jeps
Arcadefire
Ghana would like to remind DPRK to kindly take this outside so as to prevent further damaging your already very-damaged (you have temporarily alienated your one ally, China) chances of EVER making the UNSC.
-
We are currently performing site maintenance, parts of civfanatics are currently offline, but will come back online in the coming days. For more updates please see here.
SheepNES: Modern Battlefields: United Nations Security Council
- Thread starter Sheep
- Start date
JosefStalinator
Я буду снова здесь
The DPRK is hardly one to talk about law, being in flagrant opposition to a multitude of international treaties and ordinances, as well as woefully uncooperative in multilateral talks. We have nothing more to say of your rogue state, except to cease poking your nose into business that does not concern you.
And Japan requests that someone to formally create some proposals for addition to the UN Security council, so that it can see which nations are vying for this position and formally declare its position on each.
OOC: As of now im a little confused on who seriously wants to become a permanent member, and who is just spamming.
And Japan requests that someone to formally create some proposals for addition to the UN Security council, so that it can see which nations are vying for this position and formally declare its position on each.
OOC: As of now im a little confused on who seriously wants to become a permanent member, and who is just spamming.
jeps
Arcadefire
I strongly suggest all members read Reforms of the UNSC These are things that have already been proposed, and we can see which things we support or don't as opposed to making up random numbers like 19.
UNSC proposal #1 The creation of new permanent seats without veto power by adding 5 new seats to the security council.
1a) Japan
1b) Germany
1c) India
1d) Brazil
1e) An Islamic or African Nation
CURRENT APPLICANTS/PROPOSED NATIONS FOR 1E - South Africa.
UNSC proposal #1 The creation of new permanent seats without veto power by adding 5 new seats to the security council.
1a) Japan
1b) Germany
1c) India
1d) Brazil
1e) An Islamic or African Nation
CURRENT APPLICANTS/PROPOSED NATIONS FOR 1E - South Africa.
Kentharu
Zebra Commander
ooc i seriously do but since China (having veto power) said no to any expansion what so ever i dont see any point in continuing. Unless veto power only applies to resolutions and not membership.
Captain2
ಠ_ృ
We would just like to point out the fact that Japan began talking about The Peoples Republic before Korea began talking about Japan.... for a supposedly rogue state we have done a better job of restraining ourselves, we would prefer to just allow things to continue as they did before, The DPRK will no longer talk about Japan and vice versa
OOC: well as far as i figure it, I've gone from asking to be elected, however since Asias seat is taken i've now begun fighting for my ability to show up... no clue what anyone else is doing
OOC: well as far as i figure it, I've gone from asking to be elected, however since Asias seat is taken i've now begun fighting for my ability to show up... no clue what anyone else is doing
JosefStalinator
Я буду снова здесь
Japan is in opposition to the UNSC proposal, on the grounds that it does not feel it appropriate to arbitrarily select an Islamic/African nation to permanently represent the both regions, which have extremely divergent views. The UNSC reflects major influence of a specific state, not a region, and the fact that there is no specific power from either region reflects the lack of international power that the two regions possess.
We also feel it would be more appropriate to divide the proposal into 5 seperate parts, one for each potential member.
We also feel it would be more appropriate to divide the proposal into 5 seperate parts, one for each potential member.
South Africa seriously wishes to represent Africa on the council permenantly.
As for an Islamic nation, we feel that that status should not be decided on religion, as there are many major religions which do not, and will likley never get a member with permenant status. Also Islam is not exactly a united religion with both Sunni and Shia nations exisiting and in many cases competing.
As for an Islamic nation, we feel that that status should not be decided on religion, as there are many major religions which do not, and will likley never get a member with permenant status. Also Islam is not exactly a united religion with both Sunni and Shia nations exisiting and in many cases competing.
jeps
Arcadefire
I have reworded the proposal.
Ghana is in support of 1a through 1d and temporarily abstains from 1e until a nation has been chosen.
Ghana is in support of 1a through 1d and temporarily abstains from 1e until a nation has been chosen.
Kentharu
Zebra Commander
The Republic of India would like to remind the DPRK that it has no place to lecture others on restrain. If they were restrained they would cease their rather haneous acts and breaking of countless international laws.
Swissempire
Poet Jester
Venezuala strongly opposes such unilateral reform based on the wishes of the so called First World(let it be known THEY elevated THEMSELVES to that opinion). While we are not opposed to an expansion, and in fact are in favor of one, we do find ourselves opposed to any process that wouldn't allow an election to these newly created positions. We also applauded Brazil for its nomination to such a position. A South American country rising to face off with the powers of opression deserves much more than mere applause.
