[DRAFT] WA Military Non-Aggression Act

[Daarwyrth]

Princess Madelyne Zylkoven, WA Representative of Daarwyrth: "Our delegation is revisiting the idea of proposing a pan-WA non-aggression pact, based upon the suggestion of the representatives from Attempted Socialism to focus on the idea of the democratic peace theory. We welcome any commentary and feedback to help bring this proposal to a workable text."

WA Military Non-Aggression Act
Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Strong

---

Let it be known that this honourable assembly of nations firmly believes in the idea that democratic states need not engage in acts of war or conflict against one another, and instead ought to stand together united side by side against hostile external influences and autocratic regimes aiming to undermine and collapse the foundations of democracy and peace; and

To strengthen the bonds of the member nations of this august body, and to further the aim of building an international community whose members work together in peace as allies, and adherents to the principles of democracy;

The World Assembly enacts as follows:

1. A member nation is prohibited from engaging in armed conflict or any other form of military action against another member state, barring any exceptions set forth by the articles of this resolution;
   
   
2. A member state which does not adhere to Clause 1 of this resolution in good-faith, or which acts in a manner that misuses or abuses such (for example by resigning membership of the WA in order to be able to attack a member, and to subsequently reapply for WA membership to evade retaliation) is immediately excluded from the non-aggression mandate of Clause 1 as a punitive measure;
   
   
3. Any commitments to defence treaties a member nation might have with non-member states, and which were already public knowledge before a war with that non-member was started, are excluded from the good-faith mandate of Clause 2, unless any such war was started by the non-member in question;
   
   
4. Any member nation which commits crimes of war or genocide as understood by extant or future WA law must be excluded from the non-aggression mandate of Clause 1 as a punitive measure;
   
   
5. The World Assembly Compliance Commission (WACC) is empowered to exclude a member nation from the non-aggression mandate of Clause 1 as a punitive measure for non-compliance with WA law, yet only if the transgression perpetrated by that member's non-compliance is deemed significant or severe enough to warrant such an exclusion after a fair and independent hearing of the Independent Adjudicative Office (IAO) has determined that significance or severity on a case-by-case basis;
   
   
6. Any renewed inclusion of an excluded member state into the non-aggression mandate of Clause 1 must be assessed on a case-by-case basis by the IAO on whether the punishment of exclusion has been sufficient or yielded the desired coercive results, and subsequently enacted by the WACC if the IAO's assessment has yielded a positive conclusion;
   
   
7. Nothing in this resolution prevents a member state from maintaining, expanding, training or improving its national military, barring any restrictions set forth by extant or future WA legislation. Similarly, nothing in this resolution prevents a member nation from joining any mutual defence pacts with other members or non-members, barring any restrictions, limitations, or conditions set forth by this resolution, or extant or future WA law.

[Daarwyrth]

DRAFT 1:

WA Non-Aggression Pact
Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Strong

---

Let it be known that this honourable assembly of nations firmly believes in the idea that democratic states need not engage in acts of war or conflict against one another, and instead ought to stand together united side by side against hostile external influences and autocratic regimes aiming to undermine and collapse the foundations of democracy and peace; and

To strengthen the bonds of the member nations of this august body, and to further the aim of building an international community whose members work together in peace as allies, and adherents of the principles of democracy;

The World Assembly enacts as follows:

1. For the purposes of this resolution, the term "non-aggression pact" shall be understood as an agreement between sovereign member states of which the signatories promise to take no military action or hostility against one another;
   
   
2. Every member nation must be a signatory to a non-aggression pact between all member states of the WA, barring any exceptions set forth by the articles of this resolution;
   
   
3. A member state which does not make a good-faith effort to remain a signatory of the non-aggression pact of Clause 2, and which acts in a manner that misuses or abuses such (for example by resigning membership of the WA and thus withdrawing from the non-aggression pact in order to be able to attack a member nation, and to subsequently reapply for WA membership to evade retaliation), must be excluded from the non-aggression pact as a punitive measure;
   
   
4. A member nation which undermines the principles of democracy, or actively works to undo the democratic freedoms of its citizens, or those of the inhabitants of other member nations, must be excluded from the non-aggression pact as a coercive measure;
   
   
5. Nothing in this resolution prevents a member state from maintaining, expanding, or improving its national military, barring any restrictions set forth by extant or future WA legislation. Similarly, nothing in this resolution prevents a member nation from joining any mutual defence pacts with other members or non-members, barring any restrictions, limitations, or conditions set forth by extant or future WA legislation.

