[FAILED] GA Resolution: Popular Statecraft

[Lenlyvit]

Popular Statecraft

A resolution to slash worldwide military spending.

Category: Global Disarmament

Strength: Significant

Proposed by: Tinhampton

Whereas the core principles of national self-determination should be fully and effectively restated in international law, the General Assembly hereby:

a. guarantees to each member the right to determine its preferred mode of government,

b. forbids members from seeking to change any other member's government or mode thereof without that member's full, informed consent,

c. demands that members not stir up armed conflicts in other members so they can bypass Article b, and

d. clarifies that the GA may forbid specific practices associated with a mode of government, unless its primary effect is to prevent member states adhering to that mode from continuing such adherence.

This is the discussion thread. To cast your vote, go HERE

[Lenlyvit]

"The delegation of the sovereign Empire of Lenlyvit declares it's opposition to this resolution." States Valeria Tatian, ambassador to the WA. "While this is a noble piece of legislation, it inherently keeps nations from declaring war or getting involved in civil conflicts in neighboring countries. This will, in some instances, prevent the spread of democracy in authoritarian countries or authoritarianism in democratic countries. It must be opposed."

[The CFR of Kaltovar]

Major Sharon Kang of the Diplomatic Corps will give an address to the XKI regarding the so-called popular-statecraft resolution:

"Friends and comrades of the 10,000 Islands, thank you for your attention. I'll jump right to the point: Kaltovar opposes this resolution as it would undermine the standard practices of Kaltovar, XKI, and TITO. The proposed legislation would seriously degrade the ability of the international community to respond to growing threats, while at the same time granting unilateral broad authority to forbid "specific practices associated with a mode of government". How the international community would enforce these decisions is unclear, because the resolution would also make seeking to change another government a form of thought crime. The resolution doesn't merely forbid attempts to change governments with force, but categorically forbids even "seeking" to change another government by any means. People could argue that Kaltovar's many direct activities in foreign nations are precisely what this resolution is meant to prevent, and so we're biased, but I ask you: Should stirring up dissent in a Fascist nation be a crime? And if it's to be a crime, how is it to be proven and what measures will be taken to address these supposed criminal acts? While Kaltovar generally believes in the right of self determination for other countries, there are situations where direct multilateral actions must be taken at a quicker pace than the World Assembly can provide for. While inefficient politicians argued about the best course of action, the spies and tanks of proud united coalition forces have restored order to the Galaxy on numerous occasions. If this resolution is passed, Kaltovar intends to withdraw completely from the World Assembly and treat it as a hostile foreign power opposed to the international tradition of armed collective action against aggressive regimes. This resolution is not only ill-conceived and poorly worded but also non-negotiably unacceptable from our perspective."

[Vivolkha]

Recently-appointed Vivolkhan ambassador to the WA Æriel Sauvien looked closely at the short resolution in front of him. With a long sigh, he stated:
"Unfortunately, in its attempt to reinforce the noble principle of national sovereignty and promote peace, this resolution falls short in every other aspect. While its intention is sorely needed given the current times we live in, this resolution is extremely vague and restrictive. The Vivolkhan delegation has had to set up a special committee just to establish what its consequences and obligations would be, and has recommended that our vote be Against, for the following reasons: sweeping restrictions on the capacity of a state to promote its interests abroad, promotion of isolationism, imposition of undue limitations for future resolutions, and lack of clarity in the activities prohibited by this resolution, which could led to legitimate international relations actions being declared illegal under it.

On behalf of the Vivolkhan state, we would also like to warn that this resolution is either extremely rushed or, perhaps more darkly, intentionally designed to limit outside accountability for the human rights abuses of authoritarian regimes. Vivolkha will unflinchingly vote against any resolution that threatens the human rights and dignity of any citizen of a WA member state, no matter how powerful the nation pushing it"