APPROVED [GA] Resolution on Antarctica

[Odinson]

Ambassador Adams stood up and said, "I have re-written this treaty to more appropriately reflect what the members here assembled have proposed and argued for. There have been some compromises made on militarization as well as environmental protection and industrialization. Ultimately, I think this resolution will do a very good job at protecting the environmental integrity of Antarctica, while also allowing members to reasonably protect their claims with a minimal amount of personnel. I'd be open to making more changes to this resolutions if more things are proposed, or of course the Secretary General can do it himself, but I'm happy to help... The territorial part of this treaty will of course be resolved after the debate is over," he said.

CONSIDERING, the need for an international solution to the territorial integrity of Antarctica;​

WHEREAS, the Kingdom of Sweden has present control over the continent;​

WHEREAS, the international community desires more global responsibility for the continent of Antarctica;​

WHEREAS, the Kingdom of Sweden has agreed to work with the Global Assembly to resolve this problem;​

WHEREAS, the nations here assembled desire to come to a reasonable and peaceful solution;​

THEREFORE, this Assembly proclaims this "Special Resolution on Antarctica" as binding and justified under international law.​

Have agreed as follows:​

ARTICLE 1 INDUSTRIALIZATION​

1. Member-states, and additional associated states, shall not extract mineral or petroleum resources from Antarctica, or the surrounding waters, or permit other countries or entitles from doing so within their territory.​

a. All references to "Member-State" or "Member-States" in this resolution also include any other foreign states that sign this treaty as well.​

b. Member-states will not have trade routes cross through Antarctica or Antarctic waters unless these products are being sent to a station or settlement in Antarctica.​

c. Member-states are forbidden from using use coal, crude oil, or nuclear power to power their facilities or settlements in Antarctica.​

d. Member-states are forbidden from permitting underwater or above-ground pipelines for the transportation of petroleum products through Antarctica.​

e. Any fish or creatures caught in Antarctic waters, as well as their bi-products or their meat, may not be exported outside of Antarctica.​

f. Member-states are forbidden from allowing non-Antarctic nations or organizations fishing rights or permission in their Antarctic waters.​

2. For any infraction of this Article, the Secretary General may impose, at most, a $250,000,000 fine per infraction. If the guilty Member-state does not correct their mistake, then the Secretary General may continue to issue $250,000,000 fines per day until the infractions stop.​

ARTICLE 2 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION​

1. Member-states are forbidden from releasing certain pollutants into the Antarctic environment.​

a. Member-states are forbidden from allowing human waste (whether treated or not) to be released in Antarctica or its surrounding waters. All facilities and settlements must store their wastewater or freeze-dry it so that it can be taken back to one of the other six continents and disposed of on land.​

b. Member-states are forbidden from allowing radioactive, toxic, or poisoners contaminants from being released in mass or regular quantities into the Antarctic environment. This includes things such as industrial waste, but does not include exhaust from vehicles.​

c. Member-states that use water to cool power generation stations (or other kinds of facilities) must have designated tanks to hold this water and cannot just release it into open-air ponds in the outside world.​

d. The use of leaded-gasoline is not permitted in Antarctica under any circumstances.​

2. Hunting and fishing shall be regulated by this treaty.​

a. Member-states are forbidden from allowing the hunting of land-animals (including animals that spend some of their time in water, such as penguins or seals) within their territory, except in emergency situations.​

b. Member-states are forbidden from allowing fishing on an industrial scale. Any fishing that is done should be done by individuals, if done at all.​

c. Member-states are forbidden from allowing the hunting of whales, dolphins, killer-whales, or any species of shark in Antarctic waters.​

3. For any infraction of this Article, the Secretary General may impose, at most, a $250,000,000 fine per infraction. If the guilty Member-state does not correct their mistake, then the Secretary General may continue to issue $250,000,000 fines per day until the infractions stop.​

