[PASSED] Environmental Warfare Act

[Mallorea and Riva]

The classic category switcheroo between IntSec and GlobDisarm. This is clearly the latter.

[West Angola]

Blackbourne considers the proposed change. "While that would address soldiers as invasive species and bomb-carrying organisms, it would still affect biological weapons with a built-in kill switch, would it not? Unless you considered their behavior 'unnatural' by virtue of being genetically engineered?"

"That would create a rather large loophole, I fear. I would agree to the honorable representative from Sciongrad; that the damage from an invasive species persists even after the species has been contained. Preventing an invasive species from causing catastrophic damage to a nation's agriculture and resource extraction efforts is the overarching goal of this resolution, and even with a 'kill switch' that damage is still going to occur and potentially persist long after the switch has been triggered."

The classic category switcheroo between IntSec and GlobDisarm. This is clearly the latter.

"Noted, thank you."

[Sciongrad]

"Surely you've heard of Hibernation Induction? I don't Imagine you would possess that technology, but you can at least conceive of it, right?" Blackbourne replies.

even if such technology existed, we would object to it on ethical grounds.

"Nuclear Weapons have longer lasting effects, and we are specifically allowed to use them by this Assembly."

"Sciongrad has been a fierce opponent of nuclear weapons for longer than you've been a member of this assembly. Using nuclear weapons is not a convincing argument in this context.

And before you respond that I had referenced the World Assembly's previous commitments as an argument against using invasive species as weapons, I will note that argument was strictly limited to the "uncontrollable/unpredictable" objection."

"Now, how about two problems: First, that a foreign invader's species could be classified as an invasive species, and thus invasions of all sorts could be prohibited. By that interpretation, our Birrin soldiers could not be allowed to assist us in an invasion of human worlds, and humans would not be allowed to invade Chri-irah.

"Second, that animals intended to be used as weapons, such as bomb-carrying animals, could be classified as invasive species and despite only living long enough to blow up their target, and dealing a level of destruction about equal to conventional weapons, they would be prohibited as a form of 'ecoterrorism'*."

"You should know that neither of those things qualify as invasive species - those are species that happen to be invading, but they are assuredly not invasive species. While the draft's definition does not define invasive species accurately at the moment, I am confident the author intends on prohibiting invasive species, not your two examples.

Of course, Sciongrad also objects to weaponized animals. I do hope the most honorable ambassador of West Angola took my advice to heart when I said the representatives of Excidium Planetis should be politely ignored on the issue of war."

OOC: See he real life US weapon Project X-ray, also known as the 'bat bomb', which would have introduced millions of New Mexico bats to Japan just long enough to incinerate all the bats and the buildings they hid in. Ecoterrorism, or brilliant alternative to the atom bomb?

OOC: Either way, that's an utterly despicable idea in my opinion.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Not that I disagree with the Sciongrad position, but does that rejection of animals in warfare extend to the use of canines in police or explosive detection roles? There is some call for the use of animals, especially nonnatives, in war that is not entirely unreasonable. These uses do need to be weighed, as outlawing cavalry would probably bring about a low-tech civil war."

[Sciongrad]

"Not that I disagree with the Sciongrad position, but does that rejection of animals in warfare extend to the use of canines in police or explosive detection roles? There is some call for the use of animals, especially nonnatives, in war that is not entirely unreasonable. These uses do need to be weighed, as outlawing cavalry would probably bring about a low-tech civil war."

"In Sciongrad's opinion, those are acceptable uses of animals. Sciongrad obviously does not oppose the use of animals, the use of animals in war, or even war in general, but rather, objects to cruelly exploiting them - for example, forcing them to hibernate indefinitely or strapping bombs to them."

[West Angola]

"Based on objections and recommendations which have been raised, our delegation has re-worked the definition of 'invasive species.'"

"Invasive Species" as a non-native species whose natural behavior results in uncontrollable harm to ecosystems into which it is introduced.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Based on objections and recommendations which have been raised, our delegation has re-worked the definition of 'invasive species.'"

"Invasive Species" as a non-native species whose natural behavior results in uncontrollable harm to ecosystems into which it is introduced.

"Tuck "non-sentient" in there, and you're set. I can't see much justification made for cavalry horses causing uncontrollable harm to ecosystems, and including non-sentient avoids issues with soldiers being classified as invasive species."

[West Angola]

"Tuck "non-sentient" in there, and you're set. I can't see much justification made for cavalry horses causing uncontrollable harm to ecosystems, and including non-sentient avoids issues with soldiers being classified as invasive species."

