[DEFEATED] Protecting World Assembly Neutrality

[Goobergunchia]

This proposal has been submitted and is currently at quorum. Please review the submitted version here.

The representative to the World Assembly from the United Socialist States of Namwenia is pleased to present the following proposal:

Revision 6

Protecting World Assembly Neutrality

Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Mild

Acknowledging the World Assembly as an international organization with a defined role in establishing international law;

Recognizing that the World Assembly has historically been neutral in armed conflicts between individual member states;

Disappointed that the World Assembly is currently silent on its historic neutrality and lack of armed force;

Therefore, the World Assembly enacts the following articles:

1. For the purpose of these articles, conflict shall be defined as armed combat between opposing forces or member states.
2. The World Assembly shall remain neutral in all matters of civil or international conflict.
3. The World Assembly shall be prohibited from establishing either a military or police force.
4. The World Assembly shall be permitted to establish an armed security force for the purpose of protecting international World Assembly owned facilities, providing security services at the request of member states, or assisting in humanitarian crises.
5. The World Assembly urges individual member states to act with open-mindedness and respect in international affairs and conflict resolution, acknowledging that the ultimate goal of such efforts is peaceful resolution.
6. Nothing in this legislation shall prevent individual member states from establishing their own military or police force, or engaging in armed conflict with another member state.

Co-Author: second_sovereignty

Our Dispatch on the proposal including a defense of WA neutrality.

Change Log
Rev 0 -> Rev 1: Addition of a preamble to explain the logic behind the proposal.
Rev 1 -> Rev 2: Updated preamble removing direct reference to GA #002.
Rev 2 -> Rev 3: Added Clause 4 which provides member state actions, updated name, added co-author.
Rev 3 -> Rev 4: Amended preamble. Inclusion of WA armed security for the purpose of convoys or humanitarian efforts.
Rev 4 -> Rev 5: Updated language based on suggestions. Expanded WA security force to allow for protection of international WA owned facilities.
Rev 5 -> Rev 6: Updated language from suggestions. Update to language on WA security force.

Revision 0:

Militarization Prevention Act

Category: International Security | Strength: Strong

The World Assembly hereby enacts the following articles:

1. For the purpose of these articles, conflict shall be defined as armed combat between opposing forces or member states.
2. The World Assembly (WA) shall remain neutral in all matters of civil or international conflict.
3. The WA shall be prohibited from establishing either a military or police force. Therefore, the WA shall further be prohibited from participating in any armed conflict, police, or military actions except to assist in a humanitarian crisis caused as a consequences of civil or international conflict.
4. Nothing in this legislation shall prevent individual member states from the ability to establish their own military or police force, or to engage in armed conflict with another member state.

Revision 1:

Militarization Prevention Act

Category: International Security | Strength: Strong

Acknowledging that the World Assembly is a global organizational body with the purpose of establishing international law.

Further acknowledging that the World Assembly has historically remained neutral in armed conflicts between individual member states.

Noting that the World Assembly should promote peaceful resolution to conflict and demilitarization wherever possible.

Disappointed that that since the repeal of GA002, Rights and Duties of WA States, the World Assembly has been silent on the historic neutrality of this body and its traditional prohibition on the use of armed forces.

The World Assembly hereby enacts the following articles:

1. For the purpose of these articles, conflict shall be defined as armed combat between opposing forces or member states.
2. The World Assembly (WA) shall remain neutral in all matters of civil or international conflict.
3. The WA shall be prohibited from establishing either a military or police force. Therefore, the WA shall further be prohibited from participating in any armed conflict, police, or military actions except to assist in a humanitarian crisis caused as a consequences of civil or international conflict.
4. Nothing in this legislation shall prevent individual member states from the ability to establish their own military or police force, or to engage in armed conflict with another member state.

Revision 2:

Militarization Prevention Act

Category: International Security | Strength: Strong

Acknowledging that the World Assembly is a global organizational body with the purpose of establishing international law.

Further acknowledging that the World Assembly has historically remained neutral in armed conflicts between individual member states.

Noting that the World Assembly should promote peaceful resolution to conflict and demilitarization wherever possible.

Disappointed that the World Assembly is currently silent on its historic neutrality and its traditional prohibition on the use of armed forces.

Concerned about the risks of a militarized World Assembly which could be abused to mobilize said forces to push specific political objectives and harm to member states through a tyrannical future majority.

The World Assembly hereby enacts the following articles:

1. For the purpose of these articles, conflict shall be defined as armed combat between opposing forces or member states.
2. The World Assembly (WA) shall remain neutral in all matters of civil or international conflict.
3. The WA shall be prohibited from establishing either a military or police force. Therefore, the WA shall further be prohibited from participating in any armed conflict, police, or military actions except to assist in a humanitarian crisis caused as a consequences of civil or international conflict.
4. Nothing in this legislation shall prevent individual member states from the ability to establish their own military or police force, or to engage in armed conflict with another member state.

