. A member state must be compliant with all extant resolutions at any and all times that said state retains WA membership."

Would the fine Princess Christine have any suggestions on how she would like to to see limits imposed then?

"How about this:"

REQUIRES nations that possess Nuclear Weapons to limit their Nuclear Weaponization programs and delivery systems to the minimum required to defend themselves from hostile nations in a manner consistent with international law,

PROHIBITS nations from openly sharing or trading Nuclear Weapon design specifications with other nations,

CREATES and mandates the NUCLEAR WEAPONS INSPECTION COMMISSION, to commission inspectors to work together with nations to meet the aims of this resolution and to further disarmament and non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

[United Federation of Canada]

Would the fine Princess Christine have any suggestions on how she would like to to see limits imposed then?

"How about this:"

REQUIRES nations that possess Nuclear Weapons to limit their Nuclear Weaponization programs and delivery systems to the minimum required to defend themselves from hostile nations in a manner consistent with international law,

PROHIBITS nations from openly sharing or trading Nuclear Weapon design specifications with other nations,

CREATES and mandates the NUCLEAR WEAPONS INSPECTION COMMISSION, to commission inspectors to work together with nations to meet the aims of this resolution and to further disarmament and non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

That would work quite nicely. Would you care for a co-author tag?

[United Federation of Canada]

Updated yet again to reflect current changes

[Alqania]

"How about this:"

That would work quite nicely.

"I am delighted that my humble suggestions met with Your Excellency's approval", Princess Christine said while looking quite delighted indeed.

Would you care for a co-author tag?

"Thank you for the offer, Ambassador. I shall take the question into consideration, but my answer will depend on how the final draft will look."

[United Frontiers]

I would like to ask in regards to this section;

REQUIRES nations that possess Nuclear Weapons to limit their Nuclear Weaponization programs, development programs and delivery systems to the minimum required to defend themselves from hostile nations in a manner consistent with international law.

What would be the minimum amount?

[Dilange]

How about instead of limiting nuclear weapons, we increase them and sell them profit. It will be a radical change but we've dealt with worse.

[United Federation of Canada]

I would like to ask in regards to this section;

REQUIRES nations that possess Nuclear Weapons to limit their Nuclear Weaponization programs, development programs and delivery systems to the minimum required to defend themselves from hostile nations in a manner consistent with international law.

What would be the minimum amount?

The minimum credible deterrent required to ensure you have the ability to inflict enough damage on a nation that attacks you with nuclear weapons to ensure they don't attack you with nuclear weapons.

Example: Nation 1 has ability to obliterate you with nukes but you can destroy over half their territory. This gives them no reason to attack you with nuclear weapons because the loss would outweigh any gains. It is based on China's theory of deterrence towards the United States.

[United Frontiers]

Ah, I see.

Should this proposal come to fruition (I would be much interested in seeing how this comes out,) depending of course on how the final draft looks, this sounds like it could mean good things for all of us. In turn, the United Frontiers would be happy to dedicate any excess nuclear power towards our own domestic improvement or any other ally looking for domestic improvement, or for their own nuclear weaponry development, if they are lacking in the resources.

Perhaps a clause dealing with excess nuclear excess might be added.

[United Federation of Canada]

Ah, I see.

Should this proposal come to fruition (I would be much interested in seeing how this comes out,) depending of course on how the final draft looks, this sounds like it could mean good things for all of us. In turn, the United Frontiers would be happy to dedicate any excess nuclear power towards our own domestic improvement or any other ally looking for domestic improvement, or for their own nuclear weaponry development, if they are lacking in the resources.

Perhaps a clause dealing with excess nuclear excess might be added.

See viewtopic.php?f=9&t=209975 which would try to prevent proliferation of nuclear materials intended for Nuclear armaments.

[United Federation of Canada]

Added further legislation on non-proliferation of enrichment technology and services for Nuclear Weapons as well.

