NATION

PASSWORD

[SCRAPPED] Mediating POW Exchanges

Where WA members debate how to improve the world, one resolution at a time.

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Honeydewistania
Senator
 
Posts: 3875
Founded: Jun 09, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Honeydewistania » Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:47 pm

Jedinsto wrote:
Honeydewistania wrote:
If a nation is committing atrocities, they are most likely already violating WA law, so I don’t think they’d care much about adhering to his one, especially if it would help them.

Also, if you have agreed to meet with another party to exchange POWs, it should be your responsibility to ensure that all potential risks are handled. I don’t see how that’s the WA’s business at all.

For the first part, you're probably right about that. How about if they're not violating WA law? And, for the second part I disagree. Member nations put forth their money and stuff collectively and then can use this committee for mutual benefit and such when they need it.

If it isn't violating WA law, then it is probably not an "atrocity" or something similar anyway. And if nations are putting for their money and whatnot, they should be paying for their own neutral mediators, not getting the WA to do their dirty work for them.
Home of the first best pizza topping known to NationStates | Prolific Security Council Author (15x resolutions written) | Not that one fraud, Pineappleistania(ew) | Mouthpiece for Melons' first-rate SC takes | read this please

Alger wrote:if you have egoquotes in your signature, touch grass

User avatar
Araraukar
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15899
Founded: May 14, 2007
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Araraukar » Sat Jun 12, 2021 6:07 am

Honeydewistania wrote:If it isn't violating WA law, then it is probably not an "atrocity" or something similar anyway.

OOC: I fear that atrocities are very culture-dependant. I would think that bombing a school or a library is much worse (should be a war crime) than bombing a church or temple, but I'm sure there are religious people around here for whom the priorities would be reversed. Escalate that up to nation level (not just because one-person-decides types of nations exist, but also because an opinion, if shared by enough people, can become a policy and then law in RL too) and you'll end up with an endless swamp of national opinions (likely also laws) about what is an atrocity and what is not.

Now it might not count as per WA proposal legality, but then "WA atrocity" could only be based on extant resolutions, and resolutions can be repealed. So they are even more malleable, legislation-wise, than culturally entrenched national ones.

To OP: if your main point is notifying dead soldiers' families of what happened, why muddle things up with the exchange of prisoners at all?

Also worth thinking about are cases where a POW does not want to go back to the nation/organization they came from - in RL the USSR Red Army treated some ethnic minority soldiers so crappily that they'd rather get caught as POWs and then apply for asylum after the war, than go back (where they'd likely get executed for allowing themselves be captured in the first place, or be sentenced to years of hard labour without a trial as punishment for the same).

Are WA nations even allowed to send prisoners (of war or otherwise) to nations where they're likely going to be facing the death penalty?

Jedinsto wrote:
Mediating POW Exchanges

The World Assembly,

Seeking to end the withholding of the death details of prisoners of war (POWs), and to establish a means of mediating prisoner exchanges,

Hereby;

  1. Defines prisoner of war (herein POW) as a combatant member of a military organization (who has not violated international law) that is detained because of their status as such, and defines POW exchange as multiple military organizations releasing living POWs to the organization for which they served,
  2. Requires that military organizations holding POWs record (by name, if possible) the details of the deaths of any POWs they hold, and release these details to the military organization for which the POW served as soon as it is safe to do so,
  3. Prohibits member nations from engaging in armed conflict during a World Assembly sanctioned POW exchange,
  4. Establishes the Convention of POW Exchanges (CPE) and tasks it with the following:
    1. Mediating POW exchanges between member nations at the unanimous request of all involved nations,
    2. Finding neutral territory to carry out individual POW exchanges and,
    3. Ensuring that any and all terms agreed upon between the nations involved in the exchange are upheld.

Just saving this here in case Jedinsto changes course drastically again. :)
Last edited by Araraukar on Mon Jun 14, 2021 9:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
- ambassador miss Janis Leveret
Araraukar's RP reality is Modern Tech solarpunk. In IC in the WA.
Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.

User avatar
Jedinsto
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1196
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Jedinsto » Sat Jun 12, 2021 10:40 am

Are WA nations even allowed to send prisoners (of war or otherwise) to nations where they're likely going to be facing the death penalty?

No.

I'm redrafting this probably by Monday, so ya just sit tight until then, I'll consider everything y'all have mentioned.

User avatar
Jedinsto
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1196
Founded: Nov 12, 2020
Ex-Nation

Postby Jedinsto » Mon Jun 14, 2021 6:52 am

I've kinda lost motivation to do this, so I'm just gonna scrap it.

Previous

Return to General Assembly

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: The great empire of the united bert

Advertisement

Remove ads