General Assembly Resolution #654 “The Civil Charter of the World Assembly” (Category: Political Stability; Strength: Significant) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.
In principle, a resolution "formally codifying the rights, lefts, obligations, and freedoms of member nations in peacetime" might sound like a nice idea, so long as it provides some tangible benefit beyond merely restating the obligations already inherent to World Assembly membership. Unfortunately, GA 654 completely misses the mark, instead being a superfluous bit of fluff that, impressively, also manages to contain some of the most dangerous provisions of any resolution.
The General Assembly finds as follows:
- The target's requirement that "every member nation must fully comply with all active World Assembly law, including this resolution, in good faith, to the very best of its ability, and without any preventable delay" (emphasis added) is extremely dangerous for what should be obvious reasons. Nations acting in good faith can have perfectly valid reasons for a "preventable delay" in entering compliance:
- A nation may have noncompliant international obligations by being party to a bilateral treaty, international convention, mutual defense pact, non-WA body, trade agreement, etc. The target resolution forces such member nations to irresponsibly shred important agreements should something as basic as following agreed-upon withdrawal protocols or as vital as developing robust transition plans constitute a "preventable delay," regardless of potential economic damage, retaliation, or harm to national security.
- A nation may have noncompliant in-progress internal projects, such as infrastructure construction, environmental protection efforts, and funding allocation. The target is a recipe for half-finished schools, bridges that go nowhere, and water thick enough to eat with a fork if completing the relevant projects or even honoring existing government contracts constitutes a "preventable delay." That's without getting into noncompliant election procedures and the ramifications for political stability, particularly given this body's historical fascination with (badly) micromanaging those.
- A given resolution may simply be wildly incoherent and difficult to comply with even in good faith. A "preventable delay" could include something as rudimentary as ascertaining what exactly a member's obligations are or figuring out how to go about compliance in a way that doesn't cause the rapid unscheduled disassembly of society. Mistakes happen, bad resolutions pass, and political bandwagons come with the territory.
- The requirement that "member nations shall maintain full equality under all World Assembly law" is incompatible with the very nature of this body. Resolutions treat members as unequal all the time, from assessing noncompliance penalties to providing economic aid and other resources. This provision perfectly encapsulates the danger in giving feel-good statements the weight of law.
- The target's remaining provisions are all pointless fluff. Of course members' autonomy is "subject to the limitations of relevant international law." Of course members "have the right to freely conduct [their] international relations and activity, subject to the limitations of relevant international law." Of course "each member nation has consented to being subject to World Assembly law by virtue of its membership." Of course this body has "the ability to, via resolution, directly and indirectly enforce penalties" on members. Having these as provisions in a resolution accomplishes nothing and risks imposing catastrophic errors on members.
The target's intentions are clearly noble. However, good intentions do not make for a good resolution, or even a benign one. It's also important for a "meta-resolution" that concerns itself with how this body functions to provide some added benefit in
how it goes about that, rather than merely attempting to restate the implicit.
Therefore, in accordance with the Final Ride initiative, the General Assembly repeals GA 654.
