[DRAFT] Prohibition on Religious Wars

[The Holy Cee]

OOC: Hello there. After much forum digging, I have come up with a proposal that tackles a narrow part regarding religious tolerance. Specifically, this proposal tackles the issue of religious wars. Keep in mind that this my first time drafting a WA resolution. I may have overlooked a few other things. Your comments, suggestions, contemplations, commotions, questions, exclamations, and consultations are very welcome and highly appreciated. I may have trouble responding to your inquiries so please bear with me. Thank you!

OOC: Keep in mind that this resolution does not cover interventions in civil wars. However, I think it does not need to as civil wars are instigated by nation states themselves and also, specific aspects regarding interventions are already covered by WAR# 2: Rights and Duties of WA states.

OOC: Individual human rights are also not covered by this resolution. To exercise freedom of religion is also covered already by GA #35, The Charter of Civil Rights.

As you pass by along the WA Bulletin Board, you notice that, among the numerous announcements, pronouncements, and other publications, a golden-colored piece of paper stands out among them. It reads as follows.

"Hear Ye! Hear Ye! The Holy Cee wishes to invite all WA ambassadors to comment on an existing draft of the proposed resolution "PROHIBITION ON RELIGIOUS WARS".

OOC: Edited texts in RED font.

---

Prohibition on Religious Wars
A resolution to restrict political freedoms in the interest of law and order.
Category: Political Stability
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: The Holy Cee

The World Assembly,

AFFIRMING the right of every nation state to adopt a single or multiple national and/or official religions or lack thereof.

APPALLED at the absence of a resolution prohibiting religious conflict among and/or between WA member states and/or non-WA member states.

CONDEMNING wars fought in order to persecute individuals based on their religion.

BELIEVING that individuals have the right to choose freely in what to believe in.

STRONGLY BELIEVING that no nation state should be attacked based on their belief system.

HEREBY,

DEFINES "religious pretext" for this resolution as with the purpose of and/or intent on replacing and/or removing a nation state's national and/or official religion.

REQUIRES WA member states to prohibit declarations of war based on religious pretext.

Prohibition on Religious Wars
A resolution to restrict political freedoms in the interest of law and order.
Category: Political Stability
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: The Holy Cee

The World Assembly,

AFFIRMING the right of every nation state to adopt a single or multiple national and/or official religions or lack thereof.

APPALLED at the absence of a resolution prohibiting religious conflict among and/or between WA member states and/or non-WA member states.

CONDEMNING wars fought in order to persecute individuals based on their religion.

BELIEVING that individuals have the right to choose freely in what to believe in.

STRONGLY BELIEVING that no nation state should be attacked based on their belief system.

HEREBY,
DEFINES "religious pretext" for this resolution as a reason given in justification of a course of action when in fact the purpose of or intent is on:
1. replacing or removing either a nation state's national or official religion
2. imposition of religion not of an attacked nation state's religion
3. coercion or forced conversion of a nation state's population.

DEFINES "religious casus belli" for this resolution as justification for war with purpose of or intent on:
1. replacing or removing either a nation state's national or official religion
2. imposition of religion not of an attacked nation state's religion
3. coercion or forced conversion of a nation state's population.

PROHIBITS WA member states to make declarations of war or initiate armed conflict based on religious pretext or religious casus belli.

REQUIRES WA member states to refrain from recognizing any territorial acquisition from by another nation state resulting from wars declared based on religious pretext.

CLARIFIES that this resolution:
1. Does not prohibit WA member states in defending themselves in case of war or armed attack by a non-member nation state
2. Does not disallow requested intervention by WA member states in defending attacked WA member states subject to the existing rules and regulations on military intervention by international law

EXPANDS the duties and responsibilities of the WACC Judicial Committee (Judicial Committee of the Compliance Commission) to:
1. To monitor wars declared by WA member states based on religious pretext or religious casus belli
2. To declare wars declared by WA member states based on religious pretext or religious casus belli to be null and void

Prohibition on Religious Wars
A resolution to restrict political freedoms in the interest of law and order.
Category: Political Stability
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: The Holy Cee

The World Assembly,

AFFIRMING the right of every nation state to adopt a single or multiple national and/or official religions or lack thereof.

APPALLED at the absence of a resolution prohibiting religious conflict among and/or between WA member states and/or non-WA member states.

CONDEMNING wars fought in order to persecute individuals based on their religion.

BELIEVING that individuals have the right to choose freely in what to believe in.

STRONGLY BELIEVING that no nation state should be attacked based on their belief system.

