The Security Council,
Recognizing that the intent behind “Recognition of the General Assembly” is to define the Security Council’s relationship to the General Assembly, an adjacent legislative body within the broader World Assembly,
Believing there to be a number of flaws with the target resolution, a Declaration that is broadly outdated and fails to fulfill its ideal function,
Questioning Resolution 359’s stance that the relatively brief mention of the General Assembly does not do the body justice on the following basis,
- The Security Council has frequently recognized contributors to the General Assembly, such as Honeydewistania and Omigodtheykilledkenny, for deeds in that chamber worthy of commendation or condemnation,
- General Assembly resolutions do not mention the Security Council in any known case, in contrast to the frequency with which the Security Council typically affords the General Assembly acknowledgement,
- Security Council resolutions regularly and sufficiently recognize contributors to other institutions and communities, formally-organized or otherwise, from nominal ideologies that dictate interregional politics and conflicts to the various regional, national, and other sports associations which govern the grounds upon which historic athletic achievements have been celebrated, without requiring the explicit recognition of those bodies,
Further confused at Resolution 359’s assertion that the Security Council is obligated to do the General Assembly “justice” in light of the aforementioned imbalance in recognition, followed by the contention that the two chambers are “equal”, a curious display of the disparity in implied standards enforced upon this body by one over the other,
Positing that the declaratory clauses in Resolution 359 are varyingly flawed or without depth beyond their surface acknowledgements,
- Finding items (i) and (ii) unpersuasive as a declarative resolution, given they merely restate matters of fact, rather than express the perspective of the Security Council,
- Fundamentally disputing the idea advanced in (iii) that the General Assembly and Security Council “remain equal in their overall power and influence” as they carry out intrinsically different functions, the former regulating constituent nations and the matter overseeing matters of recognition and regional warfare,
- Alarmed that Resolution 359 fails to define the “rights and duties” of member states to either chamber suggested by (iv), allowing for an expansive and overreaching interpretation, and further concerned that General Assembly Resolution 654 limits all member states to the law of the General Assembly, a broad endorsement the Security Council should be hesitant to enforce,
- Challenging the stipulation in (v) a “disavowment” of one chamber should be taken as a disavowment of both, given this clause both fails to define what constitutes a disavowment and the supposed “consequences” to be imposed if a nation or region does disavow or otherwise neglect one of the chambers,
Broadly asserting that the fundamental purpose of a Declaration is to express the position of the Security Council on a given matter, and that following the repeal of Security Council Resolution 359, this body is encouraged to pass a resolution more aligned with that purpose as it relates to the present General Assembly,
Preferring a form of improved replacement to Resolution 359, though advising that absent one, the Security Council is capable of responsibly functioning without an acknowledgement of the General Assembly,
Hereby repeals Security Council Resolution 359, “Recognition of the General Assembly”.
