UNGA OOC

OOC goes here.

How would me proposing this peace plan in South Ossetia work? would I request to address the UNSC and propose there? or General assembly then passed on to UNSC?

Can request an opportunity to address the Security Council which is the only UN board that can draft binding resolutions, though its easier to get support for your plan through the General Assembly prior to addressing the UNSC.

There was one in Georgia proper, as well as an OSCE one in South Ossetia. I know Russia vetoed the extension of the UN one in '09, no idea what happened to the OSCE one. Doesn't really matter, Russia isn't letting UN peacekeepers in again

Yeah well you wont let observers in either, just wait till south ossetia demands the north >.>, section one also said refer to UNSC so russias first complain is invalied

The Georgian proposal is so entirely irrational that it borders on the insane.

First of all, ethnic Ossetians are by no means the dominant ethnic group in South Ossetia. I imagine this is why Zodiac wants to keep the ethnic Georgian regions (including a big slice of Akhalgori). The problem here is that the map is entirely nconsistent. There are Georgian enclaves in South Ossetia and there are Ossetian enclaves inside at least one of those Georgian enclaves.

Second, there are places outside of South Ossetia where Ossentians hold the ethnic majority. They're largely small areas, but Georgia is handing Russia an iron-clad case to argue for the inclusion of ethnic Ossetians in Georgia proper in an independent South Ossetia. By extension, Georgia is giving Russia cause to argue for the inclusion of those handful of ethnic Russian towns in Georgia in either the Russian Federation or South Ossetia. It's probably worth noting that you can generally find at least one Russian town per province in the eastern and southern half of the country.

Third, Georgia has three provinces that are primarily Armenian. Two additional provinces have significant Armenian minorities, and one of those has the Armenian-dominated portion sitting right on the Armenian border. Georgia is basically admitting that it has no claim to being a multi-ethnic state and this means that, at some point down the road, it's going to find itself on the receiving end of an Armenian diplomatic campaign to gobble up Tsalka, Ninotsminda, and Akhalkalaki provinces. And Russia's going to support that campaign.

Fourth, if Armenia's campaign gains traction the Azeris are going to get involved, too. They, too, dominate three Georgian provinces (Dmanisi, Bolnisi, Marneuli) and have a sizable minority in Gardabani.

Fifth, this deal sets a precedent for Abkhazia, which naturally means Georgia should be even more reluctant to back a peace plan.

Sixth, the division of states along ethnic lines is a very, very bad thing for the vast majority of people who have actually responded to the matter in the affirmative. As a general rule of thumb, people, you shouldn't support the division of territory along ethnic lines unless you stand to gain from such a division. And countries that have domestic unrest because of ethnic tension should probably avoid giving their rebels and dissidents ammunition. Russia manages to avoid this pitfall because it is a multinational state by default, but countries like Turkey (Article 301) really shouldn't support it.

Seventh, there are just over half a million ethnic Ossetians. Only about fifty thousand of them reside in South Ossetia. The overwhelming majority of the others reside in North Ossetia. To complicate matters, South Ossetia itself is not an economically viable state (whereas Abkhazia could at least have the potential to become one). All of this means that Russia can and will annex South Ossetia. The mouse does not devour the lion, Zodiac.

tl;dr -- Russia needs to throw absolutely everything it has into smashing dissent and walking away with the Georgian-proposed resolution intact. Move mountains, Skye, because everything about this resolution benefits Moscow -- and almost always at the expense of Tblisi.

There was one in Georgia proper, as well as an OSCE one in South Ossetia. I know Russia vetoed the extension of the UN one in '09, no idea what happened to the OSCE one. Doesn't really matter, Russia isn't letting UN peacekeepers in again

Weren't the Russian peace keepers in South Ossetia that were attacked by Georgia in 2008 sparking the war, there under UN mandate?
That's what I was getting at in my post, but didn't want to say it because it might have appeared as pro-Russian, and well, I'm playing Australia a close US ally.

No, they weren't there under UN mandate as far as I know. They were however attacked by savage unprovoked Georgians

Why is Venezuela more sensible than the rest of us? This is as ridiculous as when Iran didn't claim the recent GA resolution on Syria was an American sham orchestrated by the Great Satan or something. (Note: Syria did claim that)

Also, I wish I had seen Schwer's post earlier. I have much to learn, master Schwer

Venezuela is more sensible than everyone else because it realizes that Russia's gratitude is worth a whole hell of a lot more than a favor owed by Georgia.

Er, fairly sure I'm opposing the resolution.

Pretty sure at one stage they were there under UN mandate.
That was part of the big deal made about them being attacked by Georgia.

And now to wait for the imperialists dogs in America to come and hammer it through with threats and carriers

Also, whoever stated it was a 2/3rd majority needed, it's not. Normally it is a simple majority, however if a simple majority vote is taken on making it an "important question" it is required to be a 2/3rds majority.

Very well. I shall change it to just a majority.

And maybe I was misunderstood...the delegations are still open to submit arguments. I said once all arguments have been submitted we can vote...but meh.

The vote is, ultimately, pointless. Russia has unequivocally refused it and, as the matter both directly relates to Russia and must eventually obtain Russia's non-veto in the Security Council, the resolution itself is dead. What follows, while useful for record-keeping, is ultimately not at all relevant.

So, yeah. There's that.

atleast the round started with something interesting

Yes I recognize that as the case. But still...bureaucracy is bureaucracy lol. And the resolution being sent to the UNSC isn't the one that NEEDS to be passed. The UNSC can always alter the resolution to prevent a Russian veto.

And do we use the results of the player controlled nations as the official results (25% approval here would expand to 25% approval overall) or would the moderators/admins generate a result?

The result here is fine.

And that thread is a great example of why I'm hesitant to claim a country that isn't at least a great power. It really got out of hand.

Remember your Christian charity Schwer. The Shepard leading the flock. Forgive and forget etc. Try channeling a little more new testament.

Sometimes you just need to go Old Testament on something.

I didn't even know the thread existed until I saw that this thread was active. Oh well, I had nothing to say anyway.

Non intervention in the domestic affairs of others, quite the time saver!

On a practical level, voting on a UNGA resolution which urges the UNSC to do something that Russia is certain to veto is definitely self-defeating. That being said, Russia holds no veto in the General Assembly, and using the General Assembly to make a point that a majority of the world is in favor/against something is a viable (and much-used) tactic, even if the ultimate purpose is to merely diplomatically embarrass a stubborn veto-wielding power. Some day, take a gander at the daily register of UNGA resolutions. You'll notice that the US votes nay on 99% of them. LOL.