NationStates

"Welcome all to the ICDN Security Council! Located above the General Assembly, this is only open to members of the ICDN Security Council. The Security Council is tasked with delicate operations as laid out by the Corrington delegation's proposal here:"

SECURITY COUNCIL PROPOSAL v.II
“First off, we firmly believe that there is no country in the world that deserves a permanent seat. Veto-based decision-making as permanent members of Security Councils often do, should be earned through criteria for responsibility. Nations which capably and transparently demonstrate this criteria should be rewarded.

Since these are temporary seats, the ten countries would need to be elected by others, and in getting elected they would need to prove their worth to other member-states. Security Council nations would need to build allies within the ICDN and campaign to show that they are indeed responsible and capable to be trusted to help the world tackle issues from strife, poverty and climate change to pandemics and financial crises. The Corrish structure for an ICDN Security Council would see ten temporary seats opened for election every year. Such elections offer an opportunity for wide, nonregional open competition for each seat, alongside clear, monitored restrictions on lobbying expenses and term limits of four terms to reward excellence while avoiding domination.

Every elected country would have one vote, regardless of its record, wealth, population, or military might. Veto power would only be able to be exercised by three members together, preventing the tyranny of an individual member.”

General Assembly nations can apply in the GA thread as candidates for the vacant seats by simple request, and they will be put on the polls. Any nations interested in joining the SC have to apply by Monday the 19th.

Members (current):
- Arvan Irawer (President)
- South Americanastan (Vice President)
- Dalmannia
- Corrington
- Hopal
- Spaincio
- Zarnicovia Nova
- Deblar
- Countesia
- Islamic Holy Sites

Chen Shui-bian proposes a Transitional Authority in Matabeleland He then explains that during the 5th Border War , Ethnic Afrikaners living in Matabeleland Rhodesia declared Independence from Rhodesia and formed a Country called the Voortrekker Republic of Matabele . that country wanted to join the UAC as part of South Africa , "Now that the UAC is gone and the UASA is here , The UASA must full its commitment to allow its Voortrekker Brothers to join the UASA , their leader , Mark Rutte called me and said you must pressure the Successor State to admit Matabeleland into the UASA



Chen Shui-bian then shows the flag of the Partially Recognized Breakaway Country


He then shows the map of Voortrekker owned Territory and the map of the proposed Transitional Authority


He Says , We must pass a resolution into pressuring Australia-South Africa (the UASA's Short Name) into admitting Matabeleland as part of the UASA , but a Transitional Authority must be established in Matabeleland

Taiwanese South West Africa wrote:Chen Shui-bian proposes a Transitional Authority in Matabeleland He then explains that during the 5th Border War , Ethnic Afrikaners living in Matabeleland Rhodesia declared Independence from Rhodesia and formed a Country called the Voortrekker Republic of Matabele . that country wanted to join the UAC as part of South Africa , "Now that the UAC is gone and the UASA is here , The UASA must full its commitment to allow its Voortrekker Brothers to join the UASA , their leader , Mark Rutte called me and said you must pressure the Successor State to admit Matabeleland into the UASA



Chen Shui-bian then shows the flag of the Partially Recognized Breakaway Country

(Image)

He then shows the map of Voortrekker owned Territory and the map of the proposed Transitional Authority
(Image)

He Says , We must pass a resolution into pressuring Australia-South Africa (the UASA's Short Name) into admitting Matabeleland as part of the UASA , but a Transitional Authority must be established in Matabeleland

"That would be acceptable, however the German Delegation fears conflict with UASA and a divide in the ICDN. Why exactly does UASA not want Matabeleland?"

Imperium Germaniae wrote:

Taiwanese South West Africa wrote:Chen Shui-bian proposes a Transitional Authority in Matabeleland He then explains that during the 5th Border War , Ethnic Afrikaners living in Matabeleland Rhodesia declared Independence from Rhodesia and formed a Country called the Voortrekker Republic of Matabele . that country wanted to join the UAC as part of South Africa , "Now that the UAC is gone and the UASA is here , The UASA must full its commitment to allow its Voortrekker Brothers to join the UASA , their leader , Mark Rutte called me and said you must pressure the Successor State to admit Matabeleland into the UASA



Chen Shui-bian then shows the flag of the Partially Recognized Breakaway Country

(Image)

He then shows the map of Voortrekker owned Territory and the map of the proposed Transitional Authority
(Image)

He Says , We must pass a resolution into pressuring Australia-South Africa (the UASA's Short Name) into admitting Matabeleland as part of the UASA , but a Transitional Authority must be established in Matabeleland

"That would be acceptable, however the German Delegation fears conflict with UASA and a divide in the ICDN. Why exactly does UASA not want Matabeleland?"