"Excellent! Thank you, Ambassador Bell."

[Imperium Anglorum]

"Tuck "non-sentient" in there, and you're set. I can't see much justification made for cavalry horses causing uncontrollable harm to ecosystems, and including non-sentient avoids issues with soldiers being classified as invasive species."

OOC: Soldiers as invasive species?

[Separatist Peoples]

"Tuck "non-sentient" in there, and you're set. I can't see much justification made for cavalry horses causing uncontrollable harm to ecosystems, and including non-sentient avoids issues with soldiers being classified as invasive species."

OOC: Soldiers as invasive species?

OOC: You laugh, but what better way to make invasion illegal in a FT society where the WA can't be ignored? "No, Klingons, fuck off! Earth has no native Klingons and you are not allowed in!"

[Excidium Planetis]

Of course, Sciongrad also objects to weaponized animals. I do hope the most honorable ambassador of West Angola took my advice to heart when I said the representatives of Excidium Planetis should be politely ignored on the issue of war."

Cornelia Schultz now speaks up, since Blackbourne deserves at least one freebie. "I do hope the West Angolan Ambassador understands that Sciongrad's positions in war tend to be in the minority, while Excidium Planetis, which some consider 'warmongering', 'utterly despicable', and 'reckless', tends to take positions on warfare favored by this Assembly. See the resolutions permitting nuclear weapon use versus Sciongrad's attempt to ban first strikes, the biological weapons ban being limited to microorganisms versus Sciongrad's distaste for animal weapons, and sensible rules for warfare-"

"Minus Wartime Looting and Pillage." Blackbourne interjects.

"Please reread that resolution, Ambassador Blackbourne. Where was I? Sensible rules for warfare versus Sciongrad's attempt to completely eliminate conquest altogether... that was Sciongrad right? I always get Ambassador Santos and the Losthaven delegation mixed up."

"Based on objections and recommendations which have been raised, our delegation has re-worked the definition of 'invasive species.'"

"Invasive Species" as a non-native species whose natural behavior results in uncontrollable harm to ecosystems into which it is introduced.

"Tuck "non-sentient" in there, and you're set. I can't see much justification made for cavalry horses causing uncontrollable harm to ecosystems, and including non-sentient avoids issues with soldiers being classified as invasive species."

"I disagree." Blackbourne predictably says. "Cavalry can be considered an invasive species. Terran horses certainly would be invasive on Chri-irah. And they would be invasive naturally, not because of their use as beasts of war. This current definition of invasive species still bans particular kinds of cavalry or bomb-search dogs, which would be expected to survive. I had not even realized this until Ambassador Bell brought it up."

OOC Fun fact: Wild Horses in North America are considered an invasive species by many authorities (The New York Times being one of them), because they are all descended from horse introduced in the colonization of the Americas. It is arguable that they aren't, but so far the jury is still out on it.

[Araraukar]

"Invasive Species" as a non-native species whose natural behavior results in uncontrollable harm to ecosystems into which it is introduced.

"Tuck "non-sentient" in there, and you're set. I can't see much justification made for cavalry horses causing uncontrollable harm to ecosystems, and including non-sentient avoids issues with soldiers being classified as invasive species."

Except as the bee debate proved earlier, using "non-sentient" poses serious limits as to what it encompasses. Because if you say that using sentient critters is ok, you're okaying the use of insects, for example, as well as various plants. (OOC: I can only imagine what might happen in real life, if someone realized how easily you could utilize fire ant colonies as weaponry...)

[Separatist Peoples]

"Tuck "non-sentient" in there, and you're set. I can't see much justification made for cavalry horses causing uncontrollable harm to ecosystems, and including non-sentient avoids issues with soldiers being classified as invasive species."

Except as the bee debate proved earlier, using "non-sentient" poses serious limits as to what it encompasses. Because if you say that using sentient critters is ok, you're okaying the use of insects, for example, as well as various plants. (OOC: I can only imagine what might happen in real life, if someone realized how easily you could utilize fire ant colonies as weaponry...)

OOC: Dammit, I meant Sapient.

[West Angola]

"I disagree." Blackbourne predictably says. "Cavalry can be considered an invasive species. Terran horses certainly would be invasive on Chri-irah. And they would be invasive naturally, not because of their use as beasts of war. This current definition of invasive species still bans particular kinds of cavalry or bomb-search dogs, which would be expected to survive. I had not even realized this until Ambassador Bell brought it up."