ARTICLE 3 MILITARIZATION​

1. Member-states may place a limited number of forces in Antarctica.​

a. Member-states may have up to 300 militarized forces permanently stationed in their Antarctic territory. These forces may be armed, or unarmed, but must follow all international rules and regulations supported by the Global Assembly to ensure that they can be clearly identified as soldiers. Member-states may permanently station Coast Guard forces in their territory on an as-needed basis.​

b. Member-states may use their armed forces to fly-in supplies, equipment, and personnel to Antarctica. However, member-states may not station or operate armed fix-winged aircraft in Antarctica, or allow foreign actors to do so in their territory.​

c. Member-states may not station or operate tanks in Antarctica, or allow foreign actors to do so in their territory.​

d. Member-states may not construct or operate missile silos on Antarctic territory, or land-based mobile/immobile ICBM launchers, or allow foreign actors to do so in their territory.​

2. Member-states may not store large quantities of weapons, ammunition, or dangerous WMDs, or allow foreign actors to do so in their territory.​

a. Member-states may only reasonably store enough weapons and ammunition in Antarctica for 300 soldiers to use. This may not include any kind of explosives.​

b. Chemical and biological weapons may not be researched, constructed, or stored on Antarctic land.​

c. Member-states may not allow more than 300 foreign forces to be permanently stationed in their Antarctic territory.​

3. In times of war, Antarctica will be treated as an international "peaceful" zone, where armed conflict and invasion of Antarctic territories will not be tolerated.​

a. In this case, involved parties that try to antagonize or intimidate their enemies through Antarctica would be subject to fines from the Secretary General.​

3. For any infraction of this Article, the Secretary General may impose, at most, a $250,000,000 fine per infraction. If the guilty Member-state does not correct their mistake, then the Secretary General may continue to issue $250,000,000 fines per day until the infractions stop.​

The territorial part of this treaty will be completed once it has been fully negotiated.

 

[Naio90]

"Since we do not recognize any swedish claim or control, we would need the second preambulatory clause to be removed for us to be able to subscribe to any potential variation of this draft. Secondly, we do not see the need to allow the presence of up to 300 armed personnel on Antarctica. If we are to de-militarize the continent, then lets do it right."

 

[Vaka]

The German Ambassador sat at the back of the assembly carefully taking notes. He hadn't spoken to anyone yet. But seeing how hot the debate was getting, he figured it was better just to listen.

 

[HeadlessSeeker]

The Russian Representative to the GA Sergey Lavrov would arrive. Walking in without a word or announcement and simply take a seat. He would read the original proposal and then the revised proposal by the Americans."We approve of the notion that Antarctica is the common birthright of all mankind. However, Russia recognizes the territorial claims by Norway, Australia, France, New Zealand, Chile, Argentina, and the United Kingdom. All of which have merit to them. Russia does not recognize Swedish territorial claims. Russia does assert ownership of it's Antarctic research station and will be manning it. The only uncontested land in Antarctica is Marie Byrd Land."

 

[Connor]

"Special Representative, whether you believe it or not is besides the point, it is fact, this is a Global Assembly resolution and the Global Assembly as an organisation recognise the continent of Antarctica as Swedish sovreign territory. That being said, we have agreed to return historical claims and relinquish our power over said territory in the interests of global peace. If you fail to recognise any Swedish claim then this resolution is a waste of time as even upon the agreed dissection of territory you still refuse to acknowledge a Swedish claim... right now, you are the minority and you are causing unnecessary problems nit-picking resolutions and arrangements to intentionally delay peace.

Let me make this clear. You represent a state that murdered the ships company of HSwMS Sno, of which I have unedited video and audio footage contrary to what your government posted in the media, you are proactively delaying resolutions of which every other state is happy with and you are making it as awkward as possible to put a stop to this crisis. To me, and I'm sure to the rest of this chamber, Special Representative, you are appearing war hungry and I am tired of it.

We are not going around in circles any longer, either you re-write what you disagree with and present it to the chamber rather than complaining and disagreeing with everything everyone else proposes or you collect your things and leave the Global Assembly; we will seek resolution without you. You are not a key player here."

 

[Connor]

"Russian Ambassador, welcome to the chamber and thank you for joining us, we are open and welcome to cooperating with the Russian Federation with their status in Antarctica as we have done with the United States of America - there are presently no constructed stations in Antarctica however I am sure, with an amendment for freedom to conduct scientific study in Antarctica you would be welcomed in doing so and constructing your research station accordingly."

