[DRAFT] Asteroid Defence Treaty

[Kaprein]

“I will have to disagree on this. The aforementioned committee will most likely have professional astronomers and scientists, thereby they are more likely to make better and intelligent decisions on whether or not to launch. If national governments are in control of launches, then the outcomes could be more risky.”
-Ms. Charlotte Schafer, WA Ambassador for the Clevesian Empire

Regardless of the membership of the Association, it still represents WA bureaucrats being placed in control of a nation's most powerful weapons, which would be an unacceptable loss of sovereignty.

-Mr. Harry Adler, World Assembly Ambassador for the Republic of Kaprein.

[Morover]

"What assurances can you make that this... association... will not improperly seize my nation's potential nuclear assets? Presumably there are tens of thousands of nations that could potentially have 'nukes', and I cannot help but feel that in most cases, no more than one - or, in severe circumstances, several - nuclear strikes would be necessary in order to eliminate a material probability of impact. My concern, essentially, is that the use of nuclear assets will not be taken equitably, given there is no process given for how a nation will be chosen to relinquish a nuclear weapon to the Association, beyond the fact that the Association will assume possession of 'the appropriate warheads from the collective inventories [of member-nations armed with nuclear weapons].' To me, it seems a lottery of whose nuclear weapons get chosen - if OnlyAFewNukesVille only has one nuclear asset and is not in the potentially affected area of the strike, but BoomBoomExplosionTopia has several thousand and is in the primary impact area, and OnlyAFewNukesVille gets extraordinarily unlucky, they can lose their entire supply for an event that would not even directly affect them.

My nation's suggestion for this resolution is the implementation of a more sophisticated method of selection of assets to seize. This implementation process should include size of nuclear arsenal, geographical location with relation to the potential strike, and potential geopolitical ramifications of a reduced nuclear arsenal. We would be satisfied with that, but if nothing changes with regards to this issue, my nation must withhold its support.

We also suggest giving an avenue for non-member-nations to report potential impacts to the Association - they greatly outnumber us, and some of the greatest scientific minds reside in non-member-nations. Assuming the prior issue is fixed, this issue is not enough to prevent us from supporting this resolution (member-nation surveillance is better than no surveillance at all), but we feel that it would make the resolution stronger to allow a wider pool of scientists and governments to monitor for any sightings that may slip by if we narrow the pool as much as it currently is being narrowed.

It's an interesting proposal, ambassador, and we commend you for your efforts."