DRAFT 2:

WA Non-Aggression Pact
Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Strong

---

Let it be known that this honourable assembly of nations firmly believes in the idea that democratic states need not engage in acts of war or conflict against one another, and instead ought to stand together united side by side against hostile external influences and autocratic regimes aiming to undermine and collapse the foundations of democracy and peace; and

To strengthen the bonds of the member nations of this august body, and to further the aim of building an international community whose members work together in peace as allies, and adherents to the principles of democracy;

The World Assembly enacts as follows:

1. For the purposes of this resolution, the term "non-aggression pact" shall be understood as an agreement between sovereign member states of which the signatories promise to take no military action or hostility against one another;
   
   
2. Every member nation must be a signatory to a non-aggression pact between all member states of the WA, barring any exceptions set forth by the articles of this resolution;
   
   
3. Any member state which does not make a good-faith effort to remain a signatory of the non-aggression pact of Clause 2 (excluding any commitments to defence treaties with either member or non-member nations), and which acts in a manner that misuses or abuses such (for example by resigning membership of the WA and thus withdrawing from the non-aggression pact in order to be able to attack a member, and to subsequently reapply for WA membership to evade retaliation) must be excluded from the non-aggression pact as a punitive measure;
   
   
4. Any member nation which commits crimes of war or genocide as understood by extant or future WA law, or any member state which remains non-compliant with WA legislation must be excluded from the non-aggression pact as a punitive or coercive measure;
   
   
5. Nothing in this resolution prevents a member state from maintaining, expanding, or improving its national military, barring any restrictions set forth by extant or future WA legislation. Similarly, nothing in this resolution prevents a member nation from joining any mutual defence pacts with other members or non-members, barring any restrictions, limitations, or conditions set forth by extant or future WA law.

DRAFT 3:

WA Non-Aggression Pact
Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Strong

---

Let it be known that this honourable assembly of nations firmly believes in the idea that democratic states need not engage in acts of war or conflict against one another, and instead ought to stand together united side by side against hostile external influences and autocratic regimes aiming to undermine and collapse the foundations of democracy and peace; and

To strengthen the bonds of the member nations of this august body, and to further the aim of building an international community whose members work together in peace as allies, and adherents to the principles of democracy;

The World Assembly enacts as follows:

1. For the purposes of this resolution, the term "non-aggression pact" shall be understood as an agreement between sovereign member states of which the signatories promise to take no military action or hostility against one another;
   
   
2. Every member nation must be a signatory to a non-aggression pact between all member states of the WA, barring any exceptions set forth by the articles of this resolution;
   
   
3. Any member state which does not make a good-faith effort to remain a signatory of the non-aggression pact of Clause 2, and which acts in a manner that misuses or abuses such (for example by resigning membership of the WA and thus withdrawing from the non-aggression pact in order to be able to attack a member, and to subsequently reapply for WA membership to evade retaliation) must be excluded from the non-aggression pact as a punitive measure;
   
   
4. Any commitments of a member nation to a defence treaty with a non-member are excluded from the good-faith mandate of Clause 3. Yet, if any armed conflict arises between two or more member states as a result of a defence treaty with a non-member, then that war must be confined to that instance alone, and any extension of the hostilities beyond the confines of that conflict must be treated as a violation of Clause 3;
   
   
5. Any member nation which commits crimes of war or genocide as understood by extant or future WA law, or any member state which remains non-compliant with WA legislation must be excluded from the non-aggression pact as a punitive or coercive measure;
   
   
6. Nothing in this resolution prevents a member state from maintaining, expanding, or improving its national military, barring any restrictions set forth by extant or future WA legislation. Similarly, nothing in this resolution prevents a member nation from joining any mutual defence pacts with other members or non-members, barring any restrictions, limitations, or conditions set forth by extant or future WA law.

