Three regions we have treaties with, TNP, Balder and Europeiea, currently appear to be in the process of forming a "World Assembly Legislative League" (I know the vote is in process in TNP; I don't know of its status in the other regions). Do you have any thoughts on this partnership?

Reply

Three regions we have treaties with, TNP, Balder and Europeiea, currently appear to be in the process of forming a "World Assembly Legislative League" (I know the vote is in process in TNP; I don't know of its status in the other regions). Do you have any thoughts on this partnership?

I've seen the text of this treaty, now. It's an interesting idea, especially if we want to see the World Assembly take a larger spot on the agenda. I think it's good for somebody to highlight the debates that are occurring the General Assembly, and provide insight that's not obvious to a non-regular.

However, I do have concerns on a personal level. Looking at the ministers who would end up leading the League, I'm not sure they're the people I'd like exerting a lot of influence in how hundreds of votes are cast. From purely political motivation, TNP, Europeia, Balder, and the IDU, are filled with players that I disagree with on a plethora of issues. I would likely vote against ratification of the treaty, if it the League was just going to be us and those four signatories.

If the League can be more ideologically diverse, then I would have less reservations. But I think it's likely the creators of the League want an ideologically homogeneous organization, so they can maximize their political power and get the signatory regions to vote for their preference.

I also have reservations about voting blocs in general. I've been a long-time advocate of removing the extra votes delegates get altogether. I think the way WA voting works is very undemocratic, and the League would likely exacerbate that. I remember the 3rd Wall Block that formed over Rule 4 in the Security Council, and how they were planning on blocking all World Assembly resolutions until they got their way. Voting blocks can be dangerous. If the League signatories would agree to not stack votes at the beginning, I think that could alleviate some of those concerns (but not all).

For reference, here's the text of the treaty:

Spoiler

We, the undersigned governments; cognizant of our prolonged friendship; committed to fostering closer cooperation with one another; determined to promote our shared ideals and objectives in the World Assembly; and resolute to bolster our influence in the World Assembly to the joint benefit of our regions; do hereby establish and join the the World Assembly Legislative League, hereinafter referred to as the "WALL", and agree to recognize and adhere to this Treaty and the commitments set forth herein.

1 Membership and Administration

a) Each signatory is entitled to one Ambassador seat on the WALL. Each signatory may appoint and remove persons to fill their own Ambassador seat according to their internal laws and procedures. No individual may personally occupy more than one Ambassador seat on the WALL.

b) The International Democratic Union, the Realm of Balder, the Region of The North Pacific, and the Republic of Europeia shall become signatories upon ratification of this treaty according to their internal laws and procedures.

c) A region may become a signatory by (i) ratifying this treaty according to their internal laws and procedures; and (ii) after having been approved unanimously by the WALL.

d) A region may forfeit their signatory status by repealing this treaty according to their internal laws and procedures.

e) A region may have their signatory status removed by a unanimous vote among all other Ambassadors to the WALL except for the Ambassador from that region.

f) The headquarters of the WALL shall be situated on the forums of The North Pacific. Ambassadors to the WALL and the World Assembly Delegates of the signatories must always have complete access to these headquarters.

2 Functions

a) The WALL shall collectively exercise all powers and functions available to each signatory's Minister of World Assembly Affairs or equivalent official, and in place of that official, for promoting voting on a World Assembly resolution proposal in a certain manner. These include, but are not limited to: starting a regional off-site poll; producing an analysis and vote recommendation; telegramming World Assembly nations and World Assembly Delegates across Nationstates, and using regional mass-telegramming infrastructure to facilitate these actions; creating and editing NationStates dispatches; lobbying the signatory delegates for rapid votes; and posting on the NationStates World Assembly forums.

b) The WALL shall collectively exercise all powers and functions available to each signatory's Minister of World Assembly Affairs or equivalent official, and in place of that official, for increasing awareness and expertise on World Assembly matters among the regional populace of that signatory. These include, but are not limited to: organizing seminars on subjects related to World Assembly resolutions; telegramming World Assembly nations and using regional mass-telegramming infrastructure to facilitate this action; and peer-reviewing World Assembly resolution proposals prepared by members of the signatories.

c) The WALL shall make decisions to exercise their powers and functions under this Section 2 and about the exact manner in which to do so by majority vote among the Ambassadors, and their decisions shall apply uniformly to all signatories.

d) The WALL may empower individual Ambassadors to effect their decisions within each signatory.

3 Sponsorship and Opposition

a) The WALL may, by majority vote, decide to sponsor or oppose a World Assembly resolution proposal.

b) The World Assembly Delegates of the signatories shall approve of sponsored World Assembly resolution proposals. The World Assembly Delegates of the signatories shall not approve of opposed World Assembly resolution proposals.

c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this treaty, the signatories reserve their sovereign right to determine the final vote of their respective World Assembly Delegates on all World Assembly resolution proposals according to their internal laws and regulations.

(This post was last modified: 07-20-2014, 04:54 PM by Tsunamy.)

Reply

Thanks for the response.

Reply

For what it's worth, while I would likely vote against it in a private capacity, if it's something people are interested in, I wouldn't (and couldn't) block the Assembly from ratifying it. I'd just want a more diverse range of regions, at the very least.

Reply

For what it's worth, while I would likely vote against it in a private capacity, if it's something people are interested in, I wouldn't (and couldn't) block the Assembly from ratifying it. I'd just want a more diverse range of regions, at the very least.

A diverse range of regions would be entirely counter to the objectives. Voting blocks are inherently designed with the intention of pooling the collective voting power of the members - introducing regions with differing WA philosophies would produce internal disunity and weaken the whole project.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

Yes, and of the reservations I have is that the League may be targeted towards a specific ideological outcome, rather than a more apolitical advisory role. The difference between, say, the Congressional Research Service and a think-tank like Heritage or Brookings.

Reply

What do you mean "may"? It's a voting block. Of course it's going to operate with specific political and ideological objectives.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

The language of the treaty doesn't make it an obvious voting block, nor does it shed light on what the ideological tilt of the block would be. That's something I can glean from my knowledge of GA politics, but it's not something readily apparent in the text. The name "World Assembly Legislative League" is nominally nonpartisan. More of an advisory body than a political machine. There are elements of a political machine in it -- like only being able to approve of proposals supported by the League. But for the layperson, they're not going to automatically assume that the League has an ideological agenda.

So, I'm saying that if the League is pretty much ideological, namely NatSov, then I don't think it's a good idea for TSP to join. But if it's actually more advisory and nonpartisan, like the layperson would likely think, then it would be something worth looking into.

Reply

It's not going to be NatSov or IntFed, it's going to be SC focused. Look at the proposed member regions; asside from IDU, none of them really give a crap about the GA.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

---

PREVIOUS ROLES

Former Delegate (x2.5)
Former Member of the Committee for State Security
Former Chief Justice of The High Court (x3)
Former Minister of Foreign Affairs (x2)
Former Chair of the Assembly (x3)
Former Minister of Security (x2)
Former Local Councillor (x2.5)
Former Forum Administrator
Former Minister of Media

Reply

I'm not so sure that's the case, Belschaft. Mousebumples and Abacathea would be two of the ministers representing their regions in the League. I'm sure Bears Armed would end up representing the IDU, but I'm not 100% on that. All three of these players are involved in the GA. That indicates that the League would care about more than the Security Council.

Reply