NATION

PASSWORD

13

DispatchBulletinNews

by The Defender WASC Bloc of Partnership for Sovereignty. . 142 reads.

Partnership for Sovereignty Recommendation: Vote AGAINST “On Raider Unity”

On Raider Unity

Voting Recommendation: AGAINST

Reasoning: The Security Council Proposal “On Raider Unity” is a declaration that aims to contextualize, define, and identify the concept of “Raider Unity” as a threat to the security of the world.

The proposal begins by acknowledging that various raider organizations have united under the banner of “Raider Unity”, which it generally defines as a set of principles that aim to unify the raider faction of NationStates by preventing internal infighting. The raids of The Mystical Council and A Liberal Haven are presented as evidence of the present and possible future danger of Raider Unity, with the proposal finishing by declaring Raider Unity as a threat to all regions.

While the proposal is relatively well-written in terms of quality, it faces two main flaws. The first and primary flaw is that the proposal does not go far enough in its dealings with Raider Unity, as it never goes beyond identifying it as a threat. In terms of declarations that aim to recognize a world-wide threat, it is necessary to recommend a course of action for the world to diminish or eradicate said threat following its identification for the declaration to be of value. Yet, “On Raider Unity” fails to propose any actions to effectively combat Raider Unity, nor does it even encourage regions to find a way to tackle this issue. It therefore remains incomplete in its apparent mission to guide the world in combating Raider Unity and necessitates further drafting.

Another point of contention is the author’s identity as a raider who strongly benefits from and promotes Raider Unity as a high official of the Black Hawks, a notable raider region. It simply does not make sense to allow someone who benefits from the existence and growth of a threat to dictate how exactly the world should view the said danger. To allow this resolution to pass would therefore mean allowing a resolution that is inherently biased by a raider perspective to define a threat whose very existence is encouraged by raiders. It would be more sensible for this declaration to be drafted by an individual who does not hold a strong association to those regions who subscribe to Raider Unity, like the one the author leads, to ensure this resolution does not fall to inherent bias.

Ultimately, it is clear that while this proposal has a plausible goal, it does not go nearly far enough to achieve it; the circumstances of the resolution itself also warrant further examination.

The Partnership for Sovereignty therefore strongly recommends voting AGAINST “On Raider Unity”.


RawReport