[Ainocra]

MANDATES that nations will abide by a no first use policy in regards to Nuclear Weapons usage.

PROHIBITS ANY nations from sharing, trading or selling Nuclear Weapons and/or their design specifications to ANY other nations, or acquiring Nuclear Weapons and/or their design specifications from ANY other nation,

FURTHER PROHIBITS ANY nation from buying, selling, trading, or sharing Enrichment technology, equipment, or services for the purposes of enriching nuclear materials to weapons grade levels for use in Nuclear Weapons,

FURTHER REQUIRES ALL nations ensure Nuclear Weapon designs and specifications will remain national secrets and ensure that they be prevented from falling into possession of persons and/or nations with intent to contravene this convention,

We remain steadfast in our opposition to this proposal.
The first clause listed herein would prevent a protective first strike.

Say Ainocra gets hard, solid reliable intel that the evil nation of cowardly pacifists plan to launch an attack.
This clause would force us to watch as our citizens die when we could instead prevent it.
So for security reasons That must go. Bear in mind the decisions made in this hall have a cost in sentient life.

The next several clauses would be devastating to the Ainocran economy. The manufacture and export of weapons and related equipment is literally the cornerstone of our industrial complex. Not only would these clauses prevent us from trading such with member states but it would prevent us from trading with non member states as well.

Some of our biggest customers are non member states.
I am not certain but I suspect this might run afoul of legality as it demands we interact with them in a specific manner.

While I laud your intentions, the method you are attempting to employ will cause more harm than good.

[United Federation of Canada]

MANDATES that nations will abide by a no first use policy in regards to Nuclear Weapons usage.

PROHIBITS ANY nations from sharing, trading or selling Nuclear Weapons and/or their design specifications to ANY other nations, or acquiring Nuclear Weapons and/or their design specifications from ANY other nation,

FURTHER PROHIBITS ANY nation from buying, selling, trading, or sharing Enrichment technology, equipment, or services for the purposes of enriching nuclear materials to weapons grade levels for use in Nuclear Weapons,

FURTHER REQUIRES ALL nations ensure Nuclear Weapon designs and specifications will remain national secrets and ensure that they be prevented from falling into possession of persons and/or nations with intent to contravene this convention,

We remain steadfast in our opposition to this proposal.
The first clause listed herein would prevent a protective first strike.

Say Ainocra gets hard, solid reliable intel that the evil nation of cowardly pacifists plan to launch an attack.
This clause would force us to watch as our citizens die when we could instead prevent it.
So for security reasons That must go. Bear in mind the decisions made in this hall have a cost in sentient life.

The next several clauses would be devastating to the Ainocran economy. The manufacture and export of weapons and related equipment is literally the cornerstone of our industrial complex. Not only would these clauses prevent us from trading such with member states but it would prevent us from trading with non member states as well.

Some of our biggest customers are non member states.
I am not certain but I suspect this might run afoul of legality as it demands we interact with them in a specific manner.

While I laud your intentions, the method you are attempting to employ will cause more harm than good.

While we thank you for your comments on the matter we must ask if a nation WAS going to attack you and you used nuclear weapons in response would that surely not trigger a counter attack before your weapons would arrive causing more of your civilians to die anyways?

We remain steadfast in our stance that proliferation of these weapons must stop at all costs. Nations are still free to develop these weapons, but we believe if they choose to possess them, the onus is on them to develop them themselves and not have other nations do it for them.

As for legality concerns, we see none as this act cannot not be forced upon non-members, no matter how it is worded, and their are no rules stating we cannot legislate how members deal with non members.

[Alqania]

"Apart from the effects on commercial activities, we must also consider this proposal's effects on Academia", Princess Christine asserted. "The question is to what extent academic freedom and the pursuit of knowledge through scientific research and advancement should be hindered by concerns that the knowledge obtained may be harmful when possessed by actors with evil intentions. This assembly has previously committed itself to international research cooperation, most notably through the Cooperation in Science Act, and I do not feel that the implications on academic freedom of non-proliferation provisions have been adequately addressed and discussed in this chamber."

