This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

NEW POLL: Resolution 2006/29: Concerning the human rights situation in Zimbabwe

This poll is closed

Do you agree with this resolution?

Yes93%

No7%

Abstain0%

Total votes: 14

Marcods

Resolution Concerning The Situation in Zimbabwe

Committee: Human Rights & Refugees
Submitted by: South Africa

The General Assembly of The United Nations,

Reaffirming its commitment to maintaining human rights standards across the globe,
Alarmed by the repeated abuses of basic human rights commited by the ruling Zanu-PF party in Zimbabwe,
Convinced that Robert Mugabe and his Administration are to blame for the humanitarian crisis now faced by Zimbabweans,
Noting with deep concern the apathy with which this sitaution has been handled by the international community,

1. Condemns the actions of Robert Mugabe and Zanu-PF in demolishing houses across the country, leaving its citizens destitute;

2. Urges all member states to impose immediate economic sanctions on Zimbabwe until all conditions of the Geneva Conventions are met in Zimbabwe;

~~3. Requests pledges of ground troops to remove the despotic regime led by Mr Mugabe, if clause 4 below is not met by Zimbabwe;~~

4. Calls for multilateral talks between Zimbabwe, the AU, and the United Kingdom to attempt to resolve the following issues;
[INDENT] i. reconstruction of the more than 700,000 homes demolished last year.
[/INDENT][INDENT] ii. release of the 39 Trade Union leaders and activists arrested during a protest on 13 September 2006.
[/INDENT][INDENT] iii. restoration of basic utilities in urban areas.
[/INDENT][INDENT] iv. an end to government oppression of state media.
[/INDENT]
~~5. Recommends that military action be taken to remove the regime should Zanu-PF fail to comply with any resolutions agreed at the talks requested in clause 4;~~

6. Calls for the surrender of Robert Mugabe and senior Zanu-PF officials to the International Criminal Court and charges of crimes against Humanities to be brought against them, should Clause 5 come into effect.

7. Requests that, should Zimbabwe refuse to enter into talks proposed under clause 4, or fail to implement any resolutions agreed at those talks, the matter be referred to the Security Council for a decision on what action (if any) should be taken against Zimbabwe.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Agent Smith

[OOC]This Resolution will fall foul of the "non-intervention in internal affairs" clause, mainly because some rogue nation like China will see it as a dangerous precedent, and start to worry that they might have to allow some human rights too.[/OOC]

That said, for what it's worth the Bhutan will support it.

Reply 2

Wootcannon

You do realise that if any of these clauses are fulfilled there will be a massive humanitarian operation needed? (Will post more coherent thoughts on this issue later on)

Other than that, Ukraine gives you its full support and if Clauses 3/5 come into effect, we will lend air support. We are also prepared to deploy a massive amount of troops and T-84's (one of the most modern tanks in the world).

Reply 3

Agent Smith

The point of the Resolution is to prevent further humanitarian disasters from occuring in Zimbabwe, and to go some way towards undoing those that have already taken place, as far as that is possible. So yes, a huge humanitarian effort is implicit, and our Yes vote is an indication that we think it is worth it. While we have no army to speak of, we are willing to contribute what aid we can in the construction and utilities areas.

Normally we would raise concerns that the impact sanctions would simply be transferred seamlessly onto the people, failing to hurt the government significantly. However, given that Zimbabwe is already famine-stricken, we don't see what further harm a cessation of trade can really do its people. In addition, we believe Zimbabwe is selling to foreign buyers food it urgently needs to feed its people; the imposition of sanctions could thus work in their favour and go some way towards reducing the famine.

Reply 4

Nefarious

Russia will veto this resolution if Clauses 3, 5 and 6 are not removed. If they are we may (or may not) reconsider our position.

Reply 5

Agent Smith

The Bhutan feels the GA is entitled to an explanation of Russia's decision.

Reply 6

Nefarious

Agent Smith

The Bhutan feels the GA is entitled to an explanation of Russia's decision.

