05-06-2005, 12:34 AM
DomnoniaMay 5 2005, 03:19 PM We remain amazed that not only is this proposal headed towards ratification, but that it will be ratified by such a large margin. It is easy to wonder whether proposals are ever read past the Title. [/quote]
I actually have reason to believe other nations are actually reading the first few lines of the resolution.
The comments I read on one other forum can be summarized as follows:
This steps on national sovereignty, is not well written, but we don't like fundamentalists ... and therefore feel the better course of action is to vote for.
My government actually was debating the same thing. There is no clear cut position for Mikitivity, thus we've decided to either abstain or vote with the majority of the IDU (our vote will be cast late tonight).
When I was reading the debate for Gouda's Natural Disaster Act and Grosseschnauzer's Tsunami Warning System resolutions, I didn't see the same type of arguements being presented. For those resolutions, it was clear that nations were reading and liked what they saw.
What implications does that have for us as a UN active region? First, I am going to recommend that we put our flowerest comments in the first few lines. I honestly believe nations are reading this far.
Second, I've always believed that human rights arguements are appreciated in the UN, and this resolution seems to agree with that. With that in mind, I'd recommend nations that have never written a resolution before *consider* this category as a good starting place.
I actually have reason to believe other nations are actually reading the first few lines of the resolution.
The comments I read on one other forum can be summarized as follows:
This steps on national sovereignty, is not well written, but we don't like fundamentalists ... and therefore feel the better course of action is to vote for.
My government actually was debating the same thing. There is no clear cut position for Mikitivity, thus we've decided to either abstain or vote with the majority of the IDU (our vote will be cast late tonight).
When I was reading the debate for Gouda's Natural Disaster Act and Grosseschnauzer's Tsunami Warning System resolutions, I didn't see the same type of arguements being presented. For those resolutions, it was clear that nations were reading and liked what they saw.
What implications does that have for us as a UN active region? First, I am going to recommend that we put our flowerest comments in the first few lines. I honestly believe nations are reading this far.
Second, I've always believed that human rights arguements are appreciated in the UN, and this resolution seems to agree with that. With that in mind, I'd recommend nations that have never written a resolution before *consider* this category as a good starting place.