HEREBY,

1. DEFINES "religious pretext" for this resolution as a reason given in justification of a course of action when in fact the purpose of or intent is on:
   
   1. replacing or removing either a nation state's national or official religion
   2. imposition of religion not of an attacked nation state's religion
   3. coerced or forced conversion of a nation state's population.
2. DEFINES "religious casus belli" for this resolution as justification for war with purpose of or intent on:
   
   1. replacing or removing either a nation state's national or official religion
   2. imposition of religion not of an attacked nation state's religion
   3. coerced or forced conversion of a nation state's population.
3. PROHIBITS WA member states to make declarations of war or initiate armed conflict based on religious pretext or religious casus belli.
   
   
4. REQUIRES WA member states to refrain from recognizing any territorial acquisition from by another nation state resulting from wars declared based on religious pretext.
   
   
5. CLARIFIES that this resolution:
   
   1. Does not prohibit WA member states in defending themselves in case of war or armed attack by a non-member nation state
   2. Does not disallow requested intervention by WA member states in defending attacked WA member states subject to the existing rules and regulations on military intervention by international law.
6. EXPANDS the duties and responsibilities of the WACC Judicial Committee (Judicial Committee of the Compliance Commission) to:
   
   1. Monitor wars declared by WA member states based on religious pretext or religious casus belli
   2. Declare wars declared by WA member states based on religious pretext or religious casus belli to be null and void.

Draft Version v4:

Prohibition on Religious Wars
A resolution to restrict political freedoms in the interest of law and order.
Category: Political Stability
Strength: Mild
Proposed by: The Holy Cee

The World Assembly,

AFFIRMING the right of every nation state to adopt a single or multiple national and/or official religions or lack thereof.

APPALLED at the absence of a resolution prohibiting religious conflict among and/or between WA member states and/or non-WA member states.

CONDEMNING wars fought in order to persecute individuals based on their religion.

BELIEVING that individuals have the right to choose freely in what to believe in.

STRONGLY BELIEVING that no nation state should be attacked based on their belief system.

HEREBY,

1. DEFINES "religious pretext" for this resolution as a reason given in justification of a course of action when in fact the purpose of or intent is on:
   
   1. replacing or removing either a nation state's national or official religion
   2. imposition of religion not of an attacked nation state's religion
   3. coerced or forced conversion of a nation state's population.
2. DEFINES "religious casus belli" for this resolution as justification for war with purpose of or intent on:
   
   1. replacing or removing either a nation state's national or official religion
   2. imposition of religion not of an attacked nation state's religion
   3. coerced or forced conversion of a nation state's population.
3. PROHIBITS WA member states to make declarations of war or initiate armed conflict based on religious pretext or religious casus belli.
   
   
4. DECREES that WA member states have the duty to refrain from recognizing any territorial acquisition from by another nation state resulting from wars declared based on religious pretext or religious casus belli.
   
   
5. CLARIFIES that this resolution:
   
   1. Does not prohibit WA member states in defending themselves in case of war or armed attack by a non-member nation state
   2. Does not prohibit requested intervention by WA member states in defending attacked WA member states subject to the existing rules and regulations on military intervention by existing WA resolutions
6. EXPANDS the duties and responsibilities of the WACC Judicial Committee (Judicial Committee of the Compliance Commission) to:
   
   1. Monitor wars declared by WA member states to determine whether the declared war is based on religious pretext or religious casus belli
   2. Declare wars declared by WA member states determined to be based on religious pretext or religious casus belli to be null and void

[Kenmoria]

"“NationState” or “NationStates should” have a space between and be uncapitalised, to become “nation state” or “nation states”."

(OOC: Using the actual name of the game, NationStates, counts as meta-gaming, which is against the rules.)

[Bruke]

Ambassador Nega notices the proposal and makes a comment. "Does this proposal cover wars meant to change a nation state's official religion from "none", in otherwords no specific religion, to a particular religion, or vice versa?"

[The Holy Cee]

"“NationState” or “NationStates should” have a space between and be uncapitalised, to become “nation state” or “nation states”."

(OOC: Using the actual name of the game, NationStates, counts as meta-gaming, which is against the rules.)

OOC: Oh right I forgot about that. Thank you. Err, may I ask what do you think of the draft?

Ambassador Nega notices the proposal and makes a comment. "Does this proposal cover wars meant to change a nation state's official religion from "none", meaning the state has no particular national religion, to a particular religion, or vice versa?"

The Holy Ceean Ambassador nods, "Yes, Ambassador. It does. May I reiterate the clause, 'replacing and/or removing a NationState's national and/or official religion/s.'"

[Kenmoria]

"“NationState” or “NationStates should” have a space between and be uncapitalised, to become “nation state” or “nation states”."

