NATION

PASSWORD

[DEFEATED] Cyberweapons Control Act

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.
User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

[DEFEATED] Cyberweapons Control Act

Postby Greater Cesnica » Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:43 pm



Cyberweapons Control Act

Proposed by the Greater Cesnican Honorary Representation to the General Assembly.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant




Noting with no uncertainty that usage in the past decade of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare tactics have opened up a new arena of conflict in the annals of warfare.

Applauding this esteemed Assembly for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

Perturbed however by the current lack of legislation within the General Assembly governing the use of such tactics and actions by state-sponsored or government actors.

Aware of the potential threat posed by electronic warfare devices on a nation's infrastructure, economic system, industrial capability, and defense systems.

Realizing that in a changing society and world, the usage of warfare techniques applied using electronic devices reduces by a certain degree the numbers of casualties that a conflict waged via conventional warfare techniques such as bombing campaigns or ground assaults would incur.

Cognizant of the applications electronic warfare techniques deliver in times of war to a nation's armed forces and allies, and their utilization in strikes on enemy assets with limited collateral damage.

Therefore acknowledging that in order to facilitate a global understanding of the scope of this specialized type of weaponry, a universally binding legislative framework must be established to regulate the use of such electronic tactics.

Hereby defines the usage of electronic devices that cause significant negative political, economic, industrial, or physical damage to another sovereign state an act of warfare, to be referred to as Cyberwarfare.

Establishes these electronic devices or tools as Cyberweapons, to be designated and treated alongside conventional arms and weaponry as:

    I. A means of causing significant electronic or physical damage that would warrant a proportional diplomatic or military response.

    II. Weaponry to be treated with the same discretion and caution as the usage of conventional warfare technique would warrant.

    III. A warfare technique which shall be held to the same accountability as other warfare tactics.

Designates further the legally binding definitions of the term Cyberwarfare as:

    I. A warfare technique utilizing and relying on the class of weaponry defined under Clause I as cyberweapons.

    II. A method of warfare which, using cyberweapons, causes significant economic, industrial, political, or physical damage to the target entity.

    III. A warfare tactic that is intended to detriment the target entity in such a manner as to cause damage beyond the intelligence or information-sphere entities of the target entity.

Distinguishes the actions and methods of Cyberwarfare and Espionage under several differing characteristics:

    I. The action of Cyberwarfare significantly differs from the tactics employed via the action of Espionage, as the former state-sponsored technique strives to cause quantifiable damage detrimental to the immediate safety and stability of the target sovereign state, while the latter technique is designed to gather information or knowledge via illicit state-sponsored surveillance or spying.

    II. Cyberwarfare is a technique carried out exclusively via electronic warfare devices, or cyberweapons as designated in Clause I and Clause II, in contrast to Espionage, which may be carried out via existing electronic surveillance programs or physical placements of spies and diplomatic infiltrations.

    III. Espionage operations are restricted to the information-sphere and intelligence entities and environments of the target state, whereas Cyberwarfare operations are spread out across multiple mediums of targets, with both the government and the private economic and industrial complexes of the target state potential subjects for the operations.

Urges member states to establish a military-operated centre of command from which to launch cyberattacks against target entities, defend from enemy cyberarracks, and regulate the storage and safety of cyberweapons in a manner which shall be governed by the present unified military and defense command of the aforementioned member state.

Prohibits the usage of cyberwarfare and cyberweapons exclusively against protected entities, such as hospitals, evacuation centers, internationally recognized encampments such as refugee camps and other institutions of the such.

Declares the usage of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare against the protected targets designated in the previous clause as war crime offenses to be investigated and prosecuted by existing organizations and courts protecting and upholding civilian and humanitarian rights in times of warfare.

Assured by this resolution's scope and it's validity, hereby enacts the Cyberweapons Control Act into legislative power.




Additional Notes: I noted, and Imperium Anglorum kindly confirmed for me, that there is currently a complete lack of legislation that enforces, or for that matter even acknowledges the usage and existence of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare when employed by state actors or governments, and consequentially no resolution that regulates this very-real plane of warfare. I guess this is my way of pushing things forward a bit.

Also, you may have noticed that I am not in the World Assembly currently. I will be eligible to join soon and plan to submit this resolution once I gain the necessary number of endorsements. I want to start off on a blank slate, and currently am looking for your awesome advice!

Peace out,

Ghost.
Last edited by Wrapper on Sun Nov 04, 2018 6:48 am, edited 49 times in total.
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:54 pm



Cyberweapons Control Act

Proposed by the Greater Cesnican Honorary Representation to the General Assembly.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant



NOTING with no uncertainty that usage in the past decade of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare tactics have opened up a new arena of conflict in the annals of warfare.

APPLAUDING the General Assembly representation of Excidium Planetis for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

PERTURBED however by the current lack of legislation within the General Assembly governing the use of such tactics and actions by state-sponsored or government actors.

AWARE of the potential threat posed by electronic warfare devices on a nation's infrastructure, economic system, industrial capability, and defense systems.

REMINDED of the insidious nature of cyber-attacks, nearly untraceable with the proper concealment techniques applied, with the aftermath of such an attack difficult to assess initially, and capable of inciting fear and chaos within the target organization or nation.

REALIZING that in a changing society and world, the usage of warfare techniques applied using electronic devices reduces by a certain degree the numbers of casualties that a conflict waged via conventional warfare techniques such as bombing campaigns or ground assaults would incur.

THEREFORE acknowledging that in order to facilitate a global understanding of the scope of this specialized type of weaponry, a universally binding legislative framework must be established to regulate the use of such electronic tactics.

HEREBY defining the usage of electronic devices to cause significant negative political, economic, industrial, or physical damage to another sovereign state an act of warfare, to be referred to as Cyberwarfare.

DECREEING these electronic devices or tools as Cyberweapons, to be designated and treated alongside conventional arms and weaponry as:

    I. A means of causing significant electronic or physical damage that would warrant a proportional diplomatic or military response.

    II. Weaponry to be treated with the same discretion and caution as the usage of conventional warfare technique would warrant.

    III. A warfare technique which shall be held to the same accountability as other warfare tactics.

DESIGNATING further the legally binding definitions of the term Cyberwarfare as:

    I. A warfare technique utilizing and relying on the class of weaponry defined under Clause IX as cyberweapons.

    II. A method of warfare which, using cyberweapons, causes significant economic, industrial, political, or physical damage to the target entity.

    III. A warfare tactic that is intended to detriment the target entity in such a manner as to cause damage beyond the intelligence or information-sphere entities of the target entity.

DISTINGUISHING the actions and methods of Cyberwarfare and Espionage under several differing characteristics:

    I. The action of Cyberwarfare significantly differs from the tactics employed via the action of Espionage, as the former state-sponsored technique strives to cause quantifiable damage detrimental to the immediate safety and stability of the target sovereign state, while the latter technique is designed to gather information or knowledge via illicit state-sponsored surveillance or spying.

