[PASSED] Repeal "The Landmine Convention"

[Imperializt Russia]

Of course it is.

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. I roleplay my WA activities (or try to); my OOC view of landmine regulation is a subject for NS General, not the WA. Were I to revive Quintessence of Dust, the nation with which I wrote the original resolution, I would not propose this repeal with that nation. This is a different nation, representing different viewpoints. That there is a lot of OOC/IC mangling in the current WA is unfortunate, but it shouldn't obscure the fact that in character, the nation proposing this repeal has little relationship to the one that proposed the original resolution. The way I've played the relationship in the past is DSR happens to have been assigned the old QoD WA Office in the WA Headquarters by Building Mgmt, and has found a folder full of their old draft proposals and resolution notes.

In any case, I'd prefer the debate to focus on the content of the resolution and repeal, and I think that's actually a stronger case anyway for repeal than trying to pretend I've changed my mind.

Technically speaking, I said "yes it is" and then tried to explain it basically wasn't.
I was trying to show that it wasn't on the basis that "hurr, i dont like it" and that there was a thought process behind that. It certainly wasn't clear.

[Louisistan]

Considering that given these landmines do not necessarily pose significant risks to civilians they should not have been prohibited and that this technical flaw undermines the resolution's claims to concern for civilian casualties,

I don't think it does, but that is certainly a point of personal opinion.

Overall we support this repeal. Good riddance to that convention.

[Applebania]

Alexander puffed on his pipe. "I'm extremely wary of any repeal of GA#40. As such, I shall post my vote against."

[The Dark Star Republic]

Alexander puffed on his pipe. "I'm extremely wary of any repeal of GA#40. As such, I shall post my vote against."

"Thank you for your detailed explanation of why you don't wish to see the resolution repealed. It's tremendously helpful in fostering debate."

~ Vice-Colonel Truculent Bilgewater
Ambassador to the WA

[Louisistan]

Alexander puffed on his pipe. "I'm extremely wary of any repeal of GA#40. As such, I shall post my vote against."

"Thank you for your detailed explanation of why you don't wish to see the resolution repealed. It's tremendously helpful in fostering debate."

~ Vice-Colonel Truculent Bilgewater
Ambassador to the WA

Special Ambassador Max Schneider, doing one of his rare appearances in the GA chamber leans back in his chair and laughs. "Vice-Colonel, I think you need a drink. I have some Gin here and my boy Gerard here can get some Tonic Water if you want"

[Wrapper]

We the Puddle Jumping Wads of Wrapper cannot vote for this. We disagree with the statement that "landmines do not necessarily pose significant risks to civilians". Far too many of them do, and to repeal this resolution would allow any and all landmines to be used. And, just because nations "may be capable of deploying landmines in a way that poses little risk to civilians" doesn't mean that they will.

[Defwa]

Wasn't there a replacement to this lurking about?
I'm supportive of a replacement that recognizes modern mine technology, but I'm abstaining otherwise.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Wasn't there a replacement to this lurking about?

Not written by me, no; Imperializst Russia mentioned they were interested in doing so but I don't believe they had any immediate plans.

[Louisistan]

"Vice-Colonel, you are up for vote. And since I have already voted in favor, I'll take my dinner in the Bar now. Good Luck!"

[Frustrated Franciscans]

The Organic Vegan Commune of Frustrated Franciscans
Official Delegation to the World Assembly
“We praise You, Lord, for Sister Death!”
Friar John Sanders, OFM Ambassador and WA representative
Friar Tuck Ferguson, OFM Assistant Ambassador
Brother Maynard, TOR Keeper of the Holy Hand-grenade

I am on the fence on this one. I am not convinced that "these landmines do not necessarily pose significant risks to civilians" given the general impossibility to ensure civilians won't be in their vicinity during the time that these mines might be active. I am definitely of the opinion that the "non WA" argument is akin to using "Nat Sov" in a repeal. Yes, they are good points but they should be made when the resolution is proposed. Until these concerns are addressed I will remain only mildly supportive of this repeal.

[Aeuria]

It would seem to me that this piece of legislation is proposing suspending international law in order to become more effective in combat, come an invasion. The phrase "fighting fire with fire" comes to mind.

