A Note On Post Vote Statements To the Members of the Assembly:
Let us be absolutely clear that the attitude of the SICR set out in its latest statement is not very helpful it is in fact for the most part rather concerning. The two resolutions passed by this assembly are fair, reasoned and feasible. As a member of this Assembly the SICR had as much opportunity as any other member to debate the content, to propose changes to the resolutions and to advocate its point of view, it did not take any of these opportunities and must now come to terms with that and live with the consequences. Let us remember that as a member of SANE the SICR has agreed to the following at section one article one of the SANE charter:
"Members of the South Ardian New Electorate (SANE) shall all be members of the Ardian Assembly and shall agree with all the decisions made by that body."This quite clearly commits the SICR to a position where it must abide by the terms of resolutions passed by this Assembly. That the SICR now seeks to ignore a resolution of the Assembly puts them in breach of their commitments to SANE, as such the onus falls on Quintelia and New Derusmia (as the other members of SANE) to ensure that the SICR does stay true to the commitments it has signed up to under SANE, and trying to walk back a resolution into a watered down form as the statement from the Quintelia foreign affairs minister seems to attempt to do does not accomplish this. If SANE does not wish its motto to be "Our words are hollow and meaningless" then Quintelia and New Derusmia will hold the SICR's feet to the fire and hold them accountable to the two resolutions that the Assembly has passed. Should SANE wish to review the quoted article of its charter in the days that follow this debate then that is of course a matter for them to consider but let's be under no illusions the quoted article is the wording on the day that the resolutions were passed therefore the SICR must comply with the resolutions if it wishes to fulfil its obligations to SANE and if it does not take action to comply with the resolutions then SANE must take action in response to that.
It is noted that in the SICR statement the following wording is found:
"the firing over the border was halted exactly three hours from its start" This would appear to satisfy the terms of Resolution one, the shelling has stopped and that is all the first resolution required.
"and we refuse to hand over the dragonaii responsible to a foreign nation. Instead, those responsible will be tried by dragonaii law and by the dragonaii justice system alone. Any military action by the SICR against Sinsu will be halted in accordance with the Uppsala Convention and Demilitarization of the border will be commenced immediately."This is a hugely concerning statement because it seems to suggest that the SICR will act only in partial accordance with the Uppsala Convention, a statement that the international community cannot possibly permit to occur. The SICR is a signatory to the document and therefore agrees with the following provision of that document:
"2. The Convention Advisory Committee – From this point on in the document referred to as the CAC. The CAC will be a panel made up of two members of each signatory nation. They shall have the power to investigate allegations of breaking this treaty. They will gather evidence and decide whether a prosecution is warranted. Should they decide a prosecution is warranted they shall issue a request for the accused to be extradited to the nation nominated for The Court. Any defendant shall be afforded the Rights granted by Articles 4, 6 and 7 of the Mundus Convention on Human Rights, this applies even if their home nation is not a signatory member of that convention."Under the terms of Resolution 2 passed by the Assembly the CAC was to be referred the matter of investigating the shelling and then deciding whether there exists sufficient evidence to prosecute. As Achkaerin is the host nation of the Uppsala Court (though if an Achkaerinese national were on trial the Court would sit elsewhere for that case) it is the nation to whom defendants are extradited this was the case with General Brook it was the case with the Toshikawan's who masterminded the Andean Genocide and it was the case with the Empress of Rokkenjima, no ifs and no buts about it.
The proposed Resolution three by Quintelia is something that shouldn't be considered as it attempts to rewrite the second half of Resolution two. First it seeks to determine the makeup of the observational force by including personnel from SANE nations to police and observe the activities of a SANE nation, now without wishing to impinge the moral integrity of Quintelia and New Derusmia the mere appearance of them acting in such a manner may be perceived as biased, the limitation of participation in the observation force also ignores the wealth of experience held by the forces of other Assembly members in similar circumstances.
Second the third point of the Quintelia proposal is a non starter because under Resolution two it has already been agreed that:
"Both nations to meet with a representative of the Ardian Assembly in order to seek a peaceful and long term resolution to the situation."The implication of this article is that the representative of the Ardian Assembly is to be the mediator not an observer, it also follows that for the same reason outlined above that the mediator should not be a representative of Quintelia or New Derusmia I also think it likely that Rokkenjima would acknowledge that it is probably not appropriate for one of its representatives to handle this matter and to permit a representative from one of the other member states to do so.
Finally I would remind the SICR that the strategy of portraying the passed Resolutions as a
"breach of national sovereignty" holds no water. When a nation signs an international treaty the chances are that the nation will in doing so give up some of its sovereignty to that body, if you don't want to give up such sovereignty then don't go signing such treaties. The fact however is that the SICR is signatory to international treaties and therefore has obligations under them which it must follow. If the SICR wishes to resolve the dispute with Sinsu then complying with the two resolutions is the best way of doing so.
Signed
Xiaoling Tsu
Chief Councillor of Gowu