Revision 3

Protecting World Assembly Neutrality

Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Mild

Acknowledging that the World Assembly is a global organizational body with the purpose of establishing international law.

Further acknowledging that the World Assembly has historically remained neutral in armed conflicts between individual member states.

Noting that the World Assembly should promote peaceful resolution to conflict and demilitarization wherever possible.

Disappointed that the World Assembly is currently silent on its historic neutrality and its traditional prohibition on the use of armed forces.

Concerned about the risks of a militarized World Assembly which could be abused to mobilize said forces to push specific political objectives and harm to member states through a tyrannical future majority.

The World Assembly hereby enacts the following articles:

1. For the purpose of these articles, conflict shall be defined as armed combat between opposing forces or member states.
2. The World Assembly (WA) shall remain neutral in all matters of civil or international conflict.
3. The WA shall be prohibited from establishing either a military or police force. Therefore, the WA shall further be prohibited from participating in any armed conflict, police, or military actions except to assist in a humanitarian crisis caused as a consequences of civil or international conflict.
4. The WA urges individual member states to act with respect in international affairs as well as matters of conflict resolution with a goal of peace.
5. Nothing in this legislation shall prevent individual member states from the ability to establish their own military or police force, or to engage in armed conflict with another member state.

Co-Author: second_sovereignty

Revision 4

Protecting World Assembly Neutrality

Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Mild

Acknowledging the World Assembly as a global, organizational body with a defined role in establishing international law;

Further acknowledging that the World Assembly has historically retained its neutrality in armed conflicts between individual member states;

Noting that the World Assembly should actively encourage peaceful resolution to conflicts that arise between member states;

Disappointed that the World Assembly is currently silent on its historic neutrality and traditional prohibition on the use of armed forces;

Therefore, the World Assembly hereby enacts the following articles:

1. For the purpose of these articles, conflict shall be defined as armed combat between opposing forces or member states.
2. The World Assembly (WA) shall remain neutral in all matters of civil or international conflict.
3. The WA shall be prohibited from establishing either a military or police force.
4. The WA shall be permitted to establish an armed security force for the purpose of providing security escorts at the request of individual member states or assisting in humanitarian crises.
5. The WA urges individual member states to act with dignity and respect in international affairs and conflict resolution further acknowledging that the ultimate goal of such efforts is peaceful resolution.
6. Nothing in this legislation shall prevent individual member states from the ability to establish their own military or police force, or to engage in armed conflict with another member state.

Co-Author: second_sovereignty

Revision 5

Protecting World Assembly Neutrality

Category: Global Disarmament | Strength: Mild

Acknowledging the World Assembly as an international organization with a defined role in establishing international law;

Recognizing that the World Assembly has historically been neutral in armed conflicts between individual member states;

Disappointed that the World Assembly is currently silent on its historic neutrality and lack of armed force;

Therefore, the World Assembly hereby enacts the following articles:

1. For the purpose of these articles, conflict shall be defined as armed combat between opposing forces or member states.
2. The World Assembly shall remain neutral in all matters of civil or international conflict.
3. The World Assembly shall be prohibited from establishing either a military or police force.
4. The World Assembly shall be permitted to establish an armed security force for the purpose of protecting international World Assembly owned facilities, providing security escorts at the request of member states, or assisting in humanitarian crises.
5. The World Assembly urges individual member states to act with open-mindedness and respect in international affairs and conflict resolution, acknowledging that the ultimate goal of such efforts is peaceful resolution.
6. Nothing in this legislation shall prevent individual member states from establishing their own military or police force, or to engage in armed conflict with another member state.

Co-Author: second_sovereignty

[New Astri]

[waving pompoms and doing a little dance] you go i'm so proud of you

[Kirrlark]

“We have already communicated our comments on this proposal through other channels but full support in principle”

[Second Sovereignty]

OOC:
You're going to want a preamble for this.

[Juansonia]

"Opposed, as a WA-wide police force could be of benefit. I should also inform you that I have also drafted a blocker against military action by the WA."
- Maria-Fernanda Novo, WA Ambassador for the Armed Republic of Juansonia

[Namwenia]

OOC:
You're going to want a preamble for this.

OOC: I wasn't sure if a preamble was necessary, but you are not the first to recommend it. I'll be planning a draft update to include a preamble.

Thank you.

[Namwenia]

"Opposed, as a WA-wide police force could be of benefit. I should also inform you that I have also drafted a blocker against military action by the WA."
- Maria-Fernanda Novo, WA Ambassador for the Armed Republic of Juansonia

"And it is within your right to disagree. I believe a World Assembly-wide police force or military, which had been historically prohibited until the repeal of GA#02, could be very easily abused. I thank you for your comments and concern."
-World Assembly Ambassador from the United Socialist States of Namwenia, Pat McDonald.

[Namwenia]

-- BUMP --

"This legislation has been modified to include a preamble which we feel provides adequate explanation for the reasons behind it. I await to see further discussion and commentary on the topic. Thank you."
-World Assembly Ambassador from the United Socialist States of Namwenia, Pat McDonald.

