About point 1: Nigeria is deploying a brigada of peacekeepers along with Australia, as Un has asked. As Turkey seems not to be collaborating, we suggest economic sanctions to it until they allow independent investigation.

About point 2 (at large too): while Nigeria does not like the Saudi action, we see some point in their claim of the troubles post-colonialism imposed borders (after all, Africa is not free of that, to say the least) and we see more realist the German proposal: ordering a ceasefire and a UN administration of the zone while looking for a more permanet solution.

In reply to Australia (msg # 112):

>OOC: I request for GM to decide vote of Australia to Russian proposition in UNSC.
Request denied. Until I say otherwise you are the player for Australia and will make the decisions for Australia.

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 111):

To repeat; go ahead, blame Iraq and Canada for being part of it, we all know that a rape victim should just lean back, let it happen, not fight back.

In reply to Canada (msg # 115):

The USA is looking to rent uplift from nations - a total of 12000 is required.

Please let me know (probably best by PM) if you are willing to sell me uplift

In reply to Nigeria (msg # 113):

The UK proposes that the area in question be placed under a UN mandate and administered by a UN council. Natural resource revenues will be used to pay for infrastructure building and demilitarization of the area in question.
As for Turkish involvement, if it is determined that Turkey is actively either supporting the terrorists or by Turkish actions delaying the actions of the UN, Turkey should be placed under sanctions until which time Turkey is willing to comply with the UN and its policies.

HOWEVER, if the United Nations is proving to be ineffective, perhaps it is time to create a new organization which reflects the current political atmosphere as opposed to the one of the second half of the 20th century.

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 93):

The UK would like to open a dialogue on the efficacy of the United Nations. The division of Iraq as a sovereign power by its neighbors shows a total and complete lack of power by the UN in its current charter.
The UK sees the dissolution of Iraq as a blatant land grab, one which the UN was clearly incapable of calling a halt to in its current charter. Ergo, The UK proposed that the United Nations Charter be rewritten to give it more policing power OR that it be dissolved; either give it the power to do its job, or eliminate it as a useless rubber stamp for whatever power is manipulating it.

In reply to UK (msg # 118):

Reform of the Security Council has been previously discussed, it was unfortunately derailed by a nuclear strike. A situation that the UN Security council managed to resolve without the world degenerating into a general exchange of Nuclear weapons.

In addition to reaching a, if not adequate, then acceptable settlement regarding the second Korean war and the Chinese Strike, the united nations has overseen the peacekeeping mission in the Kurdish regions, in securing peace and assuring the withdrawal of Chinese troops from Iran following the Gulf Incident. That being said the UN relies upon consensus, and that is important for its stability and its authority.

On the current matter of Iraq, no motion has yet been brought before the UN Security council, though there has been conversations about the current situation between members of the P5.

The United Nations offers a means for the world to ensure that pacific settlements can be reached through consensus.

Whilst we agree, in principle, that the United Nations requires strengthening, such action requires the support of all members of the security council, and to date no such agreement has been able to be reached - maybe the time is now.

We welcome the UK's statement, and would support them taking the lead in trying to reach some consensus on a reformation of the security council in particular.

The US would be particularly keen on resurrecting some form of the plan proposed by the UK in 2040, removing the veto, expanding the number of permanent members and imposing a 2/3rds majority of permanent members to agree for a resolution to be binding

Do any other members of the P5 have any thoughts on this?

Thats one way to see it (we'd call it the Western one, no offense intended). From the Arabian point of view, things are different...

Iraq is an artificial country created after WW1 in the Sykes-Picot agreement, but never fully accepted by its own population. Tensions created for this were spiking to civil war, and Saudi Arabia intervened to avoid it (something we could have achieved if not for Canadian meddling) and to stop the abuses on Sunni population by a sectarian government.

Now, after Canadian meddling has provoked a unwanted (from Saudi side) war (BTW, helping the caliphate with it), we don’t see reunification as a possibility, as it would lead to revenges and wanton destruction. Saudi Arabia will keep its protection on Western Iraq as the only way to avoid it, and as the best way to finish IC once and forever.

Arabian people must have a saying in their borders, instead of just abiding to Sykes-Picot old agreement, whoese basis, while might have even been good intended, are no longer applicable.



When UN becomes the neutral arbiter of international affairs, treating everyone (even Israel) with the same rules when it comes to obey its resolutions and not allowing the big ones to act freely while forcing the not so big ones to abide, then we will begin to believe it might be useful.

If you want to reinforce UN role in international affairs, begin by forcing Israel to give up the non-recognized occupied territories and to compensate for the mistreatment of Palestinian population. Force them to give up their nukes, or don't complain when others want them too.

Then, and only then, the Muslim world will be able to see UN as anything else than a power tool for the big ones to impose their will on the weaker ones.

Saudi Arabia is not doing anything that Israel has not done with UN acquiescence, just with differnet intent. While Israel is occupying Palestine with hostile intent, Saudi Arabia is protecting the Iraqi sunnis from a sectarian government, while Israel is ruining the Palestinians and keeping their boot over them, Saudi Arabia wants the development of the whole zone and the wellfaring of the population. While Israel is destroying any semblance to Palestinian infrastructures to avoid them to develop, Saudi Arabia is building them to allow development, that hopefully will bring peace, to grow.

Saudi Arabia has some oil SRUs to sell. Contact us if you're interesed.

OOC:

I'm still waiting for some answers from Kelvin about its exact effects, and if they can be used this turn or will be reserves to avoid shortfalls next turns.

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 121):

Nigeria also has Oil SRU unit spare to sell.

Contact me in private for detail.