DRAFT 4:

WA Military Non-Aggression Act
Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Strong

---

Let it be known that this honourable assembly of nations firmly believes in the idea that democratic states need not engage in acts of war or conflict against one another, and instead ought to stand together united side by side against hostile external influences and autocratic regimes aiming to undermine and collapse the foundations of democracy and peace; and

To strengthen the bonds of the member nations of this august body, and to further the aim of building an international community whose members work together in peace as allies, and adherents to the principles of democracy;

The World Assembly enacts as follows:

1. A member nation is prohibited from engaging in armed conflict or any other form of military action against another member state, barring any exceptions set forth by the articles of this resolution;
   
   
2. A member state which does not adhere to Clause 1 of this resolution in good-faith, or which acts in a manner that misuses or abuses such (for example by resigning membership of the WA in order to be able to attack a member, and to subsequently reapply for WA membership to evade retaliation) is immediately excluded from the non-aggression mandate of Clause 1 as a punitive measure;
   
   
3. Any commitments to defence treaties a member nation might have, that were already public knowledge before any war was started, with non-member states are excluded from the good-faith mandate of Clause 2, unless any such war was started by the non-member in question. Yet, if any armed conflict arises between two or more member states as a result of a defence treaty with a non-member, then that war must be confined to that instance alone, and any extension of the hostilities beyond the confines of that conflict must be treated as a violation of Clause 2;
   
   
4. Any member nation which commits crimes of war or genocide as understood by extant or future WA law, or any member state which remains non-compliant with WA legislation must be excluded from the non-aggression mandate of Clause 1 as a punitive or coercive measure;
   
   
5. Nothing in this resolution prevents a member state from maintaining, expanding, or improving its national military, barring any restrictions set forth by extant or future WA legislation. Similarly, nothing in this resolution prevents a member nation from joining any mutual defence pacts with other members or non-members, barring any restrictions, limitations, or conditions set forth by this resolution, or extant or future WA law.

[Laka Strolistandiler]

I understand that as a non-member state our opinion would be the least one anyone would be interested in but doesn’t clause 4 violate ideological ban rule? If I’m correct it wasn’t removed (feel free to correct me here).

[Daarwyrth]

I understand that as a non-member state our opinion would be the least one anyone would be interested in but doesn’t clause 4 violate ideological ban rule? If I’m correct it wasn’t removed (feel free to correct me here).

OOC: As far as I am aware, the ideological ban rule has been overturned.

[Hulldom]

JLM: "Regardless of our personal opinions on democracy, which we believe is of course the superior system for governing a nation, we cannot support this proposal while clause 4 remains in this legislation. However, we support the idea of a general non-aggression pact much, much more strongly than the idea of a WA-mandated military in Hulldom."

[Daarwyrth]

JLM: "Regardless of our personal opinions on democracy, which we believe is of course the superior system for governing a nation, we cannot support this proposal while clause 4 remains in this legislation. However, we support the idea of a general non-aggression pact much, much more strongly than the idea of a WA-mandated military in Hulldom."

Zylkoven: "Our delegation is amenable to removing Clause 4 from the text of the proposal if the public opinion will be against it."

[Attempted Socialism]

At a student fair, so mobile and short, but I am a fan in general and my particular comments will come later.

[Comfed]

"Opposed so long as clause 4 remains in the proposal."

[Daarwyrth]

Zylkoven: "The now previous Clause 4 has been excised from the proposal text."

[Wallenburg]

"Wallenburg will not align itself with fascist dictatorships on the flimsy justification that they belong to this same organization."

[Daarwyrth]

"Wallenburg will not align itself with fascist dictatorships on the flimsy justification that they belong to this same organization."

Zylkoven: "May I assume that means you would support the restoration of the previous Clause 4, Ambassador? Additionally, the resolution doesn't demand that you'd align yourself with such malicious entities. It merely asks that you not attack them. Yet, perhaps that should lead to the question whether it wouldn't be a good idea to outlaw fascism across the World Assembly.