    II. Cyberwarfare is a technique carried out exclusively via electronic warfare devices, or cyberweapons as designated in Clause IX, in contrast to Espionage, which may be carried out via existing electronic surveillance programs or physical placements of spies and diplomatic infiltrations.

    III. Espionage operations are restricted to the information-sphere and intelligence entities and environments of the target state, whereas Cyberwarfare operations are spread out across multiple mediums of targets, with both the government and the private economic and industrial complexes of the target state potential subjects for the operations.

OPENING the possibility of proportional military or diplomatic responses, carried out via both conventional and electronic means, under the observation of fellow member states of this esteemed Assembly, should it be appropriate considering the individual circumstances.

STRONGLY condemning and reviling the usage of cyberwarfare and cyberweapons exclusively against protected entities, such as hospitals, evacuation centers, highly concentrated clusters of civilians and internationally recognized encampments such as refugee camps and other institutions of the such.

ESTABLISHING the usage of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare against the protected targets designated in Clause XIII as offenses to be investigated and prosecuted by existing organizations and courts protecting and upholding civilian and humanitarian rights in times of warfare.

THUS enacting the Cyberweapons Control Act into legislative power.






Cyberweapons Control Act

Proposed by the Greater Cesnican Honorary Representation to the General Assembly.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant




Clause I: NOTING with no uncertainty that usage in the past decade of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare tactics have opened up a new arena of conflict in the annals of warfare.

Clause II: APPLAUDING this esteemed Assembly for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

Clause III: PERTURBED however by the current lack of legislation within the General Assembly governing the use of such tactics and actions by state-sponsored or government actors.

Clause IV: AWARE of the potential threat posed by electronic warfare devices on a nation's infrastructure, economic system, industrial capability, and defense systems.

Clause V: REMINDED of the insidious nature of cyber-attacks, nearly untraceable with the proper concealment techniques applied, with the aftermath of such an attack difficult to assess initially, and capable of inciting fear and chaos within the target organization or nation.

Clause VI: REALIZING that in a changing society and world, the usage of warfare techniques applied using electronic devices reduces by a certain degree the numbers of casualties that a conflict waged via conventional warfare techniques such as bombing campaigns or ground assaults would incur.

Clause VII: THEREFORE acknowledging that in order to facilitate a global understanding of the scope of this specialized type of weaponry, a universally binding legislative framework must be established to regulate the use of such electronic tactics.

Clause VIII: HEREBY defines the usage of electronic devices to cause significant negative political, economic, industrial, or physical damage to another sovereign state an act of warfare, to be referred to as Cyberwarfare.

Clause IX: DECREES these electronic devices or tools as Cyberweapons, to be designated and treated alongside conventional arms and weaponry as:

    I. A means of causing significant electronic or physical damage that would warrant a proportional diplomatic or military response.

    II. Weaponry to be treated with the same discretion and caution as the usage of conventional warfare technique would warrant.

    III. A warfare technique which shall be held to the same accountability as other warfare tactics.

Clause X: DESIGNATES further the legally binding definitions of the term Cyberwarfare as:

    I. A warfare technique utilizing and relying on the class of weaponry defined under Clause IX as cyberweapons.

    II. A method of warfare which, using cyberweapons, causes significant economic, industrial, political, or physical damage to the target entity.

    III. A warfare tactic that is intended to detriment the target entity in such a manner as to cause damage beyond the intelligence or information-sphere entities of the target entity.

Clause XI: DISTINGUISHES the actions and methods of Cyberwarfare and Espionage under several differing characteristics:

    I. The action of Cyberwarfare significantly differs from the tactics employed via the action of Espionage, as the former state-sponsored technique strives to cause quantifiable damage detrimental to the immediate safety and stability of the target sovereign state, while the latter technique is designed to gather information or knowledge via illicit state-sponsored surveillance or spying.

    II. Cyberwarfare is a technique carried out exclusively via electronic warfare devices, or cyberweapons as designated in Clause IX and Clause X, in contrast to Espionage, which may be carried out via existing electronic surveillance programs or physical placements of spies and diplomatic infiltrations.

    III. Espionage operations are restricted to the information-sphere and intelligence entities and environments of the target state, whereas Cyberwarfare operations are spread out across multiple mediums of targets, with both the government and the private economic and industrial complexes of the target state potential subjects for the operations.

Clause XII: OPENS the possibility of proportional military or diplomatic responses, carried out via both conventional and electronic means, under the observation of fellow member states of this esteemed Assembly, should it be appropriate considering the individual circumstances.

Clause XIII: STRONGLY condemns and reviles the usage of cyberwarfare and cyberweapons exclusively against protected entities, such as hospitals, evacuation centers, highly concentrated clusters of civilians and internationally recognized encampments such as refugee camps and other institutions of the such.

Clause XIV: ESTABLISHES the usage of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare against the protected targets designated in Clause XIII as offenses to be investigated and prosecuted by existing organizations and courts protecting and upholding civilian and humanitarian rights in times of warfare.

Clause XV: ASSURED that the passage of this act will act to regulate the usage and proliferation of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare.

Clause XVI: THUS enacts the Cyberweapons Control Act into legislative power.





Cyberweapons Control Act

Proposed by the Greater Cesnican Honorary Representation to the General Assembly.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant




Clause I: NOTING with no uncertainty that usage in the past decade of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare tactics have opened up a new arena of conflict in the annals of warfare.

Clause II: APPLAUDING this esteemed Assembly for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

Clause III: PERTURBED however by the current lack of legislation within the General Assembly governing the use of such tactics and actions by state-sponsored or government actors.

Clause IV: OBSERVANT to the grey area that is present where the legitimate use of cyber-attacks on a nation concerned, as an action that may be perceived as justified by one sovereign entity could be perceived by another as being unjustified when held against the standards of international law.

Clause V: AWARE of the potential threat posed by electronic warfare devices on a nation's infrastructure, economic system, industrial capability, and defense systems.

Clause VI: REMINDED of the insidious nature of cyber-attacks, nearly untraceable with the proper concealment techniques applied, with the aftermath of such an attack difficult to assess initially, and capable of inciting fear and chaos within the target organization or nation.

Clause VII: REALIZING that in a changing society and world, the usage of warfare techniques applied using electronic devices reduces by a certain degree the numbers of casualties that a conflict waged via conventional warfare techniques such as bombing campaigns or ground assaults would incur.

Clause VIII: THEREFORE acknowledging that in order to facilitate a global understanding of the scope of this specialized type of weaponry, a universally binding legislative framework must be established to regulate the use of such electronic tactics.

Clause IX: HEREBY defines the usage of electronic devices to cause significant negative political, economic, industrial, or physical damage to another sovereign state an act of warfare, to be referred to as Cyberwarfare.

