• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
IC: Germany agrees with this sentiment, however the respective Government/s of northern Scandinavia should be made to guarantee the rights of the Nomadic Peoples.
 
(OOC: This is assuming a UN doesn't exit, which I'm not sure it does)

I feel the need my friends express a issue. One that has been troubling me greatly in recent days, it is this. Where once the League of Nations failed to stop the rise of tyrants, we need a new such organization. One which can stop the spread of terror and authoritarian states if they may yet rise again. We cannot rely on the United States to provide us with the stability and strength we need, we must use our own strength to power ourselves on not that of others. We need such a organization which can sanction troops to areas in need of the peace being kept, that can provide loans to states for economic development projects. We need such a organization now, more than ever.

We would like to motion a petition for such a organization, called, perhaps upon debate, the League of United Nations, a place where every nationstate may have a voice on the matters that concern their country. Leading such a organization must be a group of the five who committed the most to the Great Crusade. A council for security and of the creation of economic prosperity. There would also be a sixth member, a nation which would have as much of a veto power to any movements as any other of the big five. This nation would be elected by popular concensious from the floor (ie from all nations voting for a candidate other than themselves).

Would the committee agree to such a organization?
 
poland would agree to this, so long as the five nations do not exert so much power that they become the type of state they were brought together to stop.
 
Why do we not instead allow for a rotation system? The five nations would rotate between each other for two or three spots while the rest of the world would rotate for the other seats. This way we prevent accumulation of influence by the five and allow their sacrifices to be honored.
 
The Australian government would agree to a League of United Nations, but we are opposed to the idea of any nation having a permanent seat in the Council. For our part, we would like to see five representatives, one for each continent, elected every five years from the floor. This Council would only have veto power if a majority (three out of five) agree.

We must be careful that no nation ever have the power to dominate all others. While we, and the rest of the world, are grateful to the United States, the future is uncertain. A century ago the US was a bit part player; who is to know what 2050 will look like?

Sir Earle Page
Prime Minister
Commonwealth of Australia
 
I would agree with the sentiment of having a League that would represent the nations of the world, and would prefer a larger Council instead of just five countries for its pre-eminent body.
 
another question is how will it be led? A "President", or "General Secratary" if you will, or by a group of people. The problem with the latter is aggrement.
 
I would like to remind everyone to consider the Eastern European question first. Once territorial and cultural issues are addressed, then we will have the right constituencies to find out about what system in keeping the peace we should adopt. In this age where we could face destruction in a single moment, we ought to remember that foolish actions will have much more devastating consequences than what we have just gone through.
 
I support the idea of a United Nations to keep the peace of the world.

-Wenceslao Quinito Vinzons
 
As head of Her Majesty's Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and representative to this conference, I support the proposal to create a League of United Nations, based on the proposal forwarded by the Australian Prime Minister. We must, as previously stated, be careful that no nation has the ability to dominate others. Because the now deceased Union of Soviet Socialist Republics had that ability, the Great Crusade was necessary. That is a further reason to remove the aforementioned ability.

That is why the League of United Nations has to both have the power to prevent foreign domination, and also be accountable to the sovereign nations on this Earth, to prevent abuse of this power.

Willem Schermerhorn
Prime Minister of Her Majesty's Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
 
very nicly put
 
Gentlemen, may I request that we reconstitute the governments and nations of the world before we blithely commit them to any international structure? The idea has merit but we should ensure that everyone has a representative to speak before we hammer this out.

In short let's keep to the tasks at hand. This conference is to determine the outlines of Europe.
 
in that case, a merger of poland, lithuania, latvia, belarus, and western ukraine.
 
A federalised east European would be best until the damage caused by the great crusade is repaired. At this point the individual countries should be allowed to secede if they so wish.

French Representative

OOC: Will Alsace - Lorraine be one of the issues to discuss?
 
thats already been dealt with. alsace-lorraine is under french control.
 
We would like to ask: what will be the status of Belgium in the future? We want to make sure that a potential conflict between ourselves and France is avoided.

Willem Schermerhorn
Prime Minister of Her Majesty's Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
 
I really cant see any possibility for a war between France and the Dutch in any circumstance. Belgium has been split with Wallonia going to France and Flanders to the Dutch. To my knowledge, that border is set and permanent.
 
I'm going to withdraw from this. Its too unrealistic. Maybe I was naive in thinking it could be anything else.