At Vote:[GA] Cyber Security Convention [Complete]

Mousebumples

Mousebumples

TNPer
Cyber Security Convention
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.
Category: International Security
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: John Turner

Description: The World Assembly,

Realizing that cyber terrorism presents a legitimate threat to the international community;

Recognizing the serious damage that can be brought upon national and international organizations by rogue groups dedicated to causing mayhem on the cyber level;

Firmly believing that all member nations need to protect themselves from the perils of the of cyber terrorism, and those that don't risk damage not only to themselves, but to their international trading partners and allies as well;

Thus resolving to enact a sensible policy that allows for the safe usage of cyber technology, whist also ensuring the security of the information contained within that technology;

The General Assembly hereby:

For the purposes of this convention defines:

Cyber technology as computers, software systems, applications or services, electronic communications systems, networks, or services, and the information contained therein,

Cyber security as measures taken to protect a computer or computer system or a network against unauthorized access or attack,

Cyber warfare as actions by a nation to penetrate the computers or networks of another nation for the purposes of causing damage or disruption to combatant targets and their supporting infrastructure,

Cyber terrorism as a premeditated, politically motivated attack against information, computer systems, or devices of non-combatant targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents for the purposes of spreading fear and terror;

Requires member nations to outlaw the practice of cyber terrorism, and to actively pursue and prosecute individuals or groups actively engaging in or promoting cyber terrorism by any means necessary;

Prohibits member nations from engaging in cyber warfare against non-combatant targets or organizations not directly linked to the military or national security of fellow member nations;

Further requires member nations to enact cyber security policies and programs designed to combat the spread of cyber terrorism and other illegal cyber related activities;

Mandates member nations require organizations and individuals to harden and secure cyber devices and networks against unauthorized intrusion or attack;

Creates the Bureau for International Cyber Security (BICS) and hereby tasks it with the following mandate:

To develop and maintain a library of individuals and organizations actively engaged in or promoting cyber terrorism, and to share this information with member nations,

To provide assistance in the location of known and wanted individuals and organizations actively engaged or promoting cyber terrorism,

To assist member nations in establishing effective programs meant to defend against damaging and potentially crippling cyber attacks which threaten the national security and economic base of member nations.
Click to expand...

Please vote: Aye, Nay, Present, or Abstain.

A Present vote indicates that you are personally abstaining.

An Abstain vote indicates a desire for the Delegate to abstain from voting on behalf of the region.
 
TL;DR: One would think at first glance that this resolution undermines both the Free Internet and the rights of nations to enact their own Internet-related laws, but it actually just creates an international committee with the sole purpose of letting nations know where internet terrorists are and what they're doing.

Aye.
 
There are several issues that I don't get quite well.

Sure, cyber terrorism is a threat to the security of nations and it should be prohibited globally. It could jeopardize the private and public freedom of information for individuals at any given time with just a click, but it does mess with the regulations of personal privacy, and every state could use that pretext to get into the life of people.

In my very humble opinion I don't see this as a very objective proposal because it doesn't define what exactly a cyber terrorist is. Who will define this, or if it's going to be something like a cyber terrorism court. Fear and terror are partial and very subjective point of views, any official could pretend to use this as a motive to personal and political gain.

On the other hand, it is a nice idea to create the BICS. But it has to be well regulate thus to avoid any political ideology to be implemented.

A politically motivated attack can be anything, from just retweeting a staff member from a state administration to subscribing a government politically adverse website.
I'm not voting yet, I just want to be well informed before I make a decision.
(I'm just writing this for the sake of debating) (If I made mistakes writing this I'm very sorry I'm not English speaking native)
 
My personal view is Nay. I do not feel the WA has the purview to demand or create a body to handle it. This is the purview of the individual nations and whatever alliances they choose to form.
 
Lord Ravenclaw:
My personal view is Nay. I do not feel the WA has the purview to demand or create a body to handle it. This is the purview of the individual nations and whatever alliances they choose to form.
Click to expand...
Basically what this resolution does is creates a WA agency that finds cyber threats in member nations and then tells their respective govermnents, who punish the threat as they (the governments) see fit. It's not a breach of sovereignty; just a little helping hand.
 
Nay. The Isle of Grossmania believes that this resolution contains one edict that is appropriate and laudable- prohibiting member nations from engaging in cyber warfare- and one that is inappropriate- requiring legislation to outlaw the practice of cyber-terrorism. Given the broad definition of cyber-terrorism, this resolution represents substantial overreach by the world body. While our nation has no objection with world body rules prohibiting a nation- or even citizens within a nation- from committing aggressive acts against other nations or their citizens, including cyber-terrorism, we feel that the regulation of criminal actions where both the perpetrator and victim are within a nation should be the sovereign concern of that nation only. In other words, if a Syrixian harms another Syrixian through cyber crime, it is the business of the government of Syrixia- not the World Assembly- to regulate that behavior.

The resolution is well-intended, but poorly worded, and consequently represents substantial overreach into areas the World Assembly is without proper authority to act. We urge our fellow North Pacific nations to vote in the negative.
 
Syrixia:
Lord Ravenclaw:
My personal view is Nay. I do not feel the WA has the purview to demand or create a body to handle it. This is the purview of the individual nations and whatever alliances they choose to form.
Click to expand...
Basically what this resolution does is creates a WA agency that finds cyber threats in member nations and then tells their respective govermnents, who punish the threat as they (the governments) see fit. It's not a breach of sovereignty; just a little helping hand.
Click to expand...
I note that the resolution REQUIRES us to outlaw cyber-terrorism and prosecute its perpetrators, whether they have targeted international targets or not. To us, this is a clear breach of sovereignty.
 
Nay, freedom of the Internet should never be restricted, let alone creating an agency to monitor cyber activity.

If cyber criminals are active in a nation, let the individual nation handle it as they see fit.
 
Sergio86:
There are several issues that I don't get quite well.

Sure, cyber terrorism is a threat to the security of nations and it should be prohibited globally. It could jeopardize the private and public freedom of information for individuals at any given time with just a click, but it does mess with the regulations of personal privacy, and every state could use that pretext to get into the life of people.

In my very humble opinion I don't see this as a very objective proposal because it doesn't define what exactly a cyber terrorist is. Who will define this, or if it's going to be something like a cyber terrorism court. Fear and terror are partial and very subjective point of views, any official could pretend to use this as a motive to personal and political gain.

On the other hand, it is a nice idea to create the BICS. But it has to be well regulate thus to avoid any political ideology to be implemented.

A politically motivated attack can be anything, from just retweeting a staff member from a state administration to subscribing a government politically adverse website.
I'm not voting yet, I just want to be well informed before I make a decision.
(I'm just writing this for the sake of debating) (If I made mistakes writing this I'm very sorry I'm not English speaking native)
Click to expand...
an update i'm voting NAY btw
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top