Abolition of Nuclear Weapons Act?

[Andromeda Islands]

Rather than trying to repeal the Nuclear Weapons Act,
we are going to submit this one, which may need a little tweaking, as it is only a first draft:


Whereas

Nuclear Weapons are an existential threat to the lives of all people.

Whereas

Peace loving nations have a desire for a long and lasting peace.

Whereas

We live in an era where nuclear weapons are no longer necessary
and it is impossible to achieve a long and lasting peace without
first eliminating all nuclear weapons.

Whereas

Those nations which insist on having nuclear weapons are putting
their people in a greater danger than any danger nations
which have no such weapons are in.

Whereas

If nations with large stockpiles gradually reduce these stockpiles
we as peace loving nations can finally achieve peace in our
time.

Therefore be it resolved

That the World Assembly take all the steps necessary to negatiote
a lasting peace and to that end do everything within its power
to begin a dialogue on the abolition of nuclear weapons.

[The Sheika]

Hmm, you certainly mean well but you have a bit of an issue. Since the Nuclear Arms Protection Act, henceforth referred to as NAPA, exists your proposal is in contradiction to NAPA and therefore illegal.

Now, to break down what you have here.

Whereas

Nuclear Weapons are an existential threat to the lives of all people.

Yes, we know that nuclear weapons are quite destructive. That is much of the reason why they were created, and also because of their destructive power why many are apprehensive to use it unless it is under extreme situations.

Whereas

Peace loving nations have a desire for a long and lasting peace.

I can't really say if this really helps or hurts your proposal. I would consider perhaps revising it, if not removing it all together.

Whereas

We live in an era where nuclear weapons are no longer necessary
and it is impossible to achieve a long and lasting peace without
first eliminating all nuclear weapons.

This section is debatable. Perhaps your nation is in an era in your part of the multiverse where nuclear weapons are no longer necessary, but what of nations who find themselves surrounded by non-member states who are considerably armed? Peace can indeed be achieved without the abolition of nuclear arms, removing them does not guarantee peace it only means that those who are in the WA would not have them if this were to somehow pass, AFTER NAPA was somehow repealed.

Whereas

Those nations which insist on having nuclear weapons are putting
their people in a greater danger than any danger nations
which have no such weapons are in.

I strongly advise some revision to this section. What exactly are you trying to say? I have an idea, but some clarity would be quite welcome.

Whereas

If nations with large stockpiles gradually reduce these stockpiles
we as peace loving nations can finally achieve peace in our
time.

Once again, the lack of nuclear arms does not guarantee peace, and the existence of nuclear arms does not negate the idea of peace.

Therefore be it resolved

That the World Assembly take all the steps necessary to negatiote
a lasting peace and to that end do everything within its power
to begin a dialogue on the abolition of nuclear weapons.

I repeat myself when I say that it is clear that you are certainly well meaning, but understand that the biggest resistance you will get is the fact that non-member states outnumber member states by a wide margin and non-member states are not subject to WA law. If NAPA were somehow repealed, and this somehow was voted into effect, only member nations would be obligated to abide by it while non-members would simply ignore it. This is only my perspective on the matter, I am sure that other Ambassadors and Delegates will have something to say on the matter.

[Andromeda Islands]

"Those nations which insist on having nuclear weapons are putting
their people in a greater danger than any danger nations
which have no such weapons are in."

The point of this position is that having nuclear weapons represents a threat to other nations.
When both sides continue to escalate their number of weapons, which by the way is in itself problematic because
you don't need a great number of them to protect your nations, they constitute a threat to each other and thereby
increase the chances of war.

Diplomacy is the answer. The idea of threatening other nations is contrary to the idea of using reason and diplomacy.
The warlike mentality of humans is primitive.
Why not appeal to a nation's better side, than to their primitive side?

Diplomacy is the whole point of the resolution.
The resolution is an attempt to start a dialogue as to whether we can resolve our differences.
The idea that we can only achieve peace by war is self contradictory.
The whole idea of mutually assured destruction is MAD by it's very nature.
Starting a better dialogue would be the best way to end this kind of madness.
Madness, by it's very nature is not logical.

The threat of the destruction of an entire planet should be reason enough to look to better alternatives than aggression.

Whether or not one thinks our reasoning is naive and unrealistic, it is still important to begin a dialogue, because the danger of nuclear war is very real.