[OOC] I think you summed it up pretty well in post two. Russia's spin doctors are hard at work to produce an official reason. [/OOC]

Reply 7

Nick R

Canada feels that this is a matter for the Human Rights Council.

We also feel that supporting this resolution would not sit well with the Canadian public, as it means possibly sending troops off to a situation not invovling Canada.

Canada sympathizes with the situation in Zimbabwe, and would like to remind the GA off past generosity such as the multi-billion dollar relief fund for Lebanon.

Reply 8

Nefarious

Nick R

Russia would tolerate an HRC resolution being passed concerning Zimbabwe but this resolution definitely does not come under the jurisdiction of the HRC, for one thing it calls for military action to enforce it.

Reply 9

Nick R

Nefarious

Canada feels that with a new MUN HRC in place, a non-military resolution should be drawn up.

Canada accepts that military force may be a resort, but only a last resort and should be decided in the GA if the HRC fail with thier peaceful efforts.

Reply 10

gemgems89

Israel is prepared to support this resolution if it means further humanitarian cases are prevented in the future.

Reply 11

Nefarious

Just a small point concerning the Poll; it needs remaking on two accounts: First it isn't public and secondly the poll will not close until the 26th of September giving this resolution a week in voting which is significantly longer than the limit set down in the MUN charter.

Reply 12

Lecter

Pakistan would like to point out that China has a huge vested interest in Zimbabwe, awarding Mr Mugabi a honary degree from, I think, Shanghai University. China imports a vast quantity of raw mineral from Zimbabwe.
In addition, Beit Alfa Trailer Company has been responsible for sales of "riot-control equipment" to Zimbabwe.

Reply 13

Apollo

Nefarious

I've edited it so that it ends Thursday, but seeing as there are 6 votes already I'd rather not delete the entire poll.

Reply 14

Nefarious

Apollo

I've edited it so that it ends Thursday, but seeing as there are 6 votes already I'd rather not delete the entire poll.

Fair enough, in the GA it doesn't matter so much if the poll is accidentally made private. :cool:

Reply 15

Marcods

South Africa recognises the reluctance of some member nations to embark upon a military campaign in Zimbabwe. We wish to emphasise clause 4 of the resolution, however. It is proposed that military action only be entered into once all reasonable diplomatic options are exhausted.

As a regional power in Southern Africa, South Africa is commited to maintaining peace and order in its area of influence. The propostition of a military intervention is an effort on our part to instigate active participation by the international community in restoring basic human rights in Zimbabwe.

South Africa is willing to mediate the multilateral talks proposed by clause 4 of the resolution and, if necessary, to spearhead the possible military campaign with a generous allocation of ground troops, and logistical support.

We affirm once again that this resolution is proposed primarily as a humanitarian effort in Zimbabwe, and not merely as an attack on the sovereign rights of the nation.

PS: Sorry about messing up the poll. I suppose I'm a bit of a ****** when it comes to these things! :redface:

Reply 16

Apollo

Marcods

South Africa recognises the reluctance of some member nations to embark upon a military campaign in Zimbabwe. We wish to emphasise clause 3 of the resolution, however. It is proposed that military action only be entered into once all reasonable diplomatic options are exhausted.

As a regional power in Southern Africa, South Africa is commited to maintaining peace and order in its area of influence. The propostition of a military intervention is an effort on our part to instigate active participation by the international community in restoring basic human rights in Zimbabwe.

South Africa is willing to mediate the multilateral talks proposed by clause 3 of the resolution and, if necessary, to spearhead the possible military campaign with a generous allocation of ground troops, and logistical support.

We affirm once again that this resolution is proposed primarily as a humanitarian effort in Zimbabwe, and not merely as an attack on the sovereign rights of the nation.

PS: Sorry about messing up the poll. I suppose I'm a bit of a ****** when it comes to these things! :redface:

Don't worry about it at all- I'm very glad we have a new member whose participating! :p:

Reply 17

Nick R

Marcods

Nethertheless, Canada does not want to support a resolution that in the future, could pull her troops into action. We would like to re-asess the situation if military action is needed.