*HYP* Resolution 2011/01 - Concerning the invasion of the Republic of Korea

Brazil supports this resolution, but is concerned by the words of the AG that it does not authorise action against the DPRK.

[ooc] Should toronto be brought in?

Reply 4

rockrunride

OOC: I knew someone would bring me down on a technicality :sigh:

Reply 5

terza021

Indonesia fully support this resolution and hopes that SC will pass this resolution. Also we must be careful that this course of action does not escalate into a world conflict on many fronts.

Reply 6

Original post by terza021

Indonesia fully support this resolution and hopes that SC will pass this resolution. Also we must be careful that this course of action does not escalate into a world conflict on many fronts.

With the participants involved in this conflict, this is unfortunately becoming more likely. Brazil agrees with Indonesia that efforts must be taken to try and avoid such a scenario,, but this must not prevent the liberation of the RoK.

Reply 7

terza021

Original post by sandys1000

With the participants involved in this conflict, this is unfortunately becoming more likely. Brazil agrees with Indonesia that efforts must be taken to try and avoid such a scenario,, but this must not prevent the liberation of the RoK.

True but the liberation of RoK should be only goal and after that we should insure that countries would not pursue it own goals which could involve destruction of the another country, thus this body should make sure that if this happens we should do everything to stop escalation. Bottom line we should stop on the liberation of RoK.

Reply 8

Original post by terza021

True but the liberation of RoK should be only goal and after that we should insure that countries would not pursue it own goals which could involve destruction of the another country, thus this body should make sure that if this happens we should do everything to stop escalation. Bottom line we should stop on the liberation of RoK.

Brazil agrees entirely. Thankfully the overly aggressive rhetoric seen from certain nations has been reduced somewhat in recent days.

Reply 9

thunder_chunky

The USA agree's with this and will continue to bring in various elements of it's armed forces to help the defence of South Korea and to push North Korea back onto their side of the 38th parralell

Reply 10

username202682

17

Russia will not support this Resolution on the basis of underlying Western hegemony shown by a supposed 'military force for peacekeeping', whilst paradoxically adding a 'naval blockade' as its method for 'peacekeeping', in the hope of maintaining ' RoK sovereignty'. The Security Council does not possess authority to determine sovereignty. The supportive Security Council countries are not arbiters for such a notion that the Resolution is presenting. Russia will not support this paradox.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 11

Original post by Stricof

Russia will not support this Resolution on the basis of underlying Western hegemony shown by a supposed 'military force for peacekeeping', whilst paradoxically adding a 'naval blockade' as its method for 'peacekeeping', in the hope of maintaining ' RoK sovereignty'. The Security Council does not possess authority to determine sovereignty. The supportive Security Council countries are not arbiters for such a notion that the Resolution is presenting. Russia will not support this paradox.

What then gives Russia the authority to determine the sovereignty of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, intervening militarily in order to achieve this?

Reply 12

gyyy2807

14

China has already stated our disapproval of this resolution. We will not be supporting this.

Reply 13

rockrunride

The UK agrees that the "peacekeeping" element is questionable as there is no longer any peace to be kept, but the blockade is a fundamental part of the process to maintain RoK sovereignty in RoK waters. Point 1 can be amended easily but amending point 3 is the task of our critics. The UK would like to remind the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation that the existence of the Republic of Korea is under threat and as such a new solution should be presented as quickly as possible.

If Russia does not believe that the Security Council has authority on whether a country's sovereignty should be actively protected, Russia must therefore question its purpose.

Reply 14

username202682

17

Original post by sandys1000

What then gives Russia the authority to determine the sovereignty of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, intervening militarily in order to achieve this?

Both countries have been historically and geographically linked to Russia. The same cannot be said for the supportive members of the Security Council bar PRC (who coincidently also do not support this Resolution)

Original post by rockrunride

If Russia does not believe that the Security Council has authority on whether a country's sovereignty should be actively protected, Russia must therefore question its purpose.

We already question the position of the Security Council, post 1991. The Russian Federation has no intention of leading a "defense force" against the DPRK.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 15

rockrunride

No negotiations are possible as the DPRK is already at war. The UK is disheartened that Seoul has come a hair's breadth from occupation and negotiations are still being prioritised.

Reply 16