(OOC: Using the actual name of the game, NationStates, counts as meta-gaming, which is against the rules.)

OOC: Oh right I forgot about that. Thank you. Err, may I ask what do you think of the draft

(OOC: The draft looks good for a first draft by a new author. The concept, banning religious wars, is one I'm fairly certain doesn't inherently contradict or duplicate another active resolution. There are a few problems and the draft's a bit short but with drafting it should be a good proposal.)

[The Holy Cee]

OOC: Oh right I forgot about that. Thank you. Err, may I ask what do you think of the draft

(OOC: The draft looks good for a first draft by a new author. The concept, banning religious wars, is one I'm fairly certain doesn't inherently contradict or duplicate another active resolution. There are a few problems and the draft's a bit short but with drafting it should be a good proposal.)

OOC: Yes, thank you. I was concerned that it was a bit short, but certain topics like intervention in civil wars and individual rights are already covered by other resolutions. I think maybe I'm missing on a few more but the overall topic remains ("Banning religious wars").

[Araraukar]

AFFIRMING the right of every nation state to adopt a single or multiple national and/or official religion/s or lack thereof.

OOC post: A minor nitpick here and throughout where it's used, "religion/s" shouldn't stay as the spelling in the final draft. You already specify "single or multiple" so just use the grammatically correct "religions" (or switch them around to "multiple or single" and use "religion", which is what I'd do).

APPALLED at the absence of a resolution prohibiting religious conflict among and/or between WA member states and/or non-WA member states.

Saying anything about prohibiting religious conflict between non-WA nations makes little sense as the WA can't legislate on nonmembers. Also, you should be using the preamble to emphasize the international side of this, because there are going to be many WA nations who will not see why a religiously justified war between two other nations they're not involved with is their problem in any way.

DEFINES "religious pretext" for this resolution as with the purpose of and/or intent on replacing and/or removing a nation state's national and/or official religion/s.

Don't use italics. If Imperium Anglorum, our resident superdelegate, doesn't have any other reason to vote against this, chat effects will be reason enough.

Also, given that non-member nations aren't bound by this or any other resolution, if one of them declares a war on "religious pretext" on a member nation, is that nation allowed to defend itself? Additionally, would using religion as an additional flavour for the reasons of war be allowed? Such as, going to war for oil, but using the "heathen religion" as a way to lift your own troops' morale, to give them an extra excuse to go kick foreigner ass?

And if yes, then all this resolution would likely do would be that every actually religious war will use something else as a justification and tack on religious reasons as a side-effect, even if everyone knows it's really about the religion.

REQUIRES WA member states to prohibit declarations of war based on religious pretext

Since you cover both possibilities (member and non-member), you don't need the subclauses.

My main problem with this is that genocide is already banned, and I really can't see how a religion could be stomped out by force without resorting to a genocide. Especially as GA #38, Convention Against Genocide specifically says:

1. (1) Genocide shall be defined as any act committed, or measure enacted, with the intent to destroy, in whole or partially, an identifiable group of persons on the basis of belief, ethnicity, nationality, culture, or a perceived innate characteristic, which for the purposes of this resolution shall include sexual orientation.

(2) Acts of genocide include, but are not limited to: killing or inflicting serious harm upon members of the group, creating living conditions for the group which tend to bring about its physical destruction, forcibly removing children from the group, or taking measures to prevent births within the group.

2. Member nations are prohibited from perpetrating acts of genocide, and must take action against non-state groups undertaking such activities whithin their borders.

I underlined the relevant bits. If a religious war was indeed intended to take out a religion, then unless it is only a "propaganda war", in which case I think Freedom of Expression or one of the other resolutions of similar nature might kick in, I really can't see how it wouldn't trigger GA #38.

For reference, GA #30, Freedom of Expression.

EDIT: It's a great first attempt! I'd additionally suggest putting a "Hereby" in its own line as a demarcation point between the preamble and the active clauses.

[Greater Free Oceania]

Representative Mikhail Illandrikov stands up and clears his throat, "My friend," he begins in a thick Russo-Oceanian accent, "I support this legislation on a conceptual level. Religious wars are horrific and pointless. But at it's current stage, the bill is - understandably - very clearly unfinished. I must ask, how is this to be enforced? Might I suggest that the duty is given to one of the numerous already existing WA councils?"

[Grays Harbor]

Ban religious wars. Hnh. But wars based on conquest, appropriation of resources, or national butthurt are still ok-fine. Right?

[United Massachusetts]

"Sir, do you mean to say that nations are not permitted to go to war to remove a blood-stained theocracy from power?"

