17
Dispatch → Bulletin → Campaign
Vote Against GA resolution Prevention of Mutually Assured Destruction
Resolution Analysis
Prevention of Mutually Assured Destruction, while well meaning, is flawed and somewhat useless in application. The definition of Mutually Assured Destruction is not one synonymous with what players would be familiar with in real life, which leads to a misleading title. Furthermore, the proposal takes no steps to prevent its own defined version of MAD, therefore not achieving what it fundamentally sets out to do. The only binding clause is one that arbitrarily bans 'response systems' to nuclear attacks while never actually defining or specifying what it is banning. Due to this lack of clarity, non-lethal or even productive systems could be banned due to faulty interpretation because of the very open worded clause. Finally, this proposal creates a committee that collects and reports uses of MAD to the WAJC, despite it not being illegal. This indicates that the author is simply using this proposal as a stepping stone to push more constraining legislation in the future.
For these reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote Against this proposal.