[DRAFT] Regulation of WA Military Force

[Railana]

The first of a planned set of four proposals consisting of the following:

1. Regulation of WA Military Force: restricts the World Assembly from establishing a military force or employing violence except for the purposes listed below,
2. WA Peacemaking: authorizes the World Assembly to engage in offensive military action against violent non-state actors in consenting member states,
3. WA Peacekeeping: authorizes the World Assembly to engage in defensive military action while negotiating, implementing, and enforcing peace agreements between consenting parties, and
4. WA Peacebuilding: authorizes the World Assembly to engage in defensive military action while engaging in post-conflict reconstruction in member states.

I am aware that this proposal is currently illegal for contradicting GAR #2. However, upon the repeal of GAR #2, this proposal will be legal, as the "no army rule" has been abolished.

Regulation of WA Military Force
Category: International Security | Strength: Mild

Recognizing that the mandate of the World Assembly may be changed to permit the potential creation of a military force,

Acknowledging the potential benefits to international peace and security, as well as public order and safety in World Assembly member states, associated with limited World Assembly military intervention in certain cases,

Emphasizing the immense responsibility on the World Assembly to ensure that any World Assembly military intervention does not violate or threaten the national sovereignty of member or non-member states, nor further destabilize areas that are enduring or have recently endured conflict,

Seeking to establish reasonable limitations on the use of military force by the World Assembly consistent with the above principles,

The General Assembly,

1. Defines the following terms for the purposes of this resolution:
   
   1. "defensive military force" as a military force that is not permitted to conduct offensive military action and may only use violence in immediate self-defense, and
   2. "offensive military force" as a military force that is permitted to conduct offensive military action that is not in immediate self-defense,
   3. "recognized government" as an entity that is recognized by the World Assembly as possessing the right to exercise political authority with respect to a particular World Assembly member state,
   4. "violent non-state actor" as an entity that contests the right to govern of a recognized government and that uses violence illegal under international law, including but not limited to war crimes and crimes against humanity, to achieve its aims, and
   5. "peace settlement" as an agreement declaring the temporary or permanent cessation of hostilities between a World Assembly member state and one or more member states, non-member states, or any other entities not recognized by the World Assembly as states but which were previously engaged in the aforementioned hostilities;
2. Prohibits the World Assembly from establishing offensive military forces except for the following purposes:
   
   1. combating violent non-state actors in a member state, with the continued consent of the recognized government of that member state, and
   2. maintaining general order and safety in a member state when the recognized government of that member state lacks the ability to do so, as well as preparing the member state to eventually do so independently, with the continued consent of the recognized government of that member state;
3. Further prohibits the World Assembly from establishing defensive military forces except for the following purposes:
   
   1. mediating negotiations for, assisting in the implementation of, and monitoring compliance with the terms of a peace settlement, with the continued consent of the parties to the settlement, and
   2. assisting in post-conflict reconstruction, with the continued consent of the recognized government of the member state where the reconstruction takes place;
4. Further prohibits the World Assembly from using or providing material support for violence, except in immediate self-defense, against:
   
   1. any recognized government of a member state, and
   2. any entity outside the territorial jurisdiction of a member state or the World Assembly;
5. Clarifies that the World Assembly absolutely may not compel member states to comply with international law through the use of violence;
   
6. Strongly urges member states to employ the use of military force to maintain international peace and security in cases where the World Assembly is not permitted to intervene, but only once all reasonable alternatives to conflict have been attempted.

[The Austria-Hungary]

This does seem like it has some potential passing in the WA.
I most certainly will back this.

[Separatist Peoples]

"Seems a reasonable compromise between the need for a peacekeeping force and the risk of a WA mandated force being abused. More to follow when I've had some time to consider."

[Wallenburg]

"If this becomes necessary, Wallenburg would be willing to support it."

[Targovia]

"I will support this bill to the end."

[Dreamstar]

"Supportive. I will supply soldiers, equipment, communications, goods, whatever's needed."

[Pillowlandia]

Just eewwww. The establishment of a WA military force will be only ever used for threatening non WA member states in RPs which will be poor for all involved. If you really want a military for protecting peace and such then try a smaller more logical RP group such as the IFC or something similar.