Clause X: DECREES these electronic devices or tools as Cyberweapons, to be designated and treated alongside conventional arms and weaponry as:

    I. A means of causing significant electronic or physical damage that would warrant a proportional diplomatic or military response.

    II. Weaponry to be treated with the same discretion and caution as the usage of conventional warfare technique would warrant.

    III. A warfare technique which shall be held to the same accountability as other warfare tactics.

Clause XI: DESIGNATES further the legally binding definitions of the term Cyberwarfare as:

    I. A warfare technique utilizing and relying on the class of weaponry defined under Clause X as cyberweapons.

    II. A method of warfare which, using cyberweapons, causes significant economic, industrial, political, or physical damage to the target entity.

    III. A warfare tactic that is intended to detriment the target entity in such a manner as to cause damage beyond the intelligence or information-sphere entities of the target entity.

Clause XII: DISTINGUISHES the actions and methods of Cyberwarfare and Espionage under several differing characteristics:

    I. The action of Cyberwarfare significantly differs from the tactics employed via the action of Espionage, as the former state-sponsored technique strives to cause quantifiable damage detrimental to the immediate safety and stability of the target sovereign state, while the latter technique is designed to gather information or knowledge via illicit state-sponsored surveillance or spying.

    II. Cyberwarfare is a technique carried out exclusively via electronic warfare devices, or cyberweapons as designated in Clause X and Clause XI, in contrast to Espionage, which may be carried out via existing electronic surveillance programs or physical placements of spies and diplomatic infiltrations.

    III. Espionage operations are restricted to the information-sphere and intelligence entities and environments of the target state, whereas Cyberwarfare operations are spread out across multiple mediums of targets, with both the government and the private economic and industrial complexes of the target state potential subjects for the operations.

Clause XIII: OPENS the possibility of proportional military or diplomatic responses, carried out via both conventional and electronic means, under the observation of fellow member states of this esteemed Assembly, should it be appropriate considering the individual circumstances.

Clause XIV: STRONGLY condemns and reviles the usage of cyberwarfare and cyberweapons exclusively against protected entities, such as hospitals, evacuation centers, highly concentrated clusters of civilians and internationally recognized encampments such as refugee camps and other institutions of the such.

Clause XV: ESTABLISHES the usage of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare against the protected targets designated in Clause XIV as offenses to be investigated and prosecuted by existing organizations and courts protecting and upholding civilian and humanitarian rights in times of warfare.

Clause XVI: ASSURED that the passage of this act will act to regulate the usage and proliferation of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare.

Clause XVII: THUS enacts the Cyberweapons Control Act into legislative power.





Cyberweapons Control Act

Proposed by the Greater Cesnican Honorary Representation to the General Assembly.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant




NOTING with no uncertainty that usage in the past decade of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare tactics have opened up a new arena of conflict in the annals of warfare.

APPLAUDING this esteemed Assembly for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

PERTURBED however by the current lack of legislation within the General Assembly governing the use of such tactics and actions by state-sponsored or government actors.

OBSERVANT to the grey area that is present where the legitimate use of cyber-attacks on a nation concerned, as an action that may be perceived as justified by one sovereign entity could be perceived by another as being unjustified when held against the standards of international law.

AWARE of the potential threat posed by electronic warfare devices on a nation's infrastructure, economic system, industrial capability, and defense systems.

REMINDED of the insidious nature of cyber-attacks, nearly untraceable with the proper concealment techniques applied, with the aftermath of such an attack difficult to assess initially, and capable of inciting fear and chaos within the target organization or nation.

REALIZING that in a changing society and world, the usage of warfare techniques applied using electronic devices reduces by a certain degree the numbers of casualties that a conflict waged via conventional warfare techniques such as bombing campaigns or ground assaults would incur.

THEREFORE acknowledging that in order to facilitate a global understanding of the scope of this specialized type of weaponry, a universally binding legislative framework must be established to regulate the use of such electronic tactics.

HEREBY defines the usage of electronic devices to cause significant negative political, economic, industrial, or physical damage to another sovereign state an act of warfare, to be referred to as Cyberwarfare.

Clause I: ESTABLISHES these electronic devices or tools as Cyberweapons, to be designated and treated alongside conventional arms and weaponry as:

    I. A means of causing significant electronic or physical damage that would warrant a proportional diplomatic or military response.

    II. Weaponry to be treated with the same discretion and caution as the usage of conventional warfare technique would warrant.

    III. A warfare technique which shall be held to the same accountability as other warfare tactics.

Clause II: DESIGNATES further the legally binding definitions of the term Cyberwarfare as:

    I. A warfare technique utilizing and relying on the class of weaponry defined under Clause I as cyberweapons.

    II. A method of warfare which, using cyberweapons, causes significant economic, industrial, political, or physical damage to the target entity.

    III. A warfare tactic that is intended to detriment the target entity in such a manner as to cause damage beyond the intelligence or information-sphere entities of the target entity.

Clause III: DISTINGUISHES the actions and methods of Cyberwarfare and Espionage under several differing characteristics:

    I. The action of Cyberwarfare significantly differs from the tactics employed via the action of Espionage, as the former state-sponsored technique strives to cause quantifiable damage detrimental to the immediate safety and stability of the target sovereign state, while the latter technique is designed to gather information or knowledge via illicit state-sponsored surveillance or spying.

    II. Cyberwarfare is a technique carried out exclusively via electronic warfare devices, or cyberweapons as designated in Clause I and Clause II, in contrast to Espionage, which may be carried out via existing electronic surveillance programs or physical placements of spies and diplomatic infiltrations.

    III. Espionage operations are restricted to the information-sphere and intelligence entities and environments of the target state, whereas Cyberwarfare operations are spread out across multiple mediums of targets, with both the government and the private economic and industrial complexes of the target state potential subjects for the operations.

Clause IV: ENCOURAGES a proportional military or diplomatic response to a cyberwarfare attack conducted on a member state, carried out via both conventional and electronic means, under the observation of fellow member states of this esteemed Assembly, should it be appropriate considering the individual circumstances.

Clause V: PROHIBITS the usage of cyberwarfare and cyberweapons exclusively against protected entities, such as hospitals, evacuation centers, highly concentrated clusters of civilians and internationally recognized encampments such as refugee camps and other institutions of the such.

Clause VI: DECLARES the usage of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare against the protected targets designated in Clause V as war crime offenses to be investigated and prosecuted by existing organizations and courts protecting and upholding civilian and humanitarian rights in times of warfare.

ASSURED that the passage of this act will act to regulate the usage and proliferation of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare.

Clause VII: THUS enacts the Cyberweapons Control Act into legislative power.





Cyberweapons Control Act

Proposed by the Greater Cesnican Honorary Representation to the General Assembly.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant




Noting with no uncertainty that usage in the past decade of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare tactics have opened up a new arena of conflict in the annals of warfare.