In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 120):

While the Nordic Federation is not a member of the P-5, we support the American proposal.

In reply to Nordic Federation (msg # 123):

Following the ESA assets splitting among its members, the Nordic Federation is offering the launcher services of two (2) of its rockets, Hamingja 1.2 (TL8.8, 1800t each) based at Andoya and Esrange space center.

The Nordic Federation also has Oil SRU unit to sell.

For any of these matter, contact me in private.

In reply to Nordic Federation (msg # 124):

Greetings, gentlemen.

Brazil is interested in buying OIL, please contact me if you have amounts you willing to sell.
Please provide your proposal with terms and conditions.

Regards,
Mr. Presidente

Gentlemen,

Russian goverment consideres that soon interplanetary voyages will became mundane, so it is time to arrange an international Orbital Quarantine Command (OQC).



So far we face not a big threat and not a big traffic from colonies on Mars and Ceres. But since liquid water on Mars is confirmed, then there is a chance for microscopic life forms on Mars, with all the consequences for earthlings. Space traffic will grow, risks will grow, so it is better to be on a safe side from the very beginning. I am sure that all space-faring nations have proper quarantine procedures but Russia will feel safer if a special international force will provide proper administration of all the cargoes going down to Earth.

Also combined efforts for orbital space control will be reasonable. We already had a close call, back in 2035:



Probably those five unidentified objects were responsible for communication jam right before Korean war. I suppose this is exactly job for OQC to keep Earth orbit clear from such kind of threats, too. If these objects were intercepted by OQC instead of being ignored by UN Space Agency, we could have avoided many troubles.
This message was last edited by the player at 12:02, Fri 30 Mar 2018.

THis is quite close to the former German suggestion:



So, of course, Germany supports you proposal.

In reply to Germany (msg # 127):

OOC:
In game terms, how much Orbital Quarantine Command would cost us? Or currently it is such small organisation that only a mutual declaration would be enough?

In reply to Germany (msg # 127):

This idea has definite merits, how do you intend to form such a force of customs vessels though?

The US did recently construct the Hornet class, a fast cutter style class, given the current small number of ships one such vessel seems to fit the needs you currently have - the US would be willing to detach the Hornet to cover such a duty for the UN, assuming the Security Council can formulate rules of engagement that we can agree to.

This may, again, be a time to suggest we engage in a discussion about UNSC reform.

In game terms agreement between you will allow your skilled bureaucracy, or in this case the UN's bureaucracy, to formulate the best plans they can with the resources they have available - agreement between players sets the tone for the world and expresses the general opinion of all nations. Just getting agreement to this will factor into the GMs decisions about what is happening, and how. It will be noted that you are 'making an effort'

If you wish for this to have significant and/or specific effects, you need to state exactly what you are attempting to achieve in terms of game mechanics and spend PAs or other resources to make that happen

Alternatively, the GM is always prepared to hear other suggestions (per 1.4 Q9) - if you have an idea for how this could work in game then suggest it and the GM can either agree or shoot it down (make it simple and easy to administer and that will be a lot less likely)

OOC:
I think, for simplicity, such statement will be enough currently: "nations arranged a reasonable shield against avoidable threats in the form of international OQC". When time will come and GM decides that OQC starts drawing noticeable resources, then GM informs us about that and players arrange a pool of resources. I think we can trust GM what "reasonable" is. Mostly... :)

OQC currently should be a simple procedure "before going down, all cargoes must be inspected by OQC examination party; OQC inspectors must be kept aboard at least one OT in Earth orbit; anything in orbit or entering atmosphere without OQC green light is subject to missile target practice".
This message was lightly edited by the player at 18:34, Fri 30 Mar 2018.

In reply to Russia (msg # 131):

THe Nordic Federation support the russian proposal.  However, enforcing a quarantine upon all arriving ships involve one or several ship with UNO mandate, and possibly a resting place where ship and crew can disembark, rest and resupply.

We speak of a dedicated orbital outpost, and one or two armed ship with military grade drive, and all associated supply and support.  That several hundred billions dollars to create and several a year to support, including launching capability.

Nordic Federation believe in the treat and the need to manage it, but wonder how to keep the cost down.

Nordic Federation doesn't have space asset for these, but agree to support such an endeavor.

FInally, since it may involve the inbounding of a ship owned by a sovereign entity, which is akin to a declaration of war, we need a strong UNO mandate for this project.

In reply to Nordic Federation (msg # 132):

Nigeria support the idea and will help however possible despite our limited capability.

Nope. The GM will make no comment, recommendation or judgement on when you should do something. If the world comes to an agreement all well and good. Anything more you need to drive forwards.
Any other way madness lies

Russia informes, that Russia moved its Solar Array from Luna orbit to Earth orbit, so if you need additional power in Earth orbit, talk to Russia.

In reply to Russia (msg # 135):

Circumstances have prompted us to issue the following statement:

In light of the prevailing circumstances between Turkey and Armenia we wish to remind the international community that the United States takes it's commitment as a member of NATO incredibly seriously, and that NATO's commitment to mutual defence to counter any aggression from external threat remains strong and unwavering.

An attack against one is an attack against all.

We will act to counter any attack against any member

we will not permit aggression against any member to go unanswered

We hope for a peaceful resolution and call for calm, and the immediate cessation of clashes along the Turkish/Armenian border.

In reply to USA (msg # 136):

Nigeria renew its request to the United Nations Organisations, and to the security council to force a cessation of hostility between the belligerent, and to send a neutral peacekeeping mission in Armenia to enforce the cease fire.

Nigeria has already pledged support to this peacekeeping mission and is ready to send security troop in Armenia.