Chen Shui-bian says the UASA did want Matabeleland but had other priorities like Normalization of relations with us

Taiwanese South West Africa wrote:

Imperium Germaniae wrote:"That would be acceptable, however the German Delegation fears conflict with UASA and a divide in the ICDN. Why exactly does UASA not want Matabeleland?"

Chen Shui-bian says the UASA did want Matabeleland but had other priorities like Normalization of relations with us

"Well, if it was a promise then UASA should keep it. I support this however would like to hear what other Security Council Members think."

Imperium Germaniae wrote:

Taiwanese South West Africa wrote:Chen Shui-bian says the UASA did want Matabeleland but had other priorities like Normalization of relations with us

"Well, if it was a promise then UASA should keep it. I support this however would like to hear what other Security Council Members think."

"We agree, and believe the UASA should keep it's promise to absorb matabeleland. More broken promises and breakaway states will only serve to further destabilize the region."

Imperium Germaniae wrote:

Taiwanese South West Africa wrote:Chen Shui-bian says the UASA did want Matabeleland but had other priorities like Normalization of relations with us

"Well, if it was a promise then UASA should keep it. I support this however would like to hear what other Security Council Members think."

he then says that Even though the UASA has normalized relations with us . They claim South West Africa as part of their Territory because before the 5th Border War South West Africa was part of the UAC


map of Pre Border War UAC


Map of the UAC and later the UASA after the Border War

"Now, for the first order of business, we will be electing a President of the Security Council. All nations interested, please say so."

Arvan Irawer would like to run for President of the Security Council.
(OOC:) Will there be a period where we will be able to present why we would be a good president?

Taiwanese South West Africa wrote:

Imperium Germaniae wrote:"That would be acceptable, however the German Delegation fears conflict with UASA and a divide in the ICDN. Why exactly does UASA not want Matabeleland?"

Chen Shui-bian says the UASA did want Matabeleland but had other priorities like Normalization of relations with us

Arvan Irawer also supports this, however we are cautious of pressuring nations too much and of creating a rip in the ICDN if a conflict were to arise.

Arvan Irawer wrote:

"Now, for the first order of business, we will be electing a President of the Security Council. All nations interested, please say so."

Arvan Irawer would like to run for President of the Security Council.
(OOC:) Will there be a period where we will be able to present why we would be a good president?

Taiwanese South West Africa wrote:Chen Shui-bian says the UASA did want Matabeleland but had other priorities like Normalization of relations with us

Arvan Irawer also supports this, however we are cautious of pressuring nations too much and of creating a rip in the ICDN if a conflict were to arise.

OOC: Yeah I think I'll take candidates until around this time tomorrow and after that they can present.

I agree with Arvan Irawer, if UASA does not wish the take the territory, they should not be forced to. A safe compromise would be to create the territory of Matabeleland into a ICDN guaranteed independent nation. What do the other delegates think of this?

Imperium Germaniae wrote:

Arvan Irawer wrote:Arvan Irawer would like to run for President of the Security Council.
(OOC:) Will there be a period where we will be able to present why we would be a good president?


Arvan Irawer also supports this, however we are cautious of pressuring nations too much and of creating a rip in the ICDN if a conflict were to arise.

OOC: Yeah I think I'll take candidates until around this time tomorrow and after that they can present.

I agree with Arvan Irawer, if UASA does not wish the take the territory, they should not be forced to. A safe compromise would be to create the territory of Matabeleland into a ICDN guaranteed independent nation. What do the other delegates think of this?

"I support a transitional government in Matabeleland, but I think we should wait for the UASA to comment on this."

Imperium Germaniae wrote:

Arvan Irawer wrote:Arvan Irawer would like to run for President of the Security Council.
(OOC:) Will there be a period where we will be able to present why we would be a good president?


Arvan Irawer also supports this, however we are cautious of pressuring nations too much and of creating a rip in the ICDN if a conflict were to arise.

OOC: Yeah I think I'll take candidates until around this time tomorrow and after that they can present.

I agree with Arvan Irawer, if UASA does not wish the take the territory, they should not be forced to. A safe compromise would be to create the territory of Matabeleland into a ICDN guaranteed independent nation. What do the other delegates think of this?