The proposal as it stands states "Concerned that the occupation of any WA member nation's territories by non-member nations could result in war crimes over which the WA would have no jurisdiction nor ability to arrest,
Therefore believing that any area denial munitions available to WA member nations should be permitted in the defence of their territory from armed occupation by hostile non-members,". This is ridiculous. We should repeal international law for fear of Non-WA nations invading a region and using the very weapons we banned? We should allow the possibility of dropping to their level? Hmph. Absurd. Opposed.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

As stated, we did cast an actual vote on this repeal; and it is our judgment that it continues to do more good for people in areas unprotected by the vast technological, military, and medical power at the disposal of many WA states; than harm to those same states who find themselves tactically hampered by the unavailability of laying mines as a solution to certain security problems.

Therefore we vote AGAINST.

[The Dark Star Republic]

It would seem to me that this piece of legislation is proposing suspending international law in order to become more effective in combat, come an invasion.

"Not really. The point of landmines is to prevent an invasion. The argument in the repeal - an argument which is secondary at best - is that because non-WA nations are not obligated to obey international law on genocide, torture, slavery, rape, and other war crimes*, preventing a non-WA nation from invading and occupying a WA nation is a significant concern.

As stated, we did cast an actual vote on this repeal; and it is our judgment that it continues to do more good for people in areas unprotected by the vast technological, military, and medical power at the disposal of many WA states

"I would personally like to see WADA's work continue at some point to provide such assistance to states lacking those capabilities. The WADA could continue a role similar to that of the UN Demining Survey even without a landmine ban in place."

~ Vice-Colonel Truculent Bilgewater
Ambassador to the WA

* Admittedly, this was a stronger argument before the WA legalised the murder of civilians.

OOC: Stacking watch. A majority of individual WA voters and delegates were voting Against this, until two large delegates voted in favour, turning the overall vote in favour. Now, a majority of individual WA voters and delegates are voting For. Highly anecdotal, but another little nugget of evidence...

[Omigodtheykilledkenny]

The way I've played the relationship in the past is DSR happens to have been assigned the old QoD WA Office in the WA Headquarters by Building Mgmt, and has found a folder full of their old draft proposals and resolution notes.

Whatever happened to Quod anyway? Was some genocidal monster just waiting in the wings to exterminate them, if only that pesky ICC would stop preventing them from doing so?

[Wrapper]

Sigh. We may just draft a "Landmine Ban" to counter this.

[Separatist Peoples]

Sigh. We may just draft a "Landmine Ban" to counter this.

"A full ban would be unfortunate. Mines that remain active indefinitely are the issue. Ones with self destructing mechanisms would pose the same likelihood of failing to detonate then randomly doing so as any other UXO, from missiles to artillery shells." Bell observes.

[Chester Pearson]

Sigh. We may just draft a "Landmine Ban" to counter this.

Good luck with that.....

On a side note, I see Mousey of " Repealopia", or is it "Natsovia" (I can never remember) is voting for this. No surprise there....

[Philjia]

Unwieldy and imperfect as the current resolution is, we should proceed with caution before repealing, as the anti-landmine lobby does not currently represent a strong enough force to pass an improved resolution. Our vote is against for this reason.

[Imperializt Russia]

Wasn't there a replacement to this lurking about?

Not written by me, no; Imperializst Russia mentioned they were interested in doing so but I don't believe they had any immediate plans.

I indeed made no immediate plans and I frankly regret not doing so.
I may be able to rectify this within a week, studies and attention span willing.

[Hakio]

Sia Hedishi is handed an update on the voting of the Landmine Convention from the League of Liberty. She looks astonished for several seconds then proceeds to quietly get up and push in her chair before flipping her office desk. "Apparently we're voting FOR now! Fine! Those idiots down in the League like this proposal so much who am I to object? But I expect a Landmine Removal draft on my desk by the time this shit passes and if I don't I'll write one myself! Unlike all my other projects that I've tried recently but failed to gain any momentum--"

Drock Greiger from the Security Council department looks at Hedishi frightened with coffee. "I-I got you your coffee Ms. Hedishi." Sia Hedishi thanks him as he walks away before she notices a small flower in the coffee. Thus began a beautiful romance film between a stuttering awkward dork, and a drug addict with anger problems, a story that would most likely win many Golden Tapir Awards.

[The Dark Star Republic]

OOC:

I indeed made no immediate plans and I frankly regret not doing so.