 

[Naio90]

"Ambassador of the Kingdom of Sweden, as you know, the Argentine Republic is not a member of the General Assembly, therefore we are not subject to its decisions and Resolutions, we could not care less about its validation of an alledged "swedish antarctica". With this mentioned, we are here today because we intend to reach a long standing agreement on Antarctica on which we can be part of to guarantee long standing peace, something Sweden cannot say.

You can say what you want, but Sweden is not a traditional antarctic nation, and is lucky to be even here in this discussion.

As for your dead military sailors, their blood is on your Governments hands, which sent them to a freezing death 15,000km away from their homes, with the intention to consolidate colonial interests.

Here is what we thing should be ammended."



CONSIDERING, the need for an international solution to the territorial integrity of Antarctica;
WHEREAS, Antarctica has been subject of decade long disputes;
WHEREAS, the international community desires more global responsibility for the continent of Antarctica;
WHEREAS, the Kingdom of Sweden has agreed to work with the Global Assembly to resolve this problem;
WHEREAS, the nations here assembled desire to come to a reasonable and peaceful solution;
THEREFORE, this Assembly proclaims this "Special Resolution on Antarctica" as binding and justified under international law.

Have agreed as follows:

ARTICLE 1 INDUSTRIALIZATION
1. Member-states, and additional associated states, shall not extract mineral or petroleum resources from Antarctica, or the surrounding waters, or permit other countries or entitles from doing so within their territory.
a. All references to "Member-State" or "Member-States" in this resolution also include any other foreign states that sign this treaty as well.
b. Member-states will not have trade routes cross through Antarctica or Antarctic waters unless these products are being sent to a station or settlement in Antarctica.
c. Member-states are forbidden from using use coal, crude oil, or nuclear power to power their facilities or settlements in Antarctica.
d. Member-states are forbidden from permitting underwater or above-ground pipelines for the transportation of petroleum products through Antarctica.
e. Any fish or creatures caught in Antarctic waters, as well as their bi-products or their meat, may not be exported outside of Antarctica.
f. Member-states are forbidden from allowing non-Antarctic nations or organizations fishing rights or permission in their Antarctic waters.
2. For any infraction of this Article, the Secretary General may impose, at most, a $250,000,000 fine per infraction. If the guilty Member-state does not correct their mistake, then the Secretary General may continue to issue $250,000,000 fines per day until the infractions stop.


ARTICLE 2 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
1. Member-states are forbidden from releasing certain pollutants into the Antarctic environment.
a. Member-states are forbidden from allowing human waste (whether treated or not) to be released in Antarctica or its surrounding waters. All facilities and settlements must store their wastewater or freeze-dry it so that it can be taken back to one of the other six continents and disposed of on land.
b. Member-states are forbidden from allowing radioactive, toxic, or poisoners contaminants from being released in mass or regular quantities into the Antarctic environment. This includes things such as industrial waste, but does not include exhaust from vehicles.
c. Member-states that use water to cool power generation stations (or other kinds of facilities) must have designated tanks to hold this water and cannot just release it into open-air ponds in the outside world.
d. The use of leaded-gasoline is not permitted in Antarctica under any circumstances.
2. Hunting and fishing shall be regulated by this treaty.
a. Member-states are forbidden from allowing the hunting of land-animals (including animals that spend some of their time in water, such as penguins or seals) within their territory, except in emergency situations.
b. Member-states are forbidden from allowing fishing on an industrial scale. Any fishing that is done should be done by individuals, if done at all.
c. Member-states are forbidden from allowing the hunting of whales, dolphins, killer-whales, or any species of shark in Antarctic waters.
3. For any infraction of this Article, the Secretary General may impose, at most, a $250,000,000 fine per infraction. If the guilty Member-state does not correct their mistake, then the Secretary General may continue to issue $250,000,000 fines per day until the infractions stop.