[Separatist Peoples]

Just eewwww. The establishment of a WA military force will be only ever used for threatening non WA member states in RPs which will be poor for all involved. If you really want a military for protecting peace and such then try a smaller more logical RP group such as the IFC or something similar.

OOC: That has literally nothing to do with the current proposal. You should read it and try again.

[East Gondwana]

[Railana]

((OOC: Bumping this. I've made some changes which I think make the proposal legal even though GAR #2 has not yet been repealed. Technically at the moment it's just a lot of duplication with a single unique active clause at the end.))

[Auralia]

Bumping this in light of IA's proposed repeal of Rights and Duties.

[Liberimery]

As a Neutral Country, we will not engage in military force unless we are directly attacked by a foreign power. We are unwilling to contribute to any military force under the World Assembly UNLESS there is a clause that will allow member states to have no obligation to to support any World Assembly military action or peacekeeping forces and may withdraw such material support at any time they so choose without jeopardizing their standing in the World Assembly.

[Araraukar]

"There is no way any external legislative body can force Araraukar to create military forces, whether or not they were to be deployed domestically or in international operations. Nor will we permit our citizens to volunteer to join such a force, unless they also voluntarily relinquish both their citizenship and nationality."

[Aclion]

"I notice that the WA is prohibited from establishing a military force for the purpose of defending it's assets and personnel."

[Imperium Anglorum]

"I notice that the WA is prohibited from establishing a military force for the purpose of defending it's assets and personnel."

Oh yea, I'm definitely for the WA doing that. I mean, natural law and all. Pro Milone. Also, I'm also for permitting defensive missions for humanitarian aid. Actually, at that point, you may as well just get around to prohibiting the WA to create defensive missions except where authorised by WA resolution.

[Auralia]

Should Rights and Duties be repealed, this will be submitted shortly thereafter.

[Free Santa Rosa]

This is imperialism, good sirs! We are appalled such a measure was even drawn up in this Assembly. No matter how noble the aims may seem, this can only lead to states using the collective force of the World Assembly to suppress what that state deems to be "violent non-state actors", no matter how legitimate or just their struggles are.

The World Assembly should be a place of international solidarity for all classes, not a vehicle for foreign intervention. This is frankly unacceptable to us.

[Pan-Asiatic States]

This is imperialism, good sirs! We are appalled such a measure was even drawn up in this Assembly. No matter how noble the aims may seem, this can only lead to states using the collective force of the World Assembly to suppress what that state deems to be "violent non-state actors", no matter how legitimate or just their struggles are.

The World Assembly should be a place of international solidarity for all classes, not a vehicle for foreign intervention. This is frankly unacceptable to us.

I tend to agree with my Santa Rosan comrade. There should be no war, except Class War.

[Kowani]

This is imperialism, good sirs! We are appalled such a measure was even drawn up in this Assembly. No matter how noble the aims may seem, this can only lead to states using the collective force of the World Assembly to suppress what that state deems to be "violent non-state actors", no matter how legitimate or just their struggles are.

The World Assembly should be a place of international solidarity for all classes, not a vehicle for foreign intervention. This is frankly unacceptable to us.

I tend to agree with my Santa Rosan comrade. There should be no war, except Class War.

“Regardless of what may or may not should exist, the reality is that more war exists beyond the interminable class conflict.”

[Kenmoria]

This is imperialism, good sirs! We are appalled such a measure was even drawn up in this Assembly. No matter how noble the aims may seem, this can only lead to states using the collective force of the World Assembly to suppress what that state deems to be "violent non-state actors", no matter how legitimate or just their struggles are.

The World Assembly should be a place of international solidarity for all classes, not a vehicle for foreign intervention. This is frankly unacceptable to us.

“This proposal, perhaps unfortunately, requires that the reigning government consent to the intervention. Therefore, not only do internationally-condemned acts of violence have to occur, but these must also be frowned upon by the legitimate state. I don’t see how any legitimate group could use such unsavoury tactics.”

[WayNeacTia]

"Categorically opposed! The only enforcement arm the WA should possess is a civilian police force, under civilian oversight.

Wayne"

[Sposteen]

The floating alien encounter suit hums with its several protruding tendrils and a central glowing purple translator orb.

"This is reasonable. However, what organ of the WA would carry out these missions?"

Klee, first Sposs Ambassador to the GA.