The Deputy Ambassador took a sip of water before continuing. "The draft as currently written is unfortunately unacceptable to the Queendom, as we cannot accept a WA mandate forcing us to throw away academic freedom and the right to education and discriminate among students and scholars based on nationality. At least not without a proper debate convincing us that doing so would be necessary."

[Ainocra]

We remain steadfast in our opposition to this proposal.
The first clause listed herein would prevent a protective first strike.

Say Ainocra gets hard, solid reliable intel that the evil nation of cowardly pacifists plan to launch an attack.
This clause would force us to watch as our citizens die when we could instead prevent it.
So for security reasons That must go. Bear in mind the decisions made in this hall have a cost in sentient life.

The next several clauses would be devastating to the Ainocran economy. The manufacture and export of weapons and related equipment is literally the cornerstone of our industrial complex. Not only would these clauses prevent us from trading such with member states but it would prevent us from trading with non member states as well.

Some of our biggest customers are non member states.
I am not certain but I suspect this might run afoul of legality as it demands we interact with them in a specific manner.

While I laud your intentions, the method you are attempting to employ will cause more harm than good.

While we thank you for your comments on the matter we must ask if a nation WAS going to attack you and you used nuclear weapons in response would that surely not trigger a counter attack before your weapons would arrive causing more of your civilians to die anyways?

We remain steadfast in our stance that proliferation of these weapons must stop at all costs. Nations are still free to develop these weapons, but we believe if they choose to possess them, the onus is on them to develop them themselves and not have other nations do it for them.

As for legality concerns, we see none as this act cannot not be forced upon non-members, no matter how it is worded, and their are no rules stating we cannot legislate how members deal with non members.

The objective of a preventative strike is to disable the enemies weapons, particularly those they intend to deploy against you. So the odds are good that such a first strike would in fact save the lives of our citizens. You are attempting to enforce a mutually assured destruction military doctrine on all member states. Simply put that is both unsafe and impractical.

I would also wonder about the legality of the commerce clauses you are attempting to insert. is this a military proposal or a commercial one?

You would endanger countless trillions of sentient beings just so that you can feel better.

This is unacceptable.

[United Federation of Canada]

While we thank you for your comments on the matter we must ask if a nation WAS going to attack you and you used nuclear weapons in response would that surely not trigger a counter attack before your weapons would arrive causing more of your civilians to die anyways?

We remain steadfast in our stance that proliferation of these weapons must stop at all costs. Nations are still free to develop these weapons, but we believe if they choose to possess them, the onus is on them to develop them themselves and not have other nations do it for them.

As for legality concerns, we see none as this act cannot not be forced upon non-members, no matter how it is worded, and their are no rules stating we cannot legislate how members deal with non members.

The objective of a preventative strike is to disable the enemies weapons, particularly those they intend to deploy against you. So the odds are good that such a first strike would in fact save the lives of our citizens. You are attempting to enforce a mutually assured destruction military doctrine on all member states. Simply put that is both unsafe and impractical.

I would also wonder about the legality of the commerce clauses you are attempting to insert. is this a military proposal or a commercial one?

You would endanger countless trillions of sentient beings just so that you can feel better.

This is unacceptable.

The chances of that first strike succeeding, without a counter attack by targeted nation are slim at best, thereby causing more destruction and loss of life than necessary. Mutually assured destruction prevents war, not causes it as you say. Nations that intend to use nuclear weapons aggressively are a danger, a menace and a threat to international security at the highest levels.

This is a military proposal through and through. The fact that a few nations will take a minor economic hit, due to not having the ability to sell nuclear weapons is an unfortunate side effect, but necessary to stop the spread of nuclear weapons to insanely dangerous levels. This convention seeks to save lives, not endanger them.