Applauding this esteemed Assembly for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

Perturbed however by the current lack of legislation within the General Assembly governing the use of such tactics and actions by state-sponsored or government actors.

Observant to the grey area that is present where the legitimate use of cyber-attacks on a nation concerned, as an action that may be perceived as justified by one sovereign entity could be perceived by another as being unjustified when held against the standards of international law.

Aware of the potential threat posed by electronic warfare devices on a nation's infrastructure, economic system, industrial capability, and defense systems.

Reminded of the insidious nature of cyber-attacks, nearly untraceable with the proper concealment techniques applied, with the aftermath of such an attack difficult to assess initially, and capable of inciting fear and chaos within the target organization or nation.

Realizing that in a changing society and world, the usage of warfare techniques applied using electronic devices reduces by a certain degree the numbers of casualties that a conflict waged via conventional warfare techniques such as bombing campaigns or ground assaults would incur.

Therefore acknowledging that in order to facilitate a global understanding of the scope of this specialized type of weaponry, a universally binding legislative framework must be established to regulate the use of such electronic tactics.

Hereby defines the usage of electronic devices to cause significant negative political, economic, industrial, or physical damage to another sovereign state an act of warfare, to be referred to as Cyberwarfare.

Clause I: Establishes these electronic devices or tools as Cyberweapons, to be designated and treated alongside conventional arms and weaponry as:

    I. A means of causing significant electronic or physical damage that would warrant a proportional diplomatic or military response.

    II. Weaponry to be treated with the same discretion and caution as the usage of conventional warfare technique would warrant.

    III. A warfare technique which shall be held to the same accountability as other warfare tactics.

Clause II: Designates further the legally binding definitions of the term Cyberwarfare as:

    I. A warfare technique utilizing and relying on the class of weaponry defined under Clause I as cyberweapons.

    II. A method of warfare which, using cyberweapons, causes significant economic, industrial, political, or physical damage to the target entity.

    III. A warfare tactic that is intended to detriment the target entity in such a manner as to cause damage beyond the intelligence or information-sphere entities of the target entity.

Clause III: Distinguishes the actions and methods of Cyberwarfare and Espionage under several differing characteristics:

    I. The action of Cyberwarfare significantly differs from the tactics employed via the action of Espionage, as the former state-sponsored technique strives to cause quantifiable damage detrimental to the immediate safety and stability of the target sovereign state, while the latter technique is designed to gather information or knowledge via illicit state-sponsored surveillance or spying.

    II. Cyberwarfare is a technique carried out exclusively via electronic warfare devices, or cyberweapons as designated in Clause I and Clause II, in contrast to Espionage, which may be carried out via existing electronic surveillance programs or physical placements of spies and diplomatic infiltrations.

    III. Espionage operations are restricted to the information-sphere and intelligence entities and environments of the target state, whereas Cyberwarfare operations are spread out across multiple mediums of targets, with both the government and the private economic and industrial complexes of the target state potential subjects for the operations.

Clause IV: Urges member states to establish a military-operated centre of command from which to launch cyberattacks against target entities, defend from enemy cyberarracks, and regulate the storage and safety of cyberweapons in a manner which shall be governed by the present unified military and defense command of the aforementioned member state.

Clause V: Encourages a proportional military or diplomatic response to a cyberwarfare attack conducted on a member state, carried out via both conventional and electronic means, under the observation of fellow member states of this esteemed Assembly, should it be appropriate considering the individual circumstances.

Clause VI: Prohibits the usage of cyberwarfare and cyberweapons exclusively against protected entities, such as hospitals, evacuation centers, highly concentrated clusters of civilians and internationally recognized encampments such as refugee camps and other institutions of the such.

Clause VII: Declares the usage of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare against the protected targets designated in Clause VI as war crime offenses to be investigated and prosecuted by existing organizations and courts protecting and upholding civilian and humanitarian rights in times of warfare.

Assured that the passage of this act will act to regulate the usage and proliferation of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare.

Clause VIII: Thus enacts the Cyberweapons Control Act into legislative power.





Cyberweapons Control Act

Proposed by the Greater Cesnican Honorary Representation to the General Assembly.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant




Noting with no uncertainty that usage in the past decade of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare tactics have opened up a new arena of conflict in the annals of warfare.

Applauding this esteemed Assembly for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

Perturbed however by the current lack of legislation within the General Assembly governing the use of such tactics and actions by state-sponsored or government actors.

Observant to the grey area that is present where the legitimate use of cyber-attacks on a nation concerned, as an action that may be perceived as justified by one sovereign entity could be perceived by another as being unjustified when held against the standards of international law.

Aware of the potential threat posed by electronic warfare devices on a nation's infrastructure, economic system, industrial capability, and defense systems.

Reminded of the insidious nature of cyber-attacks, nearly untraceable with the proper concealment techniques applied, with the aftermath of such an attack difficult to assess initially, and capable of inciting fear and chaos within the target organization or nation.

Realizing that in a changing society and world, the usage of warfare techniques applied using electronic devices reduces by a certain degree the numbers of casualties that a conflict waged via conventional warfare techniques such as bombing campaigns or ground assaults would incur.

Therefore acknowledging that in order to facilitate a global understanding of the scope of this specialized type of weaponry, a universally binding legislative framework must be established to regulate the use of such electronic tactics.

Hereby defines the usage of electronic devices to cause significant negative political, economic, industrial, or physical damage to another sovereign state an act of warfare, to be referred to as Cyberwarfare.

Clause I: Establishes these electronic devices or tools as Cyberweapons, to be designated and treated alongside conventional arms and weaponry as:

    I. A means of causing significant electronic or physical damage that would warrant a proportional diplomatic or military response.

    II. Weaponry to be treated with the same discretion and caution as the usage of conventional warfare technique would warrant.

    III. A warfare technique which shall be held to the same accountability as other warfare tactics.

Clause II: Designates further the legally binding definitions of the term Cyberwarfare as:

    I. A warfare technique utilizing and relying on the class of weaponry defined under Clause I as cyberweapons.

    II. A method of warfare which, using cyberweapons, causes significant economic, industrial, political, or physical damage to the target entity.

    III. A warfare tactic that is intended to detriment the target entity in such a manner as to cause damage beyond the intelligence or information-sphere entities of the target entity.

Clause III: Distinguishes the actions and methods of Cyberwarfare and Espionage under several differing characteristics:

    I. The action of Cyberwarfare significantly differs from the tactics employed via the action of Espionage, as the former state-sponsored technique strives to cause quantifiable damage detrimental to the immediate safety and stability of the target sovereign state, while the latter technique is designed to gather information or knowledge via illicit state-sponsored surveillance or spying.