Yet, as we understand and support your sentiment, our delegation has crafted a new Clause 4 which hopefully assuages some of your concerns regarding this resolution."

[Tinhampton]

Some random staffer: Article 4 covers every nation that has ever been found non-compliant, even if the IAO now says they comply with everything today. Surely this is a mistake.

[Daarwyrth]

Some random staffer: Article 4 covers every nation that has ever been found non-compliant, even if the IAO now says they comply with everything today. Surely this is a mistake.

Daarwyrthian staffers can be seen rushing to their delegation's office to quickly mend the mistake which has been pointed out. A 'thank you, you're the best!' card with a lovely, adorable kitten has been left behind for the Tinhamptonian delegation.

[Unibot III]

Ms. Montebello nodded in general approval of the first draft, but circled the fourth clause with a green ballpoint: “I will note that non-compliance may not be wilful in cases of war.”

“If a non-member-state conducts an attack on a member-state, it is possible that this attack could render the member-state non-compliant, breaking the terms of the non-aggression pact,” said Ms. Montebello. “For instance, if a member-state cannot repel a ship that isn’t meeting various security requirements, it’s failed to comply with GA#298, and subsequently rendered ineligible for the non-aggression pact for as long as that ship remains in its waters against its will.”

[Calenoa]

"Hmm. Zhis does sound like a good resolution. As long as we can choose who to vork wizh, zhis vill be benificial to us. Some nations vill not fit wizh our values, so I see the choice of who to actually vork wizh and who not to something zhat should be implied. Don't you agree, ja?"
- Radulf Agler, WA Represenitive for The Community of Calenoa.

[Ainocra]

I believe that clause three cannot be enforced since all members must comply with all resolutions.

[Daarwyrth]

Ms. Montebello nodded in general approval of the first draft, but circled the fourth clause with a green ballpoint: “I will note that non-compliance may not be wilful in cases of war.”

“If a non-member-state conducts an attack on a member-state, it is possible that this attack could render the member-state non-compliant, breaking the terms of the non-aggression pact,” said Ms. Montebello. “For instance, if a member-state cannot repel a ship that isn’t meeting various security requirements, it’s failed to comply with GA#298, and subsequently rendered ineligible for the non-aggression pact for as long as that ship remains in its waters against its will.”

Zylkoven: "Am I to understand you'd suggest the note about non-compliance be removed, or would you suggest a different approach to non-compliant nations? We would not want to see non-compliant nations benefit from the NAP."

"Hmm. Zhis does sound like a good resolution. As long as we can choose who to vork wizh, zhis vill be benificial to us. Some nations vill not fit wizh our values, so I see the choice of who to actually vork wizh and who not to something zhat should be implied. Don't you agree, ja?"
- Radulf Agler, WA Represenitive for The Community of Calenoa.

"Our delegation is of the opinion that Clause 5 clarifies sufficiently that nations are free to choose with whom they form a defensive alliance."

I believe that clause three cannot be enforced since all members must comply with all resolutions.

"Yet, that is why Clause 2 has the line about exceptions being created by the articles of this resolution."

[Scherzinger]

Ambassador Miho Nishizumi: "Forcing forward thinking nations to align themselves with the backwards socialists and fascists of the world benefits nobody. We will not support being forced into flimsy treaties with ideologues that our own foreign relations classify as enemies to humanity. The WA is already hell-bent on stripping away every ounce of sovereignty they can from otherwise free nations. This resolution would take diplomatic freedom away from every member nation, which In my opinion is one of the few limited freedoms left for nations"

[Calenoa]

Forcing forward thinking nations to align themselves with the backwards socialists and fascists of the world benefits nobody. We will not support being forced into flimsy treaties with ideologues that our own foreign relations classify as enemies to humanity.

"Zhat, I agree wizh. Vone shouldn't be forced to align themselfs wizh a nation zhey don't want to align wizh. As good as zhe resolution does sound, the nation vill keep the ability to choose who to align wizh."
- Radulf Agler, WA Represenitive for The Community of Calenoa.

