NationStates

---

This draft is being ICly perpetuated by Alexander Smith, Tinhamptonian Delegate-Ambassador to the World Assembly.
OOC: This is the promised redraft of World Assembly Peace Prize. I'm not going to rehash all of the OOC notes from Draft 1's thread so check them out there if you want
(Regarding Article b, see Article 1.1 of the Declaration on the Right to Development)

Peace and Sustainable Development
A resolution to slash worldwide military spending.

Category: Global Disarmament

Strength: Mild

Proposed by: Tinhampton

---

Believing that all inhabitants of member states should be able to benefit from the rights they possess (including the right to development), yet

Recognising that all sapient rights are put in danger wherever unnecessary armed conflict occurs, and

Therefore seeking to disincentivise such conflict through means such as celebration, education and humanitarian aid regulation...

The General Assembly enacts as follows.

1. Definitions: In this resolution:
   
   1. "development" means those non-violent acts taken with respect for sapient dignity which aim towards facilitating the achievement of all sapient rights,
   2. "sustainable development" means development which also aims towards the long-term protection of the natural environment or the reduction of unnecessary armed conflict, and
   3. "unnecessary armed conflict" means organised armed conflict that neither serves to protect a member state from attack nor is necessary to prevent practices (such as terrorism, genocide, and other crimes against humanity) that threaten the achievement of all sapient rights.
2. The right to development: Members shall allow their inhabitants to engage in and benefit from development (including, in particular, sustainable development).
3. Promotion of non-aggression: All members are encouraged to avoid unnecessary armed conflict.
4. Aid for peace: Donors of humanitarian aid within member states shall not tie its use to the perpetuation of unnecessary armed conflict. Recipients of humanitarian aid within member states shall not use it to perpetuate unnecessary armed conflict, and are further urged to use it for its specified purpose and for the benefit of as many of their inhabitants as possible.
5. Education: Members are strongly urged to educate all of their inhabitants about the relationship between peace, sustainable development, and sapient rights, and the important role that each of these factors play in helping to protect the other two.
6. Peace Prize: The World Assembly Peace Prize (hereinafter the Prize) is established. To that effect, the WA Commission on Human Rights is tasked with:
   
   1. receiving nominations for the Prize from anyone who works as a head of state or government, legislator, or professor in any member state, in addition to any leaders of member state delegations to the World Assembly; and disregarding nominations with the effect of such individuals nominating themselves, the entity who directly employs them or any other person currently being employed by that entity for the Prize,
   2. awarding the Prize each year to that person or group of people resident in any member state who has been nominated in accordance with Article f(i) (although nothing in this section requires that all such nominees be awarded the Prize),
   3. basing its decision to award the Prize to any given person or group solely on whether, in its view, they have:
      
      • demonstrably contributed more than any other such person or group in the previous year to the resolution or prevention of major conflicts between and within nations which involved or could have realistically involved large-scale acts of violence,
      • made such contributions while respecting all sapient rights protected by international law, as well as avoiding violence and the perpetuation of war crimes, and
      • worked towards the universal, non-violent promotion and achievement of all sapient rights while doing so,
   4. rewarding (each of) the winner(s) of the Prize in each year with a gold-plated silver medal weighing one ounce and measuring one-and-a-half inches in diameter, which shall have on its obverse the words "WA PEACE PRIZE - WITH PEACE COMES FREEDOM" surrounding the logo of the World Assembly, and on its reverse nothing, and
   5. rescinding the status of any Prize winner as such (which may include ordering the return of any rewards bestowed upon them under Article f(iv) to it) if, in its view, they have carried out acts that are contrary to the intentions of Article f(iii).

Co-authors: Morover, Honeydewistania

Reserved for previous drafts.

Further to what BA said earlier, perhaps I should also require that the WACHR publish the names of the Prize winners... unless that too would be illegal

"While we are pleased that fomenting communist revolution is excluded from the section 1 definition, we're still opposed. This is all needless frippery and a waste of precious and limited funds."