    II. Cyberwarfare is a technique carried out exclusively via electronic warfare devices, or cyberweapons as designated in Clause I and Clause II, in contrast to Espionage, which may be carried out via existing electronic surveillance programs or physical placements of spies and diplomatic infiltrations.

    III. Espionage operations are restricted to the information-sphere and intelligence entities and environments of the target state, whereas Cyberwarfare operations are spread out across multiple mediums of targets, with both the government and the private economic and industrial complexes of the target state potential subjects for the operations.

Clause IV: Urges member states to establish a military-operated centre of command from which to launch cyberattacks against target entities, defend from enemy cyberarracks, and regulate the storage and safety of cyberweapons in a manner which shall be governed by the present unified military and defense command of the aforementioned member state.

Clause V: Encourages a proportional military or diplomatic response to a cyberwarfare attack conducted on a member state, carried out via both conventional and electronic means, under the observation of fellow member states of this esteemed Assembly, should it be appropriate considering the individual circumstances.

Clause VI: Prohibits the usage of cyberwarfare and cyberweapons exclusively against protected entities, such as hospitals, evacuation centers, internationally recognized encampments such as refugee camps and other institutions of the such.

Clause VII: Declares the usage of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare against the protected targets designated in Clause VI as war crime offenses to be investigated and prosecuted by existing organizations and courts protecting and upholding civilian and humanitarian rights in times of warfare.

Assured that the passage of this act will act to regulate the usage and proliferation of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare.

Clause VIII: Thus enacts the Cyberweapons Control Act into legislative power.





Cyberweapons Control Act

Proposed by the Greater Cesnican Honorary Representation to the General Assembly.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant




Noting with no uncertainty that usage in the past decade of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare tactics have opened up a new arena of conflict in the annals of warfare.

Applauding this esteemed Assembly for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

Perturbed however by the current lack of legislation within the General Assembly governing the use of such tactics and actions by state-sponsored or government actors.

Observant to the grey area that is present where the legitimate use of cyber-attacks on a nation is concerned, as an action that may be perceived as justified by one sovereign entity could be perceived by another as being unjustified when held against the standards of international law.

Aware of the potential threat posed by electronic warfare devices on a nation's infrastructure, economic system, industrial capability, and defense systems.

Reminded of the insidious nature of cyber-attacks, nearly untraceable with the proper concealment techniques applied, with the aftermath of such an attack difficult to assess initially, and capable of inciting fear and chaos within the target organization or nation.

Realizing that in a changing society and world, the usage of warfare techniques applied using electronic devices reduces by a certain degree the numbers of casualties that a conflict waged via conventional warfare techniques such as bombing campaigns or ground assaults would incur.

Cognizant of the applications electronic warfare techniques deliver in times of war to a nation's armed forces and allies, and their utilization in strikes on enemy assets with limited collateral damage.

Therefore acknowledging that in order to facilitate a global understanding of the scope of this specialized type of weaponry, a universally binding legislative framework must be established to regulate the use of such electronic tactics.

Hereby defines the usage of electronic devices that cause significant negative political, economic, industrial, or physical damage to another sovereign state an act of warfare, to be referred to as Cyberwarfare.

Clause I: Establishes these electronic devices or tools as Cyberweapons, to be designated and treated alongside conventional arms and weaponry as:

    I. A means of causing significant electronic or physical damage that would warrant a proportional diplomatic or military response.

    II. Weaponry to be treated with the same discretion and caution as the usage of conventional warfare technique would warrant.

    III. A warfare technique which shall be held to the same accountability as other warfare tactics.

Clause II: Designates further the legally binding definitions of the term Cyberwarfare as:

    I. A warfare technique utilizing and relying on the class of weaponry defined under Clause I as cyberweapons.

    II. A method of warfare which, using cyberweapons, causes significant economic, industrial, political, or physical damage to the target entity.

    III. A warfare tactic that is intended to detriment the target entity in such a manner as to cause damage beyond the intelligence or information-sphere entities of the target entity.

Clause III: Distinguishes the actions and methods of Cyberwarfare and Espionage under several differing characteristics:

    I. The action of Cyberwarfare significantly differs from the tactics employed via the action of Espionage, as the former state-sponsored technique strives to cause quantifiable damage detrimental to the immediate safety and stability of the target sovereign state, while the latter technique is designed to gather information or knowledge via illicit state-sponsored surveillance or spying.

    II. Cyberwarfare is a technique carried out exclusively via electronic warfare devices, or cyberweapons as designated in Clause I and Clause II, in contrast to Espionage, which may be carried out via existing electronic surveillance programs or physical placements of spies and diplomatic infiltrations.

    III. Espionage operations are restricted to the information-sphere and intelligence entities and environments of the target state, whereas Cyberwarfare operations are spread out across multiple mediums of targets, with both the government and the private economic and industrial complexes of the target state potential subjects for the operations.

Clause IV: Urges member states to establish a military-operated centre of command from which to launch cyberattacks against target entities, defend from enemy cyberarracks, and regulate the storage and safety of cyberweapons in a manner which shall be governed by the present unified military and defense command of the aforementioned member state.

Clause V: Encourages a proportional military or diplomatic response to a cyberwarfare attack conducted on a member state, carried out via both conventional and electronic means, under the observation of fellow member states of this esteemed Assembly, should it be appropriate considering the individual circumstances.

Clause VI: Prohibits the usage of cyberwarfare and cyberweapons exclusively against protected entities, such as hospitals, evacuation centers, internationally recognized encampments such as refugee camps and other institutions of the such.

Clause VII: Declares the usage of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare against the protected targets designated in Clause VI as war crime offenses to be investigated and prosecuted by existing organizations and courts protecting and upholding civilian and humanitarian rights in times of warfare.

Assured that the passage of this act will act to regulate the usage and proliferation of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare.

Clause VIII: Thus enacts the Cyberweapons Control Act into legislative power.


Last edited by Greater Cesnica on Sun Oct 21, 2018 8:14 am, edited 9 times in total.
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Sierra Lyricalia
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 3388
Founded: Nov 29, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Sierra Lyricalia » Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:45 pm

Greater Cesnica wrote:APPLAUDING the General Assembly representation of Excidium Planetis for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

OOC: The highlighted portion is illegal for Branding.
Principal-Agent, Anarchy; Squadron Admiral, The Red Fleet
Stephanie Athena Zakalwe
Author: 354 GA / Issues 436, 451, 724
S.L. Ambassador to the World Assembly
Tech Level: Complicated (or not: 7/0/6 i.e. 12) / RP Details
Leonid Berkman Pavonis,
Ideological Deviant, MT Army stooge, & "red [who] do[es]n't read" (various)
Ambassador-At-Large
Illustrious Bum #279



User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:52 pm

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:
Greater Cesnica wrote:APPLAUDING the General Assembly representation of Excidium Planetis for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

OOC: The highlighted portion is illegal for Branding.