Corrington seconds this proposal. Additionally, peace and relations need to be better facilitated between nations in South Africa, as there have already been six border wars and numerous other proxy conflicts. It is time to sort out and end the regional strife.

Imperium Germaniae wrote:

Arvan Irawer wrote:Arvan Irawer would like to run for President of the Security Council.
(OOC:) Will there be a period where we will be able to present why we would be a good president?


Arvan Irawer also supports this, however we are cautious of pressuring nations too much and of creating a rip in the ICDN if a conflict were to arise.

OOC: Yeah I think I'll take candidates until around this time tomorrow and after that they can present.

I agree with Arvan Irawer, if UASA does not wish the take the territory, they should not be forced to. A safe compromise would be to create the territory of Matabeleland into a ICDN guaranteed independent nation. What do the other delegates think of this?

Mr Chen agrees and he has the groundwork for the Transitional Authority , he has already called President Botha , and he said that Mr Botha will agree to form a ICDN Mandate of Matabeleland under UASA administration before a referendum can be held for admission in the UASA

Mr Chen then proposes the Mandate be divided into two ICDN Mandates , North Matabeleland and South Matabeleland

Flag of North Matabeleland


Flag of South Matabeleland


These two Mandates will be under UASA administration until a referendum can be held for admission in the UASA

the Administrator for the Two Mandates will be Pieter van Niekerk a Botswanan Yamikaner and MP for Gaborone


Non Afrikaners living in the Area and those that Settled during the UAC's Existence (1957-2021) which include Anglo Australasians , Burmese , Palestinians , Irish , Jews , Ghesites , Shona , Yamikaners , Lushanskians ( Includes North Koreans and Angolans since both are part of Lushansk) , Zulus , the Northern Ndebele people , Maori , French Australasians , Filipino Australasians , Belgian Congolese (who came as refugees from the DRC in the 1960s though some came from the South African Australasian Republic in 1959) Portuguese South Africans (immigrated from the UAC in the 1970s) , Tutsi , Chinese people and Koreans (excludes North Koreans due to them being classified as Lushanskian ) will be represented by Pieter Nkrumah and will be moved to Bulawayo which will become an Independent City State .

Taiwanese South West Africa wrote:Non Afrikaners living in the Area and those that Settled during the UAC's Existence (1957-2021) which include Anglo Australasians , Burmese , Palestinians , Irish , Jews , Ghesites , Shona , Yamikaners , Lushanskians ( Includes North Koreans and Angolans since both are part of Lushansk) , Zulus , the Northern Ndebele people , Maori , French Australasians , Filipino Australasians , Belgian Congolese (who came as refugees from the DRC in the 1960s though some came from the South African Australasian Republic in 1959) Portuguese South Africans (immigrated from the UAC in the 1970s) , Tutsi , Chinese people and Koreans (excludes North Koreans due to them being classified as Lushanskian ) will be represented by Pieter Nkrumah and will be moved to Bulawayo which will become an Independent City State .

Do the large number of ethnicities consent to being moved? And additionally, is it even ethical to just up and remove all non-Afrikaners? Clearly ethnic clashes and governmental blunders have been the root of much of these conflicts, but is state-sponsored division per ethnic status really the solution? Corrington is curious as to what other security council members think of this.

Non Afrikaners living in the Area and those that Settled during the UAC's Existence (1957-2021) which include Anglo Australasians , Burmese , Palestinians , Irish , Jews , Ghesites , Shona , Yamikaners , Lushanskians ( Includes North Koreans and Angolans since both are part of Lushansk) , Zulus , the Northern Ndebele people , Maori , French Australasians , Filipino Australasians , Belgian Congolese (who came as refugees from the DRC in the 1960s though some came from the South African Australasian Republic in 1959) Portuguese South Africans (immigrated from the UAC in the 1970s) , Tutsi , Chinese people and Koreans (excludes North Koreans due to them being classified as Lushanskian ) will be represented by Pieter Nkrumah and will be moved to Bulawayo which will become an Independent City State .

"We do not feel like any forced deportation is necessary, if people do not want to leave then their should be nothing forcing them to leave. Not to mention the poverty and overpopulation issues Bulawayo will face due to the influx of immigrants."

“I do not think that anyone should be deported from Matabeland without just cause.”

