LucasForums

LucasForums (http://www.lucasforums.com/index.php)
-   Kavar's Corner (http://www.lucasforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=698)
-   -   Save Iraq! (Model UN Security Council) (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=182604)

SilentScope001 09-26-2007 03:54 PM

Save Iraq! (Model UN Security Council)
 
On Saturday, there is going to be a Model UN Security Council Meeting over at ASU. I'm so excited, because I get to play as the People's Republic of China, a very powerful nation on the verge of being a superpower. Plus, they got a spiffy "veto" power as well.

Bad news is that, uh, one of the topics is Iraq. And China doesn't exactly care about Iraq. All it desires is self-determination for the Iraqis, but that because they are big self-determination fans. They are friends with Iran, and they do like to pay attention to the Americans, but uh, other than that, it's just a sideshow. China has more important things to do. Like saving Africa.

The bad news is that, judging from the OOC Realization that "Most Players Are American", it is likely other countries will hijack the Security Council and force me to actually do something about Iraq.

So that why I come to you. I don't care about wheter Iraq is right or wrong. What I am looking for is plausible positions and solutions that the country of China can support. I can choose to of course do nothing and let small minor countries end up controlling the Council [like what happened last time, when I, being Russia, was bootlicking some small rather unknown African country, the Ivory Coast, who was creating a resolution that would create a brand new system by which countries can apply for the creation of Peaceful Nuclear Technology]. But, it just sounds...well, werid. [See last time with Russia bootlicking the Ivory Coast]

Last time I made this petition for help, I got only one post. So, uh, please help me.

Totenkopf 09-26-2007 11:49 PM

Well, as the rep of the PRC, what are your stated interests? What strategic goals do you wish to pursue in that region? Fans of "self-determination"? Wonder how Tibet feels about that, or Taiwan for that matter. You could try and pursue some kind of quid pro quo with the Americans in your scenario vis-a-vis Iraq and Iran. No reason to let the little guys (and how many of them are really on the part of the SC that matters anyway) have an upper hand. What overlaps do you share with your Russian counterpart? Remember, a sideshow for China isn't necessarily a sideshow for another key player. Use that, if possible, to your advantage. Try to extract a concession on any interests you have in Iran in exchange for help on Iraq. However, knowing nothing about what your current strategies are, however loosely formed, makes it difficult to provide anything really helpful.

Rogue Warrior 09-27-2007 04:58 AM

Have you considered playing the free trade card, or that the war is going to bankrupt those involved? If you wanted to be a little...I dunno, honest, how about citing, accurately, about the great loss of support that Iraq had caused? Especially if you were to make comparisons between, say, post 9/11 and Abu Ghraib.

SilentScope001 09-27-2007 12:57 PM

Quote:

What strategic goals do you wish to pursue in that region? Fans of "self-determination"? Wonder how Tibet feels about that, or Taiwan for that matter.
Difference is self-determinaton for nations. China claims that since Taiwan and Tibet belongs to China, the whole country of China gets to determine what happens to Taiwan and Tibet.

Quote:

No reason to let the little guys (and how many of them are really on the part of the SC that matters anyway) have an upper hand
There are 10 little guys on the Security Council. I think 7 of those countries are taken by real people, meaning 3 little guys won't be there.

Quote:

Try to extract a concession on any interests you have in Iran in exchange for help on Iraq. However, knowing nothing about what your current strategies are, however loosely formed, makes it difficult to provide anything really helpful.
Hm, that thought about Iran got me jogging...I do think Iran and China have very good cooperation. China does back Iran's peaceful nuclear program (and funds it), and think the Iranian co-operation with the IAEA is good. While Iranian nuclear program is itself isn't on the agenda: "Preventing conflict in the Middle East" is, and I think the USA ambassador would like to use the agenda topic as a great way to target Iran.

I know Iran has interests in Iraq, so I might want to help defend Iran's interests too (using the self-determination mantra), but prehaps if I can get the USA's to stop worrying about Iran, then the US could get some cooperation and help over Iraq. Russia backs Iran's nuclear program as well, and I think they probraly see Iraq as a sideshow too. Hm. Thanks Tokentopf for your help, I think this can really help me out.

SilentScope001 09-29-2007 08:43 PM

UPDATE: The conference just ended, so here's a little summary.

I managed to start the topic on the discussion on Africa, and how to end conflict there. After writing up Resolution 1/1 [which would call for people to donate troops to help out peacekeepers as well as supporting talks between rebels and governments] and getting the support of the 5 Veto-Power Security Council members, we were printing it out. However, Qatar and Peru then called for changing the topic to focus on the Middle East while the paper is printed out. They succeded, and we focused on the Middle Eastern conflict. Thanks to Qatar, we focused on the Israel/Palestine conflict.

I wrote up a second resolution: 2/1 (which would call for Israel and Palestine to work on a framework for a road map for peace), which also got the support of all 5 Veto-Holders, but was hated by everyone else, including Qatar, for being, well, too feely-goody and doing aboslute nothing except calling for peace. It got quickly voted down, being the first time that I saw a resolution supported by USA, China, Russia, France, and UK but hated by everyone else. Meanwhile, Qatar drafted a pro-Palestinean resolution: 2/2, which has been hated by both USA and France. It got the signatuors necessary to go to a vote, but when Qatar went down to print out the resolution, we agreed to change the topic back to Africa.

After a close vote, and Italy being the tie-breaker, 1/1 passed. We then voted to adjorn the meeting, leaving 2/2 in the lurk. 2/2 was more stronger than 2/1 and could have had a chance at being passed.

[I guess that the worry about Iraq was not that great, because even the USA didn't want to talk about Iraq. Thanks to Qatar, the issue was directed towards Palestine, an issue that China supports greatly, due to the fact that it diplomatically recognize both Israel and Palestine and that it is helping to negogiate a treaty between them. Still, thanks for all your help.]


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:27 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.