"I would argue, Ambassador, that a horse's environmental impact is too small for the damage to be considered "uncontrollable." Additionally, unless the horses are introduced for the purpose of damaging the ecosystem their use wouldn't fall under the definition of "ecoterrorism."

Except as the bee debate proved earlier, using "non-sentient" poses serious limits as to what it encompasses. Because if you say that using sentient critters is ok, you're okaying the use of insects, for example, as well as various plants.

"Noted, thank you, Ambassador Leveret."

[Europe and Oceania]

We support this.

[Sciongrad]

We support this.

OOC: Care to add a bit more? This doesn't really contribute to this thread.

[Bears Armed]

OOC

By normal RL definitions, the term "invasive species" is not just synonymous with "invading species": It refers specifically to species which, when introduced to a new habitat, not only survive there but expand their numbers & range so rapidly that [1] it is very difficult for people to control that expansion and [2] this expansion is normally at the expense of native species. On that basis, this proposed resolution would affect neither stocks that had been modified for sterility (unless those were still capable of asexual reproduction, or simply propagation through extremely rapid growth of connected runners/rhizomes/roots from which new shoots could arise, anyhows) nor ones used for a single, immediate attack in which -- like those WW2 bats -- they themselves would be expected to perish.[/zoologist]

I assume this is OOC?

OOC
That's why it was labelled as such, yes.

[Excidium Planetis]

"I disagree." Blackbourne predictably says. "Cavalry can be considered an invasive species. Terran horses certainly would be invasive on Chri-irah. And they would be invasive naturally, not because of their use as beasts of war. This current definition of invasive species still bans particular kinds of cavalry or bomb-search dogs, which would be expected to survive. I had not even realized this until Ambassador Bell brought it up."

"I would argue, Ambassador, that a horse's environmental impact is too small for the damage to be considered "uncontrollable." Additionally, unless the horses are introduced for the purpose of damaging the ecosystem their use wouldn't fall under the definition of "ecoterrorism."

'Firstly, the impact of the horse cannot be predicted before hand, but as in some areas of Chri-irah it would have no natural predators and would compete with native lifeforms for vegetation, it could potentiaoly drive several species to extinction. Second, as the horses would be introduced as a weapon of war, they would be introduced for the purpose of damaging the ecosystem... damage surely results from warfare.

"Or, taken another way... imagine a nation utilizes alien cavalry against a Terrain planet, and these cavalry possess the ability to spew hydrofluoric acid from their mouths. Such a method of attack would surely damage the ecosystem in which they were used, and if they were used to destroy the crops sustaining a military base, they would have been purposely used to damage an ecosystem. Well, now these cavalry are banned.

"Wait, does acid-spewing cavalry count as a chemical weapon? That's interesting if they do... what if you had a sapient species of soldier who possessed that ability? Would normal citizens be considered chemical weapons? Schultz! Bring me a copy of the Chemical Weapons Accord!"

"Get an aide to do it." Schultz replies. "I'm not your inferior."

[Separatist Peoples]

"I would argue, Ambassador, that a horse's environmental impact is too small for the damage to be considered "uncontrollable." Additionally, unless the horses are introduced for the purpose of damaging the ecosystem their use wouldn't fall under the definition of "ecoterrorism."

'Firstly, the impact of the horse cannot be predicted before hand, but as in some areas of Chri-irah it would have no natural predators and would compete with native lifeforms for vegetation, it could potentiaoly drive several species to extinction. Second, as the horses would be introduced as a weapon of war, they would be introduced for the purpose of damaging the ecosystem... damage surely results from warfare.

"But that is not their intended use. Much like the legislation on chemical weapons, where weapons that operate primarily through their chemical toxicity are bound by the regulations, cavalry horses' primary use is not to eat up all the vegetation and starve out the natives. Its disingenuous to suggest that because damage occurs, it was the intended function of the creature's introduction."

"Or, taken another way... imagine a nation utilizes alien cavalry against a Terrain planet, and these cavalry possess the ability to spew hydrofluoric acid from their mouths. Such a method of attack would surely damage the ecosystem in which they were used, and if they were used to destroy the crops sustaining a military base, they would have been purposely used to damage an ecosystem. Well, now these cavalry are banned.

"Wait, does acid-spewing cavalry count as a chemical weapon? That's interesting if they do... what if you had a sapient species of soldier who possessed that ability? Would normal citizens be considered chemical weapons? Schultz! Bring me a copy of the Chemical Weapons Accord!"