[Wallenburg]

"Wallenburg will not align itself with fascist dictatorships on the flimsy justification that they belong to this same organization."

Zylkoven: "May I assume that means you would support the restoration of the previous Clause 4, Ambassador? Additionally, the resolution doesn't demand that you'd align yourself with such malicious entities. It merely asks that you not attack them. Yet, perhaps that should lead to the question whether it wouldn't be a good idea to outlaw fascism across the World Assembly.

Yet, as we understand and support your sentiment, our delegation has crafted a new Clause 4 which hopefully assuages some of your concerns regarding this resolution."

"Section 4 addresses the worst cases, but Wallenburg still will not accept alignment with the counterrevolutionary ideologies of fascism abroad, even if the states practicing them limit themselves to the injustices permitted under World Assembly law. Regardless of your claims to the contrary, a pact of nonaggression is necessarily an act of alignment with all parties to that pact. It enables any member of that pact to exercise their power more freely. It enables them to commit violence both foreign and domestic against the disadvantaged and dispossessed. It enables them to wage war against our non-member allies and foreign friends, as we have vowed not to retaliate. What else do you call that but alignment?"

[Daarwyrth]

Zylkoven: "May I assume that means you would support the restoration of the previous Clause 4, Ambassador? Additionally, the resolution doesn't demand that you'd align yourself with such malicious entities. It merely asks that you not attack them. Yet, perhaps that should lead to the question whether it wouldn't be a good idea to outlaw fascism across the World Assembly.

Yet, as we understand and support your sentiment, our delegation has crafted a new Clause 4 which hopefully assuages some of your concerns regarding this resolution."

"Section 4 addresses the worst cases, but Wallenburg still will not accept alignment with the counterrevolutionary ideologies of fascism abroad, even if the states practicing them limit themselves to the injustices permitted under World Assembly law. Regardless of your claims to the contrary, a pact of nonaggression is necessarily an act of alignment with all parties to that pact. It enables any member of that pact to exercise their power more freely. It enables them to commit violence both foreign and domestic against the disadvantaged and dispossessed. It enables them to wage war against our non-member allies and foreign friends, as we have vowed not to retaliate. What else do you call that but alignment?"

Zylkoven: "Then I would ask what kind of approach you would suggest that would make your delegation more amenable to support the resolution."

[Unibot III]

Zylkoven: "Am I to understand you'd suggest the note about non-compliance be removed, or would you suggest a different approach to non-compliant nations? We would not want to see non-compliant nations benefit from the NAP."

“Our suggestion is a different approach as non-compliance may not be a wilful choice by the member-nation — perhaps noncompliance is being imposed or forced upon the nation, for instance,” she replied.

[Daarwyrth]

Zylkoven: "Am I to understand you'd suggest the note about non-compliance be removed, or would you suggest a different approach to non-compliant nations? We would not want to see non-compliant nations benefit from the NAP."

“Our suggestion is a different approach as non-compliance may not be a wilful choice by the member-nation — perhaps noncompliance is being imposed or forced upon the nation, for instance,” she replied.

Zylkoven: "I fail to see how non-compliance could be enforced on a member nation. If a member is unable to address its non-compliance it's due to their own unwillingness to do so, not mandated by external influences. We are of the strong opinion that non-compliant nations should not benefit from the protection of a WA NAP. If a nation wants to be a part of that NAP, the solution is simple: be or become compliant."

[Tinhampton]

Also: How is this not illegal for contradicting Two?

[The Orwell Society]

The Orwellian Ambassador bursts into the chamber, eager to share his two cents.

"The Society strenuously opposes this burning piece of melted-together, stinking, fly-ridden trash that the Daarwrythian delegation calls a "proposal" and everything it represents. We will not stand for the WA nanny state dictating how we use our military and who we use it on. Good day!" The Ambassador turned around and walked out of the chamber, leaving the room in silence.

OOC: Well-written, well done, but I still oppose.