by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

1

DispatchBulletinOpinion

by The Republic of Hiram Land. . 18 reads.

The Repeal of "Ban of Secret Treaties" and the WA Delegate's vote

OFFICE OF THE WORLD ASSEMBLY DELEGATION FOR THE UNITED NATIONS OF EARTHLINGS

Repeal "Ban on Secret Treaties"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORIGINAL:

Greetings, UNOE persons. You may not have heard of this new bill as the time of the writing of the dispatch (11:05pm Eastern Standard Time). This is a bill that may appear on your WA table, where you can approve or deny the passage of this bill. This bill is named "Repeal "Ban on Secret Treaties"".

This bill wants to remove the secret treaties ban, due to major flaws being found in the bill. For example, the bill says that:

"Noting that GAR#408 lists only the negative affects of what it terms "secret diplomacy." Wishing to clarify that such negotiations can indeed be of benefit, for reasons including but not limited to the following:

Secret alliances between various member states during wartime can often check the balance of power and lead to swifter resolutions, particularly if said alliances are being practised by member states acting defensibly; and

"Ambiguous relations" (defined as: "relations and/or diplomatic agreements that are not necessarily codified and made publicly available") between various member states can often act as a deterrent to aggressive nations, since such nations are more likely to lie dormant than risk involving themselves in what could potentially become a lost cause."

As the treaty ban doesn't show the positive affects of the "secret diplomacy" claim, a issue grows.

Another piece of this new bill states that:

"Further noting that GAR#408 concentrates only on "secret diplomacy" taking place during wartime. Understanding that "secret diplomacy" can operate in many other sectors, including but not limited to trade, and convinced that secret diplomacy has the capability to, in this instance, foster economic advantages.

Concluding that the disadvantages within GAR#408 outweigh the advantages."

This bill wants to repeal a bill that can cause major economic and peacetime issues. All in all, Hiram Land, as your WA Delegate, will be happy to announce, that HL will be voting YES on this proposal.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NEW:

As of now, the UNOE WA Delegate will be changing his vote from YES to NO. The reason is as follows: (this was written on the WA discord and is not of good grammar quality)

"for one, i thought the proposal was a good proposal. i thought that the person who wrote the proposal had written a good (but not great) proposal. plus, he mentioned that the ban on secret treaties/diplomacy had done damage to the economies of the WA members.

and for two

i regret the vote, because now i see that the proposal has major flaws that were not fixed. i no longer believe that the ban on secret diplomacy was going to damage the WA and its members in the future.

not only that.

but as one of the GenSec members said, "We find that the proposal is illegal for an Honest Mistake violation."

and "Only in two preamble clauses does the target mention war specifically, and nowhere does it limit its effects to military alliances; nor to treaties negotiated during wartime. We note that but for the word "only," the allegation would be reasonable; but with it the allegation is simply false, in violation of the Honest Mistake rule."

so as i first saw that forum post, i thought that the proposal was illegal in the opinion of a GenSec

oh, and the telegram is also why i am voting against."

As of now, the vote is now NO.

The Republic of Hiram Land

Edited:

RawReport