Alright. Thank you. I'll edit it. Everything else good in your opinion?
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Sierra Lyricalia
GA Secretariat
 
Posts: 3388
Founded: Nov 29, 2008
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Sierra Lyricalia » Mon Sep 17, 2018 7:00 pm

Greater Cesnica wrote:
Sierra Lyricalia wrote:OOC: The highlighted portion is illegal for Branding.

Alright. Thank you. I'll edit it. Everything else good in your opinion?


OOC: A couple of grammar and phrasing choices could be fixed, but I don't have the time right now to go through and highlight them. I sure would leave this posted for a couple of weeks and gather more feedback. It's probable that others will have suggestions for improvement that I would not think of (this statement is generally true across all drafts and all readers, not just this one and me). You'll want to give this time to gather opinions and analyses.
Principal-Agent, Anarchy; Squadron Admiral, The Red Fleet
Stephanie Athena Zakalwe
Author: 354 GA / Issues 436, 451, 724
S.L. Ambassador to the World Assembly
Tech Level: Complicated (or not: 7/0/6 i.e. 12) / RP Details
Leonid Berkman Pavonis,
Ideological Deviant, MT Army stooge, & "red [who] do[es]n't read" (various)
Ambassador-At-Large
Illustrious Bum #279



User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Mon Sep 17, 2018 7:02 pm

Sierra Lyricalia wrote:
Greater Cesnica wrote:Alright. Thank you. I'll edit it. Everything else good in your opinion?


OOC: A couple of grammar and phrasing choices could be fixed, but I don't have the time right now to go through and highlight them. I sure would leave this posted for a couple of weeks and gather more feedback. It's probable that others will have suggestions for improvement that I would not think of (this statement is generally true across all drafts and all readers, not just this one and me). You'll want to give this time to gather opinions and analyses.

Oh, I will keep this posted for at least 34 days ;p

In all seriousness, thank you for the advice in general. Looking forward to everyone's thoughts on this.
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13804
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:17 pm

OOC: Given the passive tense (verbs ending in "ing") in the clauses, does this actually do anything? It reads more like a repeal.
Last edited by Araraukar on Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk.

Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Araraukar wrote:
Blueflarst wrote:a cosmopolitan hammer
United Massachusetts wrote:Can we all call ourselves "cosmopolitan hammers"?
Us cosmopolitan hammers
Can teach some manners
Often sorely lacking
Hence us attacking
Silly GA spammers

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Tue Sep 18, 2018 3:57 am

Araraukar wrote:OOC: Given the passive tense (verbs ending in "ing") in the clauses, does this actually do anything? It reads more like a repeal.

OOC: Hmm.. it does sound like that. I'll modify the opening verbs. Thanks!

EDIT: see below post
Last edited by Greater Cesnica on Tue Sep 18, 2018 4:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Tue Sep 18, 2018 4:01 am

OOC: Actually, I can't really find a way to remove the 'ing's without making it grammatically clunky. No, it is not a repeal, of course.
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5227
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Tue Sep 18, 2018 8:03 am

Greater Cesnica wrote:OOC: Actually, I can't really find a way to remove the 'ing's without making it grammatically clunky. No, it is not a repeal, of course.

(OOC: I’ve had a go, it doesn’t seem that clunky:


Cyberweapons Control Act

Proposed by the Greater Cesnican Honorary Representation to the General Assembly.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant



NOTING with no uncertainty that usage in the past decade of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare tactics have opened up a new arena of conflict in the annals of warfare.

APPLAUDING this esteemed Assembly for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

PERTURBED however by the current lack of legislation within the General Assembly governing the use of such tactics and actions by state-sponsored or government actors.

AWARE of the potential threat posed by electronic warfare devices on a nation's infrastructure, economic system, industrial capability, and defense systems.

REMINDED of the insidious nature of cyber-attacks, nearly untraceable with the proper concealment techniques applied, with the aftermath of such an attack difficult to assess initially, and capable of inciting fear and chaos within the target organization or nation.

REALIZING that in a changing society and world, the usage of warfare techniques applied using electronic devices reduces by a certain degree the numbers of casualties that a conflict waged via conventional warfare techniques such as bombing campaigns or ground assaults would incur.

THEREFORE acknowledging that in order to facilitate a global understanding of the scope of this specialized type of weaponry, a universally binding legislative framework must be established to regulate the use of such electronic tactics.

HEREBY defines the usage of electronic devices to cause significant negative political, economic, industrial, or physical damage to another sovereign state an act of warfare, to be referred to as Cyberwarfare.

DECREES these electronic devices or tools as Cyberweapons, to be designated and treated alongside conventional arms and weaponry as:

    I. A means of causing significant electronic or physical damage that would warrant a proportional diplomatic or military response.

    II. Weaponry to be treated with the same discretion and caution as the usage of conventional warfare technique would warrant.

    III. A warfare technique which shall be held to the same accountability as other warfare tactics.

DESIGNATES further the legally binding definitions of the term Cyberwarfare as:

    I. A warfare technique utilizing and relying on the class of weaponry defined under Clause IX as cyberweapons.

    II. A method of warfare which, using cyberweapons, causes significant economic, industrial, political, or physical damage to the target entity.

    III. A warfare tactic that is intended to detriment the target entity in such a manner as to cause damage beyond the intelligence or information-sphere entities of the target entity.

DISTINGUISHES the actions and methods of Cyberwarfare and Espionage under several differing characteristics:

    I. The action of Cyberwarfare significantly differs from the tactics employed via the action of Espionage, as the former state-sponsored technique strives to cause quantifiable damage detrimental to the immediate safety and stability of the target sovereign state, while the latter technique is designed to gather information or knowledge via illicit state-sponsored surveillance or spying.

    II. Cyberwarfare is a technique carried out exclusively via electronic warfare devices, or cyberweapons as designated in Clause IX, in contrast to Espionage, which may be carried out via existing electronic surveillance programs or physical placements of spies and diplomatic infiltrations.

    III. Espionage operations are restricted to the information-sphere and intelligence entities and environments of the target state, whereas Cyberwarfare operations are spread out across multiple mediums of targets, with both the government and the private economic and industrial complexes of the target state potential subjects for the operations.

OPENS the possibility of proportional military or diplomatic responses, carried out via both conventional and electronic means, under the observation of fellow member states of this esteemed Assembly, should it be appropriate considering the individual circumstances.

STRONGLY condemns and reviles the usage of cyberwarfare and cyberweapons exclusively against protected entities, such as hospitals, evacuation centers, highly concentrated clusters of civilians and internationally recognized encampments such as refugee camps and other institutions of the such.

ESTABLISHES the usage of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare against the protected targets designated in Clause XIII as offenses to be investigated and prosecuted by existing organizations and courts protecting and upholding civilian and humanitarian rights in times of warfare.