ARTICLE 3 MILITARIZATION
1. Member-states may have military personnel stationed to provide logistical support to the operating stations on Antarctica. These forces cannot be armed. Member-states may permanently station Coast Guard forces in their territory on an as-needed basis.
a. Member-states may use their armed forces to fly-in supplies, equipment, and personnel to Antarctica. However, member-states may not station or operate armed fix-winged aircraft in Antarctica, or allow foreign actors to do so in their territory.
b. Member-states may not station or operate tanks in Antarctica, or allow foreign actors to do so in their territory.
c. Member-states may not construct or operate missile silos on Antarctic territory, or land-based mobile/immobile ICBM launchers, or allow foreign actors to do so in their territory.
2. Member-states may not store weapons, ammunition, or dangerous WMDs, or allow foreign actors to do so in their territory. Only small personal weapons specifically used for scientific and research purposes, and their limited ammunition, are permited.
a. Chemical and biological weapons may not be researched, constructed, or stored on Antarctic land.
3. In times of war, Antarctica will be treated as an international "peaceful" zone, where armed conflict and invasion of Antarctic territories will not be tolerated.
a. In this case, involved parties that try to antagonize or intimidate their enemies through Antarctica would be subject to fines from the Secretary General.
3. For any infraction of this Article, the Secretary General may impose, at most, a $250,000,000 fine per infraction. If the guilty Member-state does not correct their mistake, then the Secretary General may continue to issue $250,000,000 fines per day until the infractions stop.


The territorial part of this treaty will be completed once it has been fully negotiated.

 

[GingeOrCringe]

Ostap Ilchuk frowned when Representative Lavrov entered the chamber. He had already taken a drink of the coffee, it wouldn’t be sanitary to give it to the Russian now...

Of course, there wasn’t much time to fret over it, the debate was in full force and he could hardly keep up with his note taking. “Fellow representatives,” Ostap began, “It is our duty to serve our countries’ best interests, and I am only able to do that if I am informed. This is a bit embarrassing for me, but I feel as if I’m missing two key pieces of the puzzle so I must ask: why is Argentina here?”

“Ambassador Cardona has pointed out, ‘the Argentine Republic is not a member of the General Assembly,’ and therefore ‘not subject to its decisions and Resolutions.’ If they are not subject to our resolutions, they will not be subject to this resolution. They are setting the parameters of what members of the Global Assembly may do, but there is no insurance they will comply with those parameters themselves.”

“I think the rest of my confusion stems from our collective failure to define our terms. How does the assembly define ‘historical claim’? As the first recorded discoverers of land—not ice—in 1820, Russia’s right to the continent is indisputable. Sweden was a late arrival, but the first Argentine to set foot on Antarctica, José María Sobral, was invited by Otto Nordenskjöld’s Swedish expedition. If Sweden is to be excluded, then why not Argentina and all other countries who did not arrive until after 1901?"

"It’s disappointing Argentina and Sweden cannot cooperate with each other as they did at the turn of the century. Even sadder yet is the red stain Argentina has now left on this once pure land. Why are we rewarding Argentina's violent behavior with an equal voice in this resolution? Their claim has no more 'history' than Sweden's. They complain about 'Swedish colonialism,' but in reality there isn't much danger of this because we can check Swedish oversteps. We cannot check Argentina's ambition."

 

[Connor]

"I cannot agree more; if Argentina has no intention of complying with the Global Assembly and sees our chamber as such a blight on the international community then there never will be peace on the continent." Marc nods, firmly agreeing with the Ukrainian Ambassador.

"Sweden has, from the very start of this crisis, been seeking a peaceful resolution; we have shown no violence, we have recorded our actions for audit, we have sought international talks, we have divided up our sovereign territory for the international community to make best use of the territory and we are here today. However, on the contrary, Argentina has one hundred and twenty dead servicemen and women to account for, has manipulated and lied to the media, failed to comply with the Global Assembly from the beginning of this debate and offered no alternative to everything they disagree with. Even the amendment put forward now is nothing more than pettiness from what are supposed to be experienced politicians."

"Ukrainian Ambassador I apologise that the reputation of Sweden has been tarnished in your eyes but I want to make thing abundantly clear to you and to the rest of this chamber... we seek peace and we, from the off-set, have done everything we physically can to keep this gorgeous continent as pristine as possible."

Marc pauses briefly, taking a sip of water before continuing "Special Representative for Argentina, this is your time to be accountable, do you intent to comply with the Resolution on Antarctica? and how can we, as member-states of the Global Assembly be reassured that a nation such as yours, with an overt hatred for the organisation, be reassured that you will be held accountable for any violation of a ratified resolution?"