Well, I'm sorry if you feel I rushed you, but this had been in draft for a very long time so I wanted to move ahead before November, when my next contract starts and I'll be much more busy. I don't think you have any particular obligation, though, so if you do draft a proposal do so at your own pace.

On a side note, I see Mousey of " Repealopia", or is it "Natsovia" (I can never remember) is voting for this. No surprise there....

It's a surprise to me: however, maybe all that flattering of Europeiea has worked? I really don't know: I never got an answer as to what "unflattering" comment it was that originated the policy of voting against my resolutions on spec.

Or maybe it's just voting to repeal a resolution written by me...?

Whatever happened to Quod anyway? Was some genocidal monster just waiting in the wings to exterminate them, if only that pesky ICC would stop preventing them from doing so?

I don't know, really. I just lost all enthusiasm for playing them because of the SC stuff. I think the nation is probably still alive, but just consigned to irrelevance. QoD had a capped population of 5 million, no real military or economic power, and was located in the very arse end of Wysteria on a dead continent, so without WA activity, there's no real reason anyone would take notice of it in the world.

More on topic, the voting pattern has really shifted now.

[Imperial Republic of Shadow]

If the area mined is clearly marked as such, I am entirely for placement of landmines for border security. No one has any business in such an area on the border unless they are seeking to illegally cross the border at other than the approved crossings.

In addition limited duration minds designed to cease functioning after a time can be valuable for tactical purposes during times of DECLARED WAR in DESIGNATED war zones.

While our country does not use landmines because we are a large island nation, we do use nautical mines at times to sink intruding vessels. (more likely though just torpedos from our sub fleet or missiles from air force).

[The Eternal Kawaii]

You are going to repeal your own resolution?

It's been done before. Though I don't have any immediate plans on this.

In the Name of the Eternal Kawaii, may the Cute One be praised

Could the esteemed representative explain their change of heart toward this proposal? The stated reasons behind the repeal seem flimsy, at best. Were they not considered when GAR #40 was first being proposed, and if not, why?

[The Dark Star Republic]

It's been done before. Though I don't have any immediate plans on this.

In the Name of the Eternal Kawaii, may the Cute One be praised

Could the esteemed representative explain their change of heart toward this proposal? The stated reasons behind the repeal seem flimsy, at best. Were they not considered when GAR #40 was first being proposed, and if not, why?

OOC: There are really two arguments in the repeal. The first is a technical criticism of the definition, the second is a moral/political argument.

The technical criticism in the repeal is simply a mistake on my part. I had meant to write the definition to exclude such mines, but then I simply failed to produce that in the final version. It had about a month of drafting, so I guess no one else noticed it either.

The moral/political argument is one I've used before albeit with yet another nation. As I say, that I am "the player behind" these various nations isn't really relevant: The Dark Star Republic, Gruenberg, and Quintessence of Dust have different in character views towards landmines.

There's also the fact that a lot of time has passed. When The Landmine Convention passed, the WA was still in its relative infancy. Participation was extremely low - look at the vote totals on some of the resolutions from that era - and there was no real organized sovereigntist bloc. The WA was voting in many humanitarian resolutions, had just approved the Convention on Genocide, and seemed set to systematically treat the laws of war. I genuinely believed at the time (completely wrongly) that the WA would make a much better fist of laws of war than the NSUN did.

In fact, quite the opposite occurred. The WA has grown much more militaristic, much more sovereigntist, much more reactionary. Even relatively moderate resolutions are shot down, while a recent repeal legalised virtually all war crimes. When The Landmine Convention passed, a landmine ban made sense because it was reasonable to assume the WA would pass lots of other war crime resolutions and would thoroughly treat weapons of mass destruction. But it's gone in the other direction, and it no longer really makes sense to ban nations from using landmines, yet permit them chemical weapons and totally unregulated use of nuclear weapons. WA nations can legally murder civilians without committing a crime according to international law. The Landmine Convention is a relic of a different age.

[Frenequesta]

I'd say that the risk of a malfunction of one of the hypothetical landmines stated in this repeal are enough to warrant a general removal of all landmines regardless of their type.

The rest of the arguments sound like NatSov boilerplates. I, and Frenequesta, shall stand against, and hope that the rest of the RoUS follow our lead.

--Dawn C. Chalmers, Delegate pro temp for Social Republic and Scientific Collectives of Frenequesta