THUS enacts the Cyberweapons Control Act into legislative power.
)
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Tue Sep 18, 2018 8:21 am

Kenmoria wrote:
Greater Cesnica wrote:OOC: Actually, I can't really find a way to remove the 'ing's without making it grammatically clunky. No, it is not a repeal, of course.

(OOC: I’ve had a go, it doesn’t seem that clunky:


Cyberweapons Control Act

Proposed by the Greater Cesnican Honorary Representation to the General Assembly.

Category: International Security | Strength: Significant



NOTING with no uncertainty that usage in the past decade of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare tactics have opened up a new arena of conflict in the annals of warfare.

APPLAUDING this esteemed Assembly for successfully passing GAR #378, 'Digital Network Defense', a legislative framework that established basic responsibilities for member states to criminalize and curb criminal and terrorist acts conducted using access to a digital device and access to the internet.

PERTURBED however by the current lack of legislation within the General Assembly governing the use of such tactics and actions by state-sponsored or government actors.

AWARE of the potential threat posed by electronic warfare devices on a nation's infrastructure, economic system, industrial capability, and defense systems.

REMINDED of the insidious nature of cyber-attacks, nearly untraceable with the proper concealment techniques applied, with the aftermath of such an attack difficult to assess initially, and capable of inciting fear and chaos within the target organization or nation.

REALIZING that in a changing society and world, the usage of warfare techniques applied using electronic devices reduces by a certain degree the numbers of casualties that a conflict waged via conventional warfare techniques such as bombing campaigns or ground assaults would incur.

THEREFORE acknowledging that in order to facilitate a global understanding of the scope of this specialized type of weaponry, a universally binding legislative framework must be established to regulate the use of such electronic tactics.

HEREBY defines the usage of electronic devices to cause significant negative political, economic, industrial, or physical damage to another sovereign state an act of warfare, to be referred to as Cyberwarfare.

DECREES these electronic devices or tools as Cyberweapons, to be designated and treated alongside conventional arms and weaponry as:

    I. A means of causing significant electronic or physical damage that would warrant a proportional diplomatic or military response.

    II. Weaponry to be treated with the same discretion and caution as the usage of conventional warfare technique would warrant.

    III. A warfare technique which shall be held to the same accountability as other warfare tactics.

DESIGNATES further the legally binding definitions of the term Cyberwarfare as:

    I. A warfare technique utilizing and relying on the class of weaponry defined under Clause IX as cyberweapons.

    II. A method of warfare which, using cyberweapons, causes significant economic, industrial, political, or physical damage to the target entity.

    III. A warfare tactic that is intended to detriment the target entity in such a manner as to cause damage beyond the intelligence or information-sphere entities of the target entity.

DISTINGUISHES the actions and methods of Cyberwarfare and Espionage under several differing characteristics:

    I. The action of Cyberwarfare significantly differs from the tactics employed via the action of Espionage, as the former state-sponsored technique strives to cause quantifiable damage detrimental to the immediate safety and stability of the target sovereign state, while the latter technique is designed to gather information or knowledge via illicit state-sponsored surveillance or spying.

    II. Cyberwarfare is a technique carried out exclusively via electronic warfare devices, or cyberweapons as designated in Clause IX, in contrast to Espionage, which may be carried out via existing electronic surveillance programs or physical placements of spies and diplomatic infiltrations.

    III. Espionage operations are restricted to the information-sphere and intelligence entities and environments of the target state, whereas Cyberwarfare operations are spread out across multiple mediums of targets, with both the government and the private economic and industrial complexes of the target state potential subjects for the operations.

OPENS the possibility of proportional military or diplomatic responses, carried out via both conventional and electronic means, under the observation of fellow member states of this esteemed Assembly, should it be appropriate considering the individual circumstances.

STRONGLY condemns and reviles the usage of cyberwarfare and cyberweapons exclusively against protected entities, such as hospitals, evacuation centers, highly concentrated clusters of civilians and internationally recognized encampments such as refugee camps and other institutions of the such.

ESTABLISHES the usage of cyberweapons and cyberwarfare against the protected targets designated in Clause XIII as offenses to be investigated and prosecuted by existing organizations and courts protecting and upholding civilian and humanitarian rights in times of warfare.

THUS enacts the Cyberweapons Control Act into legislative power.
)

Touche. Thank you!
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Tue Sep 18, 2018 12:50 pm

Obligatory bump.
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Ransium
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 6174
Founded: Oct 17, 2006
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Ransium » Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:04 pm

Please don’t bump more than once per every 24 hours. Excessive bumping (both in terms of rate and overall number) is spamming.

Commended by SC 236,
WA Delegate of Forest since March 20th, 2007.
Author of WA Resolutions: SC 221, SC 224, SC 233, SC 243, SC 265, GA 403, GA 439, GA 445,GA 463,GA 465,
Issues Editor since January 20th, 2017.
Author of 22 issues. First editor of 44.
Forum Moderator since November 10th, 2017. Game Moderator since March 15th, 2018.

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:44 pm

Ransium wrote:Please don’t bump more than once per every 24 hours. Excessive bumping (both in terms of rate and overall number) is spamming.

Okay, sorry.
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5227
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Tue Sep 18, 2018 11:36 pm

(OOC: Please number your active clause (ones below the hereby) to make them easier to refer to. It is confusing when some of your clause mention clause IX, despite not clause being labelled IX. I also question what this proposal actually does.)
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Wed Sep 19, 2018 5:05 am

Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: Please number your active clause (ones below the hereby) to make them easier to refer to. It is confusing when some of your clause mention clause IX, despite not clause being labelled IX. I also question what this proposal actually does.)

(OOC: This proposal is intended to designate cyberwarfare and cyberweapons as extensions of conventional warfare, and to hold their usage to the same degree as conventional weaponry. It also prohibits the usage of said weaponry against humanitarian-tier locations such as hospitals and civilian evacuation centre. As for the clause numbering, I shall get to doing that )
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Wed Sep 19, 2018 5:08 pm

(OOC: I am curious as to whether this proposal hits all the bases as far as comprehensive legislation *NSG-wise* goes for cyberweapons and cyberwarfare. I don't want to have it be too intrusive on a nation's military capabilities, but I still am intending for there to be a degree of regulation involved in the usage of this class of weaponry.)
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5227
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Wed Sep 19, 2018 11:33 pm

(OOC: Preambulatory clauses shouldn’t be numbered, only active ones. Though my comment was slightly ambiguous, I meant you should only put clause labelling on the clause below the ‘Hereby’ line.
Greater Cesnica wrote:(OOC: I am curious as to whether this proposal hits all the bases as far as comprehensive legislation *NSG-wise* goes for cyberweapons and cyberwarfare. I don't want to have it be too intrusive on a nation's military capabilities, but I still am intending for there to be a degree of regulation involved in the usage of this class of weaponry.)
This was what I meant in the comment I made before this one; the proposal has very little effect. Your first non-preamble clause just decrees something, which the World Assembly could do all day and nobody would notice since member nations aren’t affected by it. Secondly, you designate a definition for cyberwarfare, which also doesn’t do anything since member nations don’t have to follow the WA’s definitions except for proposals.