It is a self fulfilling prophecy to say something is impossible.

[Andromeda Islands]

Once again, the lack of nuclear arms does not guarantee peace, and the existence of nuclear arms does not negate the idea of peace.

As for the latter part of your statement, we respectfully disagree. The more a nation builds up it's military the more it threatens other nations, leading to bad relationships between nations.
As for the former part, no it doesn't guarantee peace, but it doesn't guarantee war either.

[Gig em Aggies]

Except for the part where a shit load of nations consider nuclear weapons a shameful use of resources when there are other exotic weapons available take me for example. We have the ability to collapse stars and create black holes at the center of your planet or use engineered diseases to wipe out your population who won't have an immunity. When writing these types of proposals you have to consider the tech levels that a lot of WA nations are at like me I'm an Universe spanning empire capable of travel between different universes.

[Wrapper]

Rather than trying to repeal the Nuclear Weapons Act,

Since the Nuclear Arms Protection Act, henceforth referred to as NAPA, exists your proposal is in contradiction to NAPA and therefore illegal.

Regardless of the merit of your arguments, if your proposal contradicts NAPA, it will be marked illegal and will not go to vote. To avoid this, you must either resolve the contradiction, or repeal NAPA.

[Andromeda Islands]

Rather than trying to repeal the Nuclear Weapons Act,

Since the Nuclear Arms Protection Act, henceforth referred to as NAPA, exists your proposal is in contradiction to NAPA and therefore illegal.

Regardless of the merit of your arguments, if your proposal contradicts NAPA, it will be marked illegal and will not go to vote. To avoid this, you must either resolve the contradiction, or repeal NAPA.

We're not sure it does contradict NAPA (except for the title of the resolution which implies that nuclear weapons should be abolished).
Would creating a department of peace or starting a dialogue on arms reduction contradict NAPA?

[Andromeda Islands]

The essence of the resolution is not about forbidding nuclear weapons but to look into ways to bring about peace and start a dialogue as to whether nuclear weapons should be abolished:

Therefore be it resolved

That the World Assembly take all the steps necessary to negatiote
a lasting peace and to that end do everything within its power
to begin a dialogue on the abolition of nuclear weapons.

Of course,
We are open to the suggestions already made to omit some of the other statements since the above quoted part is the meat of the resolution.

[Andromeda Islands]

(OCC we need to leave this thread now, and will return later, as we need to get some sleep, but thanks for the input, suggestions, and feedback)

[Wallenburg]

Resolutions must actually have some effect on member states. This does not.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

Resolutions must actually have some effect on member states. This does not.

This is correct. You must mandate that member nations take some concrete action if the proposal is to be legal.

[Andromeda Islands]

We must say (some of) you seem to underestimate our nation and of what she is capable.

That is not a surprise; it has happened to us for the last 1630 years that we have been active in the Global Community.

[Kenmoria]

We must say (some of) you seem to underestimate our nation and of what she is capable.

That is not a surprise; it has happened to us for the last 1630 years that we have been active in the Global Community.

(OOC: It does not matter how long one has been active IC in the WA, that does not equate to actual experience with writing resolutions. Furthermore, even years experience does not equate to being allowed to break the rules of the GA. Unless your proposal has an effective mandate, or a suggestion, it will be removed from the voting floor and won’t have a chance to be voted upon by other players.

Also, put [DRAFT] in the title so other players know that this is a draft and can thus comment on it.)

[Andromeda Islands]

We must say (some of) you seem to underestimate our nation and of what she is capable.

That is not a surprise; it has happened to us for the last 1630 years that we have been active in the Global Community.

(OOC: It does not matter how long one has been active IC in the WA, that does not equate to actual experience with writing resolutions. Furthermore, even years experience does not equate to being allowed to break the rules of the GA. Unless your proposal has an effective mandate, or a suggestion, it will be removed from the voting floor and won’t have a chance to be voted upon by other players.

Also, put [DRAFT] in the title so other players know that this is a draft and can thus comment on it.)

Thanks for the good suggestions.
I know that it needs tweaking. (and needs to comply with the rules)
I don't expect any such resolution to
necessarily pass even if it comes to a vote, but it would generate a healthy debate.
I do admit to being stuborn in the sense that I don't give up easily, which was the point of my last post.

[Kranostav]

Whereas,

No