Tinhampton wrote:Further to what BA said earlier, perhaps I should also require that the WACHR publish the names of the Prize winners... unless that too would be illegal

'OOC: I presumed that they would, anyway... but as that publication would be solely IC, in the absence of any OOC body to make the decisions, there would still be no way to determine OOC who had won and thus would be too much potential for competing claims to this.

On further consideration, I will not be including explicit publication requirements in Article f.

Prospective submission date: Wednesday 22nd September.

How does any of this reduce military or police spending?

Promotion of non-aggression: All members are encouraged to avoid unnecessary armed conflict.

Significant, this does not make.

Wayneactia wrote:How does any of this reduce military or police spending?

Promotion of non-aggression: All members are encouraged to avoid unnecessary armed conflict.

Significant, this does not make.

OOC: Agreed, it's only 'Mild' at best.

Toned back down to Mild... although I figured that the mandate and bunch of non-binding clauses surrounding it would/could have brought it over the line. Apparently not

Tinhampton wrote:Toned back down to Mild... although I figured that the mandate and bunch of non-binding clauses surrounding it would/could have brought it over the line. Apparently not

OOC: If you mean 'b', too much of that is already covered by existing resolutions anyway.

OOC: You should perhaps define "development aid" - and "development", as the current "suggests" isn't same as "defines". It would currently mean I would be providing development aid to a nation if I, while on a tourist trip to it, plucked off the ground a plant I know to be an invasive weed there.

"Opposed so long as there is a mechanism for war criminals to pat themselves and each others on the back for bringing about peace, especially when peace is not always the best outcome. Such prizes are little more than opportunities for self aggrandizement for oligarchs to either cover their crimes in a veil of "peace" or to engage in tokenism to balm their consciences. If the World Assembly is interested in manufacturing a just geopolitical condition, it should take direct action to facilitate that condition and forbear from pagentry. "

Separatist Peoples wrote:"Opposed so long as there is a mechanism for war criminals to pat themselves and each others on the back for bringing about peace, especially when peace is not always the best outcome. Such prizes are little more than opportunities for self aggrandizement for oligarchs to either cover their crimes in a veil of "peace" or to engage in tokenism to balm their consciences. If the World Assembly is interested in manufacturing a just geopolitical condition, it should take direct action to facilitate that condition and forbear from pagentry. "

The air tingles around Ogenbond as the IC/OOC divide briefly dissolves. He lurches forward, blurting out, "What he said!" before settling in his chair. "What the hell just happened?" he whispers to himself.

I would have assumed that the meaning of development (aid) would have been apparent. Article d's references have in any event been changed to refer to international development aid instead.

OOC: This, still:

Araraukar wrote:OOC: You should perhaps define "development aid" - and "development", as the current "suggests" isn't same as "defines". It would currently mean I would be providing development aid to a nation if I, while on a tourist trip to it, plucked off the ground a plant I know to be an invasive weed there.

Also, if this passes, I'm definitely going to claim Janis got one of those prizes, just to piss her off even more.

...which reminds me, can people turn down the prize or is it forced on them?

This will no longer be submitted as planned, although it will hopefully be submitted at some point. Suffice to say that the references to IHA in Article d may be changed to refer to humanitarian aid instead (for consistency purposes).

Tinhampton wrote:the references to IHA in Article d may be changed to refer to humanitarian aid instead (for consistency purposes).

Done.

I have also tried my best to actually define "development." Do you think I've done a good job? Are there any other glaring omissions or errors that I need to sort out?

OOC:
To reiterate from the last thread...

"The Imperium intends to posthumously nominate the late Lis-Raesilir for his briefly successful efforts to end the first Aeravahn war prior to his assassination by the Aeravahn. And the late Ris-Raesilir for her successful conclusion thereof."
OOC:
If we're to have the Politically Motivated War Criminal Congratulations Prize we might as well start with a politically motivated nomination of some war criminals...