The United Kingdom
OK then as a member of the "BIG 5" I am going to support the UNSC proposal #1 The creation of new permanent seats without veto power. As well I support South Africa in representing Africa. Just a reminder to japan as harsh as it seems until you are on the counsel your opposition doesn't really matter. Now witch way the other "BIG 5" will go is in question and they might even veto this bill like I have considered because of all the bickering.
DPRK, your actions will be in question by the security counsel allot in the up coming years/months so therefore it isn't smart to "put the convict on the jury" as they say.
OK then as a member of the "BIG 5" I am going to support the UNSC proposal #1 The creation of new permanent seats without veto power. As well I support South Africa in representing Africa. Just a reminder to japan as harsh as it seems until you are on the counsel your opposition doesn't really matter. Now witch way the other "BIG 5" will go is in question and they might even veto this bill like I have considered because of all the bickering.
DPRK, your actions will be in question by the security counsel allot in the up coming years/months so therefore it isn't smart to "put the convict on the jury" as they say.
Captain2
ಠ_ృ
we would like to remind India that the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea has decided agianst further discussion of national standings, it solves nothing and only raises arguement, The DPRK apologises for its remarks towards Japan and can only hope that Japan will be willing to allow hostile tones to subside
jalapeno_dude
AKA Panda Judo Eel
As regards Resolution #1, Luxembourg asks its sponsor (Ghana) how the new members will be included. Will the Security Council grow to 20, or will there be only 5 members be elected to terms? If the latter, how will the elected seats be apportioned?
In addition, Luxembourg notes that Resolution #1 is actually an amendment, since it modifies Articles 23 and 27 of the UN Charter. That being the case, it must be ratified by a 2/3 vote of both the General Assembly and the Security Council, including all the permanent members, per Article 108 of the UN Charter.
In addition, Luxembourg notes that Resolution #1 is actually an amendment, since it modifies Articles 23 and 27 of the UN Charter. That being the case, it must be ratified by a 2/3 vote of both the General Assembly and the Security Council, including all the permanent members, per Article 108 of the UN Charter.
Sheep
Orange Shrooms!
Just some General Housekeeping for the UNSC
- Elections will be done now by my whim only. Player nations will be given majority of the spots, however NPCs will still have some places.
- As no motion has been moved by a Security Council member nor has this non-existent motion be seconded, The idea of extra pernament seats at the current time is only that, an idea.
- All nations may express their views here, if they are a member of the United Nations (even UN observers like PLO and Vatican) HOWEVER only UNSC members may vote.
- UNSC votes are REQUIRED IN YOUR ORDERS. THIS WILL SAVE ME THE HEADACHE OF LOOKING FOR THEM IN THE THREAD.
- I retain the right to change anything here at anytime, to better facilitate the UNSC in my capacity as Secretary General.
- Elections will be done now by my whim only. Player nations will be given majority of the spots, however NPCs will still have some places.
- As no motion has been moved by a Security Council member nor has this non-existent motion be seconded, The idea of extra pernament seats at the current time is only that, an idea.
- All nations may express their views here, if they are a member of the United Nations (even UN observers like PLO and Vatican) HOWEVER only UNSC members may vote.
- UNSC votes are REQUIRED IN YOUR ORDERS. THIS WILL SAVE ME THE HEADACHE OF LOOKING FOR THEM IN THE THREAD.
- I retain the right to change anything here at anytime, to better facilitate the UNSC in my capacity as Secretary General.
jalapeno_dude
AKA Panda Judo Eel
Sorry, Sheep, but my MUN training demands I step in here.
Ghana is currently a member of the Security Council. The rule about seconding would usually make this unimportant, but Rule 34 of the Security Council (here) states that draft resolutions do not need to be seconded.That said, the draft resolution still doesn't say how the 5 new members would be added.
Sheep
Orange Shrooms!
Jal, all good, thanks for the correction. So how will they be added. This needs to be clearly defined before I allow the resolution to go to vote.
jeps
Arcadefire
I have edited the proposal to add the fact that we shall be adding seats (up to 5, depending on how many pass), as otherwise no Asian nation could get a temporary seat except Israel (in the Western Europe and Other category)
Swissempire
Poet Jester
Venezuala suggests they be added by a vote of the General Assembly, which insures the popular, benevolent countries get elected, truly representing the interests of the world, not just the First World. The 5 seats would be delegated to 5 regions. South America, Asia, Africa, Europe, and a wild card(OOC: not a MUN, don't know what the proper term is)that could be chosen from anywhere.
jalapeno_dude
AKA Panda Judo Eel
But new members are elected in their region every 1 or 2 years. Why, then, does there need to be a permanent one? Remember, these new members will not have veto power!