[Kenmoria]

"Sir, do you mean to say that nations are not permitted to go to war to remove a blood-stained theocracy from power?"

"If I understand the draft correctly, that would only be prohibited if the nation aimed not to topple an oppressive regime, but to change the national religion."

[Sierra Lyricalia]

OOC: I hesitate to be too hard-assed about this, but I worry there's a potential GAR #2 violation here.

Article 5 § War in the World of NationStates is defined as a consensual act between two or more NationStates. WA Member States may, at their discretion, intercede against declarations of war on behalf of NationStates who wish to avoid war.

Since war is "a consensual act," I'm not 100% sure the WA has the power to legislate on motives.

My colleagues may disagree, of course; and I'd frankly prefer not to make an issue of it. But it'd be negligent not to point out the possibility.

[Alpha Cassiopeiae]

"A noble effort, to be sure, but there are many other casus belli a nation could use to prosecute a war for religious reasons. I'm just not seeing how this could be enforced."

[Kenmoria]

"A noble effort, to be sure, but there are many other casus belli a nation could use to prosecute a war for religious reasons. I'm just not seeing how this could be enforced."

"There are many resolutions that would be impractical to enforce, so the WA relies on nation's goodwill and following the rules they have voted on. If nothing else, this will serve as a declaration of the WA's stance against religious warfare."

[The Holy Cee]

AFFIRMING the right of every nation state to adopt a single or multiple national and/or official religion/s or lack thereof.

OOC post: A minor nitpick here and throughout where it's used, "religion/s" shouldn't stay as the spelling in the final draft. You already specify "single or multiple" so just use the grammatically correct "religions" (or switch them around to "multiple or single" and use "religion", which is what I'd do).

OOC: Edited accordingly. Thanks.

Saying anything about prohibiting religious conflict between non-WA nations makes little sense as the WA can't legislate on nonmembers. Also, you should be using the preamble to emphasize the international side of this, because there are going to be many WA nations who will not see why a religiously justified war between two other nations they're not involved with is their problem in any way.

OOC: Added in a emphasis to the international side. Thanks.

Also, given that non-member nations aren't bound by this or any other resolution, if one of them declares a war on "religious pretext" on a member nation, is that nation allowed to defend itself?

Yes, this resolution will not contradict Section II, Article 4 of the WAR# 2: Rights and Duties of WA states in which nation states have the right of self-defense against armed attack.

Additionally, would using religion as an additional flavour for the reasons of war be allowed? Such as, going to war for oil, but using the "heathen religion" as a way to lift your own troops' morale, to give them an extra excuse to go kick foreigner ass?

And if yes, then all this resolution would likely do would be that every actually religious war will use something else as a justification and tack on religious reasons as a side-effect, even if everyone knows it's really about the religion.

No, I think that in your particular example it will still be covered. I worded the resolution in such a way that covers purpose of and/or intent on replacing and/or removing so even if a nation were to declare war for some other main reason, they are still prohibited from doing if there is intent or purpose of changing a nation's religion. You think should add some sort of clarification clause in the resolution?

Since you cover both possibilities (member and non-member), you don't need the subclauses.

OOC: Done edited.

My main problem with this is that genocide is already banned, and I really can't see how a religion could be stomped out by force without resorting to a genocide. Especially as GA #38, Convention Against Genocide specifically says:

1. (1) Genocide shall be defined as any act committed, or measure enacted, with the intent to destroy, in whole or partially, an identifiable group of persons on the basis of belief, ethnicity, nationality, culture, or a perceived innate characteristic, which for the purposes of this resolution shall include sexual orientation.

(2) Acts of genocide include, but are not limited to: killing or inflicting serious harm upon members of the group, creating living conditions for the group which tend to bring about its physical destruction, forcibly removing children from the group, or taking measures to prevent births within the group.

2. Member nations are prohibited from perpetrating acts of genocide, and must take action against non-state groups undertaking such activities whithin their borders.

I underlined the relevant bits. If a religious war was indeed intended to take out a religion, then unless it is only a "propaganda war", in which case I think Freedom of Expression or one of the other resolutions of similar nature might kick in, I really can't see how it wouldn't trigger GA #38.

For reference, GA #30, Freedom of Expression.

I think that GA #38 covers a whole other area, in particular regards to killing an entire people. This resolution seeks to eliminate wars started to change a nation's religion. You can change nation's religion without killing all of them by forcing them to convert. And that doesn't count as genocide because genocide would entail biological and physical destruction. You would note that I did not tackle the issue of individual religions since there are already religions covering the rights of individuals to freely believe in anything.