Tinfect wrote:OOC:
To reiterate from the last thread...

"The Imperium intends to posthumously nominate the late Lis-Raesilir for his briefly successful efforts to end the first Aeravahn war prior to his assassination by the Aeravahn. And the late Ris-Raesilir for her successful conclusion thereof."
OOC:
If we're to have the Politically Motivated War Criminal Congratulations Prize we might as well start with a politically motivated nomination of some war criminals...

Since this whatever was happening with IC Tinfect and the Aeravahns was more than a year ago, it probably won't count. There are more controversial things I could say about that particular incident...

"We remain opposed to any draft that includes a prize as incentive to act. Such prizes are little more than opportunities for self aggrandizement for oligarchs to either cover their crimes in a veil of "peace" or to engage in tokenism to balm their consciences. If the World Assembly is interested in manufacturing a just geopolitical condition, it should take direct action to facilitate that condition and forbear from pagentry. "

"Okay... Article f(i) says first-party aggrandisation is banned. Well, between that and the eligibility criteria to win and hold onto the Prize..."

OOC: Sapient is an awful word.

Development is defined. Slot the definition into section b:

"Members shall allow their inhabitants to work towards and benefit from development" becomes:

1) Members shall allow their inhabitants to work towards non-violent acts taken with respect for sapient dignity which aim towards facilitating the achievement of all sapient rights.

and 2) Members shall allow their inhabitants to benefit from non-violent acts taken with respect for sapient dignity which aim towards facilitating the achievement of all sapient rights.

The second part of section b:
It is suggested that non-violent acts taken with respect for sapient dignity which aim towards facilitating the achievement of all sapient rights also aim towards the long-term protection of the natural environment and the reduction of unnecessary armed conflict

What do these things mean?

Same thing with e. What is sustainable non-violent acts taken with respect for sapient dignity which aim towards facilitating the achievement of all sapient rights?

Why is literally everyone who's nominated being handed a prize (see f2)?

IC: "This is still wasteful frippery, we remain opposed."

Tinhampton wrote:"Okay... Article f(i) says first-party aggrandisation is banned. Well, between that and the eligibility criteria to win and hold onto the Prize..."

"Right, because no government has ever painted their war crimes as enforcement of the peace. Or used soft power to ensure allies recieved reciprocal back-patting. This is far, far too little to salvage our support or to prevent our opposition."

"It is an interesting proposal; however, it is one that we quite frankly feel is rather disjointed thematically. For example, the connections between "development", "sapient rights", and "unnecessary armed conflict" are very weak and it is almost as if one is reading separate sub-resolutions at times. We feel that each of these aforementioned topics can also be better defined within the resolution, and that is especially the case for "development". Our delegation is unsure of the necessity of a WA Peace Prize, mainly because we don't see the gradual build up of a clear argument for it within the resolution. At any rate, we feel that these issues in structure and flow ought to be resolved before we can consider the merits of a Peace Prize and we are happy to weigh these merits once the appropriate edits have been made."

Smith: Thank you, Count Nye... Nyle. I think so, anyway. If you think our new draft is any more or less coherent, do let me know and I'll be on it ASAP.

---

I'm looking to submit this in the next two weeks, by the way.

Thanks for the constructive feedback, Banana. Regarding Article f(ii), I'd note that f(iii) makes it very clear that not all nominees will be guaranteed a shiny thing but I've made it even clearer now anyway . Regarding the meaning of development and how sentences make sense (or don't) as a result, some changes have been made.

You write


What if the conflict itself is over controls of the aid flows? Or if the aid flows are indirectly diverted by getting school funds, defunding the schools, then using the money for other things? Aid not some simplistic band-aid programme which can easily solve problems. It distorts domestic incentives and encourages rent-seeking. It is not some unalloyed good worth competing for (at least on the supply side; on the demand side people would kill to have a bite of it).