"Get an aide to do it." Schultz replies. "I'm not your inferior."

"Such a weapon would absolutely be a chemical weapon, but the mount wouldn't be against the rules to utilize, provided it didn't spray acid everywhere. Incidental damage is inevitable. An artillery shell flying into a vegetable patch will affect the ecosystem, however minutely, but it isn't the case that it was utilized to that end deliberately. If we took that kind of interpretation of how weapons operate, lead bullets would be illegal for being chemical weapons by causing lead poisoning, but that's clearly an absurd interpretation that deliberately overlooks the kinetic energy imparted by the round in the first place. Nobody is unleashing hordes of hungry horses to win a war. They're riding them into battle."

[West Angola]

'Firstly, the impact of the horse cannot be predicted before hand, but as in some areas of Chri-irah it would have no natural predators and would compete with native lifeforms for vegetation, it could potentiaoly drive several species to extinction. Second, as the horses would be introduced as a weapon of war, they would be introduced for the purpose of damaging the ecosystem... damage surely results from warfare.

"Ambassador, you cannot conflate use of a weapon which may, among other things, damage the environment as a side effect with the intentional targeting of an entire ecosystem via the introduction of an invasive species. Unless the species is intended to damage the ecosystem rather than that being collateral damage resulting from war, it's not relevant as ecoterrorism."

"Or, taken another way... imagine a nation utilizes alien cavalry against a Terrain planet, and these cavalry possess the ability to spew hydrofluoric acid from their mouths. Such a method of attack would surely damage the ecosystem in which they were used, and if they were used to destroy the crops sustaining a military base, they would have been purposely used to damage an ecosystem. Well, now these cavalry are banned.

"If you're utilizing hydrofluoric acid-spitting cavalry as a mount for your soldiers, and you are using them to cause intentional, targeted, uncontrollable harm to an entire ecosystem, then yes I would argue that those should be illegal, and I would agree that they constitute a chemical weapon if used for the purpose you describe."

[The Imperial Frost Federation]

Currently a bit busy and am only able to glance at the resolution. However from the looks of things it looks like my Nation will be opposed to it. I will post an IC response in this post sometime tomorrow to elaborate my opposition as well as spoiler the ooc. Cheers and have a nice day.

IC:
Lt. Albert Nakiri reads through the resolution before placing it down shaking his head. Looking over at the West Angolan Ambassador the ambassador says, "While I understand sensible legislation to prevent unnecessary slaughter in times of war, the resolution in question doesn't appear to do either and only serves to put our soldiers at risk since GAR 272 prevents our offensive troops from using chemical weapons on the environment to flush out enemy soldiers from their hiding places as well as burn a path to the enemy stronghold. Using well trained sentient animals have allowed us to circumvent the issue as they are far more efficient and cost effective in clearing the environment than sending a division of engineers with expensive equipment and another division of soldiers to protect them from their foes. They are also far more efficient than their chemical counterparts drastically reducing civilian casualties and eliminating the risk of an unforeseen consequence from the use of chemical weapons. Regardless of this resolution's intent, I will not have my country's soldiers put at risk needlessly in times of war to suit one's own esoteric wish to prevent unavoidable environmental damage or to increase the risk of civilian casualties by forcing us to use more dramatic means of clearing an environment."

[Sciongrad]

Cornelia Schultz now speaks up, since Blackbourne deserves at least one freebie. "I do hope the West Angolan Ambassador understands that Sciongrad's positions in war tend to be in the minority, while Excidium Planetis, which some consider 'warmongering', 'utterly despicable', and 'reckless', tends to take positions on warfare favored by this Assembly. See the resolutions permitting nuclear weapon use versus Sciongrad's attempt to ban first strikes, the biological weapons ban being limited to microorganisms versus Sciongrad's distaste for animal weapons, and sensible rules for warfare-"

"Minus Wartime Looting and Pillage." Blackbourne interjects.

"Please reread that resolution, Ambassador Blackbourne. Where was I? Sensible rules for warfare versus Sciongrad's attempt to completely eliminate conquest altogether... that was Sciongrad right? I always get Ambassador Santos and the Losthaven delegation mixed up."