EDIT: It's a great first attempt! I'd additionally suggest putting a "Hereby" in its own line as a demarcation point between the preamble and the active clauses.

OOC: I thank you for the points you raised. They help in polishing the draft (and to remove possible confusion) even though it took me a few days to respond.

[The Holy Cee]

Representative Mikhail Illandrikov stands up and clears his throat, "My friend," he begins in a thick Russo-Oceanian accent, "I support this legislation on a conceptual level. Religious wars are horrific and pointless. But at it's current stage, the bill is - understandably - very clearly unfinished. I must ask, how is this to be enforced? Might I suggest that the duty is given to one of the numerous already existing WA councils?"

The Holy Ceean ambassador raises his eyebrows, "Oh, uhm-", he pauses momentarily, "Well we propose to add additional responsibilities to the WACC Judicial Committee (Judicial Committee of the Compliance Commission) Mainly,

1. To monitor wars declared based on religious pretext
2. To declare wars declared based on religious pretext to be null and void.
3. To issue fines and penalties to nation states who declare wars based on religious pretext.

We also propose that in accordance with Section II, Article 7 of the WAR# 2: Rights and Duties of WA states that every WA Member State has the duty to refrain from recognizing any territorial acquisition from by another nation state resulting from wars declared based on religious pretext."

[The Holy Cee]

Ban religious wars. Hnh. But wars based on conquest, appropriation of resources, or national butthurt are still ok-fine. Right?

Unfortunately, Ambassador, we are currently working on a way to prevent wars based on those casus belli but this resolution is a first step.

[The Holy Cee]

"Sir, do you mean to say that nations are not permitted to go to war to remove a blood-stained theocracy from power?"

"Removing a government in power is not covered by this resolution. You mistake, Ambassador, between religion and government. One's government does not necessarily relate to it's religion. However, any attempt on changing that nation's religion will be covered."

[Club-Penguin]

"Ambassador, why is a religious war any worse than a war for other reasons?"

[Salus Maior]

I have a question: What's the difference between a religious war and ideological wars in general? Such as overthrowing a government to enforce a democracy, or communism, or what have you.

They're all based on moral judgement and the enforcement of values on another, or at the very least fighting for the sake of said values/moral judgements.

[The Holy Cee]

"Ambassador, why is a religious war any worse than a war for other reasons?"

The Holy Ceean ambassador winces, "All wars are terrible, Ambassador. We do not attempt to portray a religious war as the worse one. All wars are initiated by one's pride and greed. We wish to stop all armed conflict and we believe that this resolution should be a first step in that direction."

[Club-Penguin]

"Ambassador, why is a religious war any worse than a war for other reasons?"

The Holy Ceean ambassador winces, "All wars are terrible, Ambassador. We do not attempt to portray a religious war as the worse one. All wars are initiated by one's pride and greed. We wish to stop all armed conflict and we believe that this resolution should be a first step in that direction."

If all wars are terrible and religious wars are not the worst then there should not be a reason to not make this a "Prohibition on Wars". But neither are probably legal for the World Assembly.

[The Holy Cee]

I have a question: What's the difference between a religious war and ideological wars in general? Such as overthrowing a government to enforce a democracy, or communism, or what have you.

They're all based on moral judgement and the enforcement of values on another, or at the very least fighting for the sake of said values/moral judgements.

I might say that you can overthrow a government but still leave it's religion alone. A religious war is fought on notion that you intend on removing/replacing a nation's religion. We can say that it is similar to an ideological war. However, the two are different in that the intention is changing a political system in a ideological war while the intention is changing a belief system in a religious war.

[The Holy Cee]

If all wars are terrible and religious wars are not the worst then there should not be a reason to not make this a "Prohibition on Wars". But neither are probably legal for the World Assembly.

"Precisely, Ambassador, that would be our main goal. We considered the possibility to make the resolution an overall prohibition on wars but it would only affect and be binding WA member states", the Holy Ceean ambassador pauses, "Hmm... we will need further discussion and assistance if the resolution would expand to cover all wars."

[Bears Armed]

OOC: I hesitate to be too hard-assed about this, but I worry there's a potential GAR #2 violation here.

Article 5 § War in the World of NationStates is defined as a consensual act between two or more NationStates. WA Member States may, at their discretion, intercede against declarations of war on behalf of NationStates who wish to avoid war.

Since war is "a consensual act," I'm not 100% sure the WA has the power to legislate on motives.

My colleagues may disagree, of course; and I'd frankly prefer not to make an issue of it. But it'd be negligent not to point out the possibility.

OOC; That could be a problem for this, I agree...
Not sure yet how I'd rule on the matter if this were submitted.