AT VOTE: Repeal "Nuclear Security Convention" [Complete]

[Eluvatar]

Category: Repeal
Resolution: GA#292
Proposed by: Imperium Anglorum
GA Topic

Description: WA General Assembly Resolution #292: Nuclear Security Convention (Category: International Security; Strength: Mild) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: Remembering the use of this resolution in an attempt to repeal 10 GA, the Nuclear Arms Possession Act, which allows World Assembly nations to have nuclear weapons, and therefore considering this a threat to the stability of the international system itself and

Believing that the threat of 'uncontrolled proliferation of nuclear technology, particularly by non-members who are not bound by the conventions of international law' mentioned in the Nuclear Security Convention, hereafter referred to as the Convention, is an over-exaggerated menace which cannot be affected by World Assembly legislation anyway,

This august World Assembly:

1. Objects to the clause that member states are to '[prevent] the transfer of nuclear technology, design specifications, and materials if there is reason to suspect that they will be weaponised', as:
   
   • this prevents the transfer of nuclear propulsion technologies in warships, for the nuclear technology is weaponised by putting it inside that ship and by preventing that transfer, degrades the ability of nations to assist in collective defence,
     
   • this also prevents the transfer of nuclear materials and specifications inside countries, as there is no limiting statement on to where such transfers are permitted and by preventing that transfer, prohibits nations from moving nuclear materials within their own sovereign borders,
     
   • this also prevents the transfer of nuclear technologies used for energy production, for suspicion is always cast on nuclear fission due to the easy reapplication of peaceful technologies to weapon production (the only differences being that of reaction control and purity) and by preventing that transfer, prevents cheap and available electricity from being more readily available, and
     
   • this also prevents the transfer of specifications of any kind as the criteria for suspicion are not as of yet settled and by preventing that transfer, increases the likelihood of nuclear disasters by depriving scientists of important knowledge and safety procedures;
2. Questions the enforceability of the clause referenced in (1), no matter how sophisticated and Latinate this appears in comparison to a previous legislation's reference of 'wrong hands';
   
3. Objects, with shoe-banging, to the enforceability of a requirement that 'all measures necessary and practical' be taken, as the extent to these measures is as of yet undefined in their extent;
   
4. Disapproves of the failure of the World Assembly to protect indigenous and foreign nuclear technologies and materials and thereby leaving open a path to ban nuclear weapons by prohibiting their supply chain; this Assembly hereby;
   
5. Repeals the Nuclear Security Convention.

 

[Eluvatar]

There are two main parts to the case for repeal. The Nuclear Arms Prevention Act has been a major piece of WA law since very near the beginning of the World Assembly. A solid majority has stood by its status as a "blocker" preventing a ban on WA members possessing nuclear weapons. Nuclear Security Convention was indeed used by its author to try to justify a repeal of NAPA. Many would like to repeal NSC for that reason alone. Furthermore, an adequate case is made that clause 3 of NSC restricts nuclear transfers too severely.

The case for keeping the resolution is the case that was made for passing it: that NAPA's "3. REQUIRES that any nation choosing to possess nuclear weapons take every available precaution to ensure that their weapons do not fall into the wrong hands." is insufficiently specific, and more detailed (and thus stringent) regulations are required.

 

[Eluvatar]

Received Telegram:

From: Foreign Office, Greyhall
To: Foreign Secretary, %NATION%

In February of this year, a proposal came up to vote on repealing the Nuclear Arms Possession Act (NAPA), the act which prevents the World Assembly from banning the possession of nuclear weapons.

The proposal, submitted by now ex-nation Chester Pearson, argued for a repeal based on his belief that the Nuclear Security Convention and the Nuclear Arms Protocol (both his resolutions) duplicated the entirety of the Nuclear Arms Possession Act and hence, made Napa pointless.

The resolution also has numerous issues, including:

1. Prohibitions on the sale or transfer of nuclear weapons by member states to their allies à la the United States and the United Kingdom in the 1960s,

2. Prohibitions on the transfer of nuclear propulsion technology, thereby degrading the ability of nations to assist in collective defence,

3. De facto prohibitions on the transfer of nuclear energy technologies, thereby preventing cheap and clean electricity from being more readily available, and

4. Prohibitions on the transfer of specifications of any kind, thereby increasing the risk and danger of nuclear accidents and radiation contamination.

With other issues on the failure of the resolution to give limits on the ability of member states to prevent the transfer of nuclear technologies and the enforceability of its provisions, I hope that you vote in favour of repealing this awfully flawed resolution.

I hope you and your nation the best,

HG Cyril Parsons
Permanent Representative for Imperium Anglorum

 

[plembobria]

for

 

[Tomb]

Against for the time being.

 

[Syrixia]

I honestly don't care about this resolution enough to even abstain from voting on it, so I'm just gonna hitch a ride with the Flopposition and vote for.

 

[mcmasterdonia]

Agreed with Syrixia.

I'm going to vote FOR. I hated the nuclear related proposal spam that we faced last time, and I think this has made me permanently against any kind of nuclear weapon legislation in the UN.

Plus I want nations to be able to obliterate each other.

 

[Syrixia]

in the UN.

Still got those 2003 blues, eh?

 

[Estingberg]

Agreed with Syrixia.

I'm going to vote FOR. I hated the nuclear related proposal spam that we faced last time, and I think this has made me permanently against any kind of nuclear weapon legislation in the UN.

Plus I want nations to be able to obliterate each other.

Really, you are voting for because their are to many nuclear proposals. That's like not donating for charity, because their are to many charities. THAT ARGUMENT MAKES NO SENSE.



Also, No just no, I don't want nations "obliterate each other"

AGAINST

 

[Eluvatar]

For.

 

[Chester Pearson]

1. Prohibitions on the sale or transfer of nuclear weapons by member states to their allies à la the United States and the United Kingdom in the 1960s,

Which would be illegal under the Non-Proliferation treaty since it's passage, which this resolution seeks to replicate in NS.

2. Prohibitions on the transfer of nuclear propulsion technology, thereby degrading the ability of nations to assist in collective defence,

Disingenuous statement. If the author is referring to nuclear submarines or warships, they cannot be weaponized, they are simply a delivery system which this does not regulate.

3. De facto prohibitions on the transfer of nuclear energy technologies, thereby preventing cheap and clean electricity from being more readily available, and

Disingenuous statement. The NSC clearly states "Demands that member nations take all measures necessary and practical in preventing the transfer of nuclear technology, design specifications, and materials if there is reason to suspect that they will weaponized,". It is pretty hard to weaponize a nuclear reactor as you cannot make a reactor detonate.

4. Prohibitions on the transfer of specifications of any kind, thereby increasing the risk and danger of nuclear accidents and radiation contamination.

Yet another disingenuous statement. The NSC clearly states: "Clarifies that nothing in this resolution shall be interpreted as affecting the right of member nations to research or use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, nor denying members nations the right to possess or produce nuclear armaments via their own technological and manufacturing capacities".

Had the author made any one of these arguments in the actual repeal it would have been yanked as an honest-mistake.

 

[Eluvatar]

The General Assembly resolution Repeal "Nuclear Security Convention" was passed 10,269 votes to 3,764.

The Delegate did not vote on this resolution.

 

[Eluvatar]

Voting on this resolution has ended.

Thanks to those nations who cast their votes. Your participation is a great help to the region.

This topic has been locked and sent to the Archives for safekeeping. If you would like this topic to be re-opened for further discussion, please contact the WA Delegate, a Global Moderator, or an Administrator for assistance. Thank you.