"Of course, Sciongrad's positions on war are much more mainstream then you let on. It's quite telling that only two resolutions proposed by Sciongrad have ever failed - a repeal of GAR#286 and a near carbon copy replacement of Responsible Arms Trading, which failed due to a concerted counter campaign. On the issue of biological weapons, Sciongrad advanced its agenda successfully (the only ambassador to do so since the repeal of the World Assembly's initial resolution against biological weapons, despite numerous attempts) - and I'll note including anything but microorganisms was not a concession to enlist the support of the more "mainstream," pro-ecoterrorist masses. The resolution was always limited in scope to microorganisms. Note as well that the ambassador of Excidium Planetis did indeed offer support for our attempt to ban nuclear first strikes between member nations - a position you now claim is radical. And you are also conflating warfare and conquest, as you tend to do, probably to make a rhetorical point, possibly because you are unaware of the difference. But I am not here to defend my credentials as a advocate for humane and responsible warfare, although they are many. I'm here to offer Sciongrad's support for the proposed draft."

Ambassador Santos addresses the noble ambassador from West Angola. "Sciongrad is pleased with the most recent modifications to the definition. We will continue to follow this draft and add commentary whenever we feel it is appropriate."

[Excidium Planetis]

Note as well that the ambassador of Excidium Planetis did indeed offer support for our attempt to ban nuclear first strikes between member nations - a position you now claim is radical.

"As originally written, it was radical, and still is not mainstream given the opposition voiced against it when it was submitted. Also note that I did offer my support for it, but you may find my nation will not the next time you attempt it, if you do." Schultz looks at Ambassador Blackbourne. "We do love our first strikes."

[West Angola]

Lt. Albert Nakiri reads through the resolution before placing it down shaking his head. Looking over at the West Angolan Ambassador the ambassador says, "While I understand sensible legislation to prevent unnecessary slaughter in times of war, the resolution in question doesn't appear to do either and only serves to put our soldiers at risk since GAR 272 prevents our offensive troops from using chemical weapons on the environment to flush out enemy soldiers from their hiding places as well as burn a path to the enemy stronghold."

"Ambassador, the Chemical Weapons Accord demonstrates a clear international precedent for banning targeted environmental damage. The World Assembly has long recognized the risk to international security such damage creates. Since the use of invasive species to accomplish much the same goal as a chemical defoliant can have similarly long-term and unforeseen effects on an ecosystem the use of such species should be tightly controlled."

"Using well trained sentient animals have allowed us to circumvent the issue as they are far more efficient and cost effective in clearing the environment than sending a division of engineers with expensive equipment and another division of soldiers to protect them from their foes. They are also far more efficient than their chemical counterparts drastically reducing civilian casualties and eliminating the risk of an unforeseen consequence from the use of chemical weapons."

"I would make the same argument to you, Ambassador, that I made to the honorable delegate from Excidium Planetis earlier: this sort of scorched-earth tactic is precisely the behavior the resolution seeks to curtail. Devastating an ecosystem for military gain has far-reaching consequences that may not always be evident. Utilizing trained animals rather than chemical defoliants may, in the short run, reduce civilian casualties, but over time those who depend on the environment you have destroyed to sustain themselves will suffer greatly. Additionally, due to the complex nature of ecosystems, the unforeseen consequences you attribute only to chemical agents also apply to devastating caused by an invasive species, as the removal of one or more localized links in the food chain can have dramatic effect across a much wider area."

"Regardless of this resolution's intent, I will not have my country's soldiers put at risk needlessly in times of war to suit one's own esoteric wish to prevent unavoidable environmental damage"

"With all due respect, this argument is disingenuous because it implies the environmental damage is somehow 'unavoidable.' Environmental damage does result from war, that is a given, and some amount of it is unavoidable. However, you cannot equate all levels of damage, you must separate that which arises via collateral damage from weapons used against military targets and intentional targeting of an ecosystem for military gain. One is preventable, the other is not, and to lump them together as an unavoidable consequence of war is irresponsible."

"or to increase the risk of civilian casualties by forcing us to use more dramatic means of clearing an environment."

"We would prefer, Ambassador, that you refrained from clearing an environment through any means. You are not being 'forced' to use 'more dramatic means' because you have the option of using no means at all. Your attempt to lay the civilian casualties resulting from your choice at our feet is nothing more than an attempt to deny culpability for your own crimes."

[Bears Armed]

Artorrius looks around the chamber, scowling slightly as his gaze passes across the faces of certain diplomats.
"If your nation is at war with a foreign country then, bearing in mind that this organisation has already passed a resolution against genocide, sooner or later you are going to have to either make peace with that other country's government or take over operation of the place yourselves: You having devastated the local environment would, obviously, make both of those options harder to achieve..."