Thirdly, you clarify the above definition, this one is quite clear it is intended to not have an effect on member states. The fourth clause just allows something that was already allowed before - strong diplomatic responses. The fifth clause is merely a condemnation and doesn’t actually force or encourage member nations to pass anything into law. The ‘Establishes’ clause is just inventing a committee, the penultimate clause has no obvious effect, and the last clause passes the proposal into law.

What I have just said, in a lot of words, is that mbee nations aren’t being explicitly encouraged or forced to actually do something, or, if they are and I missed something, it is only a clause or two.)
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:42 am

Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: Preambulatory clauses shouldn’t be numbered, only active ones. Though my comment was slightly ambiguous, I meant you should only put clause labelling on the clause below the ‘Hereby’ line.
Greater Cesnica wrote:(OOC: I am curious as to whether this proposal hits all the bases as far as comprehensive legislation *NSG-wise* goes for cyberweapons and cyberwarfare. I don't want to have it be too intrusive on a nation's military capabilities, but I still am intending for there to be a degree of regulation involved in the usage of this class of weaponry.)
This was what I meant in the comment I made before this one; the proposal has very little effect. Your first non-preamble clause just decrees something, which the World Assembly could do all day and nobody would notice since member nations aren’t affected by it. Secondly, you designate a definition for cyberwarfare, which also doesn’t do anything since member nations don’t have to follow the WA’s definitions except for proposals.

Thirdly, you clarify the above definition, this one is quite clear it is intended to not have an effect on member states. The fourth clause just allows something that was already allowed before - strong diplomatic responses. The fifth clause is merely a condemnation and doesn’t actually force or encourage member nations to pass anything into law. The ‘Establishes’ clause is just inventing a committee, the penultimate clause has no obvious effect, and the last clause passes the proposal into law.

What I have just said, in a lot of words, is that mbee nations aren’t being explicitly encouraged or forced to actually do something, or, if they are and I missed something, it is only a clause or two.)

Ah, it's the phrasing of the verbs within the clauses themselves. Perhaps a more firmly worded proposal is what we are looking for here?
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Kenmoria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5227
Founded: Jul 03, 2017
Corporate Bordello

Postby Kenmoria » Thu Sep 20, 2018 8:17 am

Greater Cesnica wrote:
Kenmoria wrote:(OOC: Preambulatory clauses shouldn’t be numbered, only active ones. Though my comment was slightly ambiguous, I meant you should only put clause labelling on the clause below the ‘Hereby’ line.This was what I meant in the comment I made before this one; the proposal has very little effect. Your first non-preamble clause just decrees something, which the World Assembly could do all day and nobody would notice since member nations aren’t affected by it. Secondly, you designate a definition for cyberwarfare, which also doesn’t do anything since member nations don’t have to follow the WA’s definitions except for proposals.

Thirdly, you clarify the above definition, this one is quite clear it is intended to not have an effect on member states. The fourth clause just allows something that was already allowed before - strong diplomatic responses. The fifth clause is merely a condemnation and doesn’t actually force or encourage member nations to pass anything into law. The ‘Establishes’ clause is just inventing a committee, the penultimate clause has no obvious effect, and the last clause passes the proposal into law.

What I have just said, in a lot of words, is that mbee nations aren’t being explicitly encouraged or forced to actually do something, or, if they are and I missed something, it is only a clause or two.)

Ah, it's the phrasing of the verbs within the clauses themselves. Perhaps a more firmly worded proposal is what we are looking for here?
(OOC: Yes, some more forceful verbs, or just ones that have the member nations doing or being encouraged to do something would help in clearly demonstrating what this proposal will do. It is also illegal to have no clause that at least recommend action for member states.)
A representative democracy with a parliament of 535 seats
Kenmoria is Laissez-Faire on economy but centre-left on social issues
Located in Europe and border France to the right and Spain below
NS stats and policies are not canon, use the factbooks
Not in the WA despite coincidentally following nearly all resolutions
This is due to a problem with how the WA contradicts democracy
However we do have a WA mission and often participate in drafting
Current ambassador: James Lewitt

For more information, read the factbooks here.

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:53 am

Kenmoria wrote:
Greater Cesnica wrote:Ah, it's the phrasing of the verbs within the clauses themselves. Perhaps a more firmly worded proposal is what we are looking for here?
(OOC: Yes, some more forceful verbs, or just ones that have the member nations doing or being encouraged to do something would help in clearly demonstrating what this proposal will do. It is also illegal to have no clause that at least recommend action for member states.)

(OOC: Noted. I replaced some terminology, and added an important clause- urging member states to create a cyber operations command centre to govern the usage and storage of cyberweapons.)
Last edited by Greater Cesnica on Thu Sep 20, 2018 10:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sat Sep 22, 2018 12:31 pm

It's been two days, so... lays down a bump before meekly retreating.
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sun Sep 30, 2018 6:46 am

So I will be submitting this in 20 days. Any suggestions on this to add/remove or tweak?
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

User avatar
Araraukar
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 13804
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Sun Sep 30, 2018 8:42 am

Greater Cesnica wrote:So I will be submitting this in 20 days. Any suggestions on this to add/remove or tweak?

OOC: I thought we were talking via TGs for a reason...
- Linda Äyrämäki, acting ambassador in the absence of miss Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk.

Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Araraukar wrote:
Blueflarst wrote:a cosmopolitan hammer
United Massachusetts wrote:Can we all call ourselves "cosmopolitan hammers"?
Us cosmopolitan hammers
Can teach some manners
Often sorely lacking
Hence us attacking
Silly GA spammers

User avatar
Greater Cesnica
Senator
 
Posts: 4801
Founded: Mar 30, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Greater Cesnica » Sun Sep 30, 2018 9:19 am

Araraukar wrote:
Greater Cesnica wrote:So I will be submitting this in 20 days. Any suggestions on this to add/remove or tweak?

OOC: I thought we were talking via TGs for a reason...

OOC: Still need to keep this draft up here just in case. Read your message.
Proud Red Tory.
An 8 Power Civilization, with Tier 9 Technology and Type 7 Influence.
I use NS stats for the Economy and GDP spending only.
Working on this right now!

Pro: Capitalism, Conservatism, Secular State, Right to Bear Arms, Death Penalty, Responsible Immigration Policies, Equality.
Against: SJWS, Modern Leftism, Socialism, Islamism, Discrimination, Orwellian Government.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
My favourite revenge would be:
Genivaria wrote:Giving him an anal probe with a bayonet?

Next

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bhang Bhang Duc

Advertisement

Remove ads