[Namwenia]

-- BUMP --

As noted previously, a preamble has been added to ensure the reason for the proposed prohibition on both a WA military and police force is adequately explained.

[Chipoli]

"Against in Principle."

[Republic of Mesque]

Good luck, OP, getting past the vultures picking on the repeal of GA#2, which long to use the WA’s name militarily with the purpose of advancing their nefarious, puppeteering agenda.

[Namwenia]

Good luck, OP, getting past the vultures picking on the repeal of GA#2, which long to use the WA’s name militarily with the purpose of advancing their nefarious, puppeteering agenda.

"Thank you, while I recognize that this may be an uphill battle, I believe it is an important one."
-World Assembly Ambassador from the United Socialist States of Namwenia, Pat McDonald.

[Namwenia]

-- BUMP --

"In this version of the proposal, the preamble has been amended. Please let us know if you have any comments or concerns."
-World Assembly Ambassador from the United Socialist States of Namwenia, Pat McDonald.

[Astrobolt]

Ambassador Tappe: “Why should the WA remain neutral when faced with a genocidal state declaring war against a weaker nation, particularly if this weaker nation is a WA member state?”

OOC: I believe your resolution needs to impose some sort of mandate on individual member states.

[The Orwell Society]

Opposed.

[Namwenia]

Ambassador Tappe: “Why should the WA remain neutral when faced with a genocidal state declaring war against a weaker nation, particularly if this weaker nation is a WA member state?”

OOC: I believe your resolution needs to impose some sort of mandate on individual member states.

"The WA is not a war machine and should not be used as a tool to wage wars between individual member states. They may serve to provide humanitarian aid, of course, but they are not intended to be the world's police."
-World Assembly Ambassador from the United Socialist States of Namwenia, Pat McDonald

[Second Sovereignty]

OOC:
Astrobolt is correct on one point; you need some kind of action on Member-States, even an optional one. Something to the effect of 'Urges Member-States to act with dignity and respect in international affairs and conflict resolution', would do well. That being said, you're also looking at a Category violation, at least from what I remember - something with minimal mandate on action for Member-States to take is not a 'Strong' proposal, it would be mild, even if it is quite strong in restraining the WA itself.

[Namwenia]

"Additional comments and concerns had been brought to our attention about the proposal and its required action of the member states. An updated draft is above. We thank you for your time."
-World Assembly Representative from the United Socialist States of Namwenia, Pat McDonald

OOC: Updated above. Rev 3.

[Second Sovereignty]

OOC:
Not to rush you, but I would recommend submission sooner rather than later. Best to get this one in before the alternatives.

[WayNeacTia]

Looks great. Will support. Won’t pass. #2 was repealed to get rid of the blocker on WA military and police. Still…. Looks great. Will still support.

[Namwenia]

Looks great. Will support. Won’t pass. #2 was repealed to get rid of the blocker on WA military and police. Still…. Looks great. Will still support.

"Thank you for your support. While I know this may turn into an uphill battle, I feel this is an important one to have to maintain the tradition of WA neutrality."
-World Assembly Ambassador from the United Socialist States of Namwenia, Pat McDonald

[Republic of Mesque]

Ambassador Tappe: “Why should the WA remain neutral when faced with a genocidal state declaring war against a weaker nation, particularly if this weaker nation is a WA member state?”

The WA is a flawed, judicially controlled institution, subject to the bias of its more influent members. To give it a military is the same as allowing these states the right of holding a paramilitary ready to do their whim.
These slimy WA bureaucrats will have on their hands the ability to invade a nation to “protect citizens from fascists”, or other excuse, which is not dissimilar to a certain anocratic president invading a neighbor country on Earth, y. 2022. It takes but one ill-intentioned to, in their hubris, cause the death of thousands with the excuse of “liberation”, “restoration of order” or even “peacekeeping”.
In short, awarding this broken system with a military is not a good idea, and those that support it want to use it for their nefarious purposes.

[Namwenia]

This proposal has been submitted to the GA.

[Astrobolt]

Ambassador Tappe: “Why should the WA remain neutral when faced with a genocidal state declaring war against a weaker nation, particularly if this weaker nation is a WA member state?”

OOC: I believe your resolution needs to impose some sort of mandate on individual member states.

"The WA is not a war machine and should not be used as a tool to wage wars between individual member states. They may serve to provide humanitarian aid, of course, but they are not intended to be the world's police."
-World Assembly Representative from the United Socialist States of Namwenia, Pat McDonald

Ambassador Reede Tappe: “That answer will not provide solace to populations suffering under the genocidal boot of unstable dictators. Your position ambassador, is morally untenable.”

[Kenmoria]

(OOC: There is no need for the GA to be prevented from military or policing action. I am opposed to this proposal. Clause 3 is also oddly worded. There is no causal link from its first requirement to its second, so the ‘therefore’ seems misplaced.)