An

Corrington wrote:

Taiwanese South West Africa wrote:Non Afrikaners living in the Area and those that Settled during the UAC's Existence (1957-2021) which include Anglo Australasians , Burmese , Palestinians , Irish , Jews , Ghesites , Shona , Yamikaners , Lushanskians ( Includes North Koreans and Angolans since both are part of Lushansk) , Zulus , the Northern Ndebele people , Maori , French Australasians , Filipino Australasians , Belgian Congolese (who came as refugees from the DRC in the 1960s though some came from the South African Australasian Republic in 1959) Portuguese South Africans (immigrated from the UAC in the 1970s) , Tutsi , Chinese people and Koreans (excludes North Koreans due to them being classified as Lushanskian ) will be represented by Pieter Nkrumah and will be moved to Bulawayo which will become an Independent City State .

Do the large number of ethnicities consent to being moved? And additionally, is it even ethical to just up and remove all non-Afrikaners? Clearly ethnic clashes and governmental blunders have been the root of much of these conflicts, but is state-sponsored division per ethnic status really the solution? Corrington is curious as to what other security council members think of this.

Trenaka wrote:“I do not think that anyone should be deported from Matabeland without just cause.”

Due to International Backlash , Southern Matabeleland will be multicultural and recently the UASA President called and suggested that Matabeleland be divided into two different states

North Matabeleland

South Matabeleland


The President of North Matabeleland will be Kenneth O’Brady

Lars:
“According to my understanding, Ludistan has been chosen for the Security Council, we will certainly do our best.”

Regarding the situation in South Africa, Imperium Germaniae strongly opposes any deportation and would like UASA to comment.

President P.W. Botha phones in to the Security Council and says that while we agree to a ICDN mandate , We Oppose any Deportation of the Already Multicultural Matabeleland which united against a Common Enemy which is Rhodesia.

Union of Australia and South Africa wrote:President P.W. Botha phones in to the Security Council and says that while we agree to a ICDN mandate , We Oppose any Deportation of the Already Multicultural Matabeleland which united against a Common Enemy which is Rhodesia.

Thank you. Here is an official resolution from the Security Council:

Matabeleland will be divided into two mandates North Matabeleland and South Matabeleland under UASA administration. They will be divided based on this map:

(Image)

. Bulawayo will be under the direct administration of the ICDN Security Council, who will then hold elections in that city, in order to deter ethnic conflicts that may arise. Safe passage will also be guaranteed across Matabeleland. Should the majority of each region and the UASA vote to join the UASA, they will do so immediately.

This resolution is up for debate and can be amended.

Imperium Germaniae wrote:

Union of Australia and South Africa wrote:President P.W. Botha phones in to the Security Council and says that while we agree to a ICDN mandate , We Oppose any Deportation of the Already Multicultural Matabeleland which united against a Common Enemy which is Rhodesia.

Thank you. Here is an official resolution from the Security Council:

Matabeleland will be divided into two mandates North Matabeleland and South Matabeleland under UASA administration. They will be divided based on this map:

(Image)

. Bulawayo will be under the direct administration of the ICDN Security Council, who will then hold elections in that city, in order to deter ethnic conflicts that may arise. Safe passage will also be guaranteed across Matabeleland. Should the majority of each region and the UASA vote to join the UASA, they will do so immediately.

This resolution is up for debate and can be amended.

We would like to Ammend the Proposal by adding that Bulawayo will be a Special Administrative Region of the UASA if Matabeleland Residents want to join the UASA which 92% want to join

Union of Australia and South Africa wrote:

Imperium Germaniae wrote:Thank you. Here is an official resolution from the Security Council:


This resolution is up for debate and can be amended.

We would like to Ammend the Proposal by adding that Bulawayo will be a Special Administrative Region of the UASA if Matabeleland Residents want to join the UASA which 92% want to join

Corrington is curious as to why the UASA wants Bulawayo specifically, as it seems most of the Security Council may not know of what implications this action would have.

Corrington wrote:

Union of Australia and South Africa wrote:
We would like to Ammend the Proposal by adding that Bulawayo will be a Special Administrative Region of the UASA if Matabeleland Residents want to join the UASA which 92% want to join

Corrington is curious as to why the UASA wants Bulawayo specifically, as it seems most of the Security Council may not know of what implications this action would have.

"Yes it does seem a bit strange that you have opposed the rest of the territories, who want to join UASA, but specifically want Bulawayo."

to clarify we want Matabeleland and Bulawayo , we now show you a map proving that we want Matabeleland

Union of Australia and South Africa wrote:(Image)
to clarify we want Matabeleland and Bulawayo , we now show you a map proving that we want Matabeleland

"Oh thank you. Then the issue is settled, and the Security Council does not need to get involved as UASA can annex Matabeleland. If I am wrong please correct me."