 

[Naio90]

"If we are here, and actively participating it is because we wish to come to a solution that is appealing to all involved Parties, and, unlike Sweden, when Argentina agrees to something and subscribes it, it sticks by it. Our concern here is that Sweden is acting like an imperialistic nation drawing borders anyway they want.

There is only one nation at to blame here, and it is the Kingdom of Sweden.

Also, Mr. Ambassador of Sweden, I know you are unable to comprehend basic english, but if you check the transcripts , there you will find our latest proposal."

 

[Connor]

Marc simply looks upon the Secretary General following further inappropriate abuse from the Argentine Special Representative, not in keeping with the professionalism of the chamber.

Hollie

 

[Logan]

"Point of Clarification, Mr Speaker, for the purposes of this treaty, France's southern islands, namely those that are part of the French Southern and Antarctic Lands, will not be included in this, correct? While we have no problem keeping our military presence on our claims in Antarctica extremely light to non-existent, we will not assent to the demilitarization of our islands in the Indian Ocean and the Southern Ocean. The same with exploitation rights."

 

[ManBear]

Andrej Towpik had stayed silent throughout the entire hearing. He had no horse in this race but the dialogue between Sweden and Argentina was no longer within the bounds set by Global Assembly.

"I apologize if I am interrupting, fellow Ambassadors. I know Poland does not have a horse in this race but I feel I must interject here."

"Correct me if I am wrong, Ambassadors, but was there not just a warning issued to Argentina and Sweden to cease their personal attacks against each other and instead focus on the issue at hand. Argentina just stated they are here to come up with a solution to the Antarctica problem. To me, it appears as though Argentina is here to try and slow our progress on coming up with a solution. As controversial as this may be, I propose that Sweden and Argentina refrain from talking to each other for the remainder of this meeting. If the Secretary General agrees, this can help show to everyone present that Argentina does have the ability to comply with parameters established by the GA. And it will show to Argentina that Sweden will also comply with parameters set by the Global Assembly."

"As for the actual issue at hand. It appears the United States' amended documentation has the most weight behind it. As far as we can tell, the only issue to date lieswith Argentina and the second Preambulatory Clause. We propose that we do not change the second clause as it is not a secret that Sweden currently has control over Antarctica. We also propose that we proceed with the current draft of the resolution provided by the United States. Unless there are legitimate concerns with the draft and the wording within it. Thank you."

 

[GingeOrCringe]

Ostap stood up again, he was beginning to get that rush again, that feeling he always got back in his University debate club. “The GA will deal with Sweden. Your argument, Ambassador Cardona, that Argentina will obey the resolution is not an argument at all as it sets forth no evidence. Your premise is just restating the conclusion: Argentina will obey the treaty because Argentina obeys treaties. you offer no support for your argumentative claim in this rebuttal.”

“What’s more, you just stated that you are not subject to the resolutions set forth by the GA. You are exploiting this organization at the expense of one of its members. You say you will support a peaceful resolution which benefits everyone, but you cannot say ‘everyone’ benefits if one of our GA members is neglected. Like an imperialist colonizer, you want the solution that benefits your country, not the world. is time you stop using words like colonizer in your argument, you are just as guilty of these sentiments as Sweden.”

 

[JakeDorent]

The Brazilian Representative would lean forward to his mic, activating it.

"Can I ask, why are we allowing for troops to be stationed in Antarctica when the goal for this resolution is to Demilitarize the continent? It seems counter-productive to me.

Why are we now blaming the Argentineans for the unfortunate death of the Swedish sailors? let me remind you all that the Argentinean vessel maintained its course while the Swedish vessel changed its course, this information, no, this fact, is public knowledge, the Swedish vessel could have avoided the collision had it not switched its course, but sure, blame the vessel that maintained its course and never diverted.

Brazil, as a member of the GA, disagrees with the 3rd Amendment made by the United States, as the presence of armed military personnel within the continent will defeat the purpose of this very resolution.

Thank you." The Brazilian would lean back from his mic, taking a sip of his coffee.

 

[Jamie]

The British Ambassador sighs, clearing his throat on something he had truly hoped not to have to get involved in. However, the constant back and forth with little to no progress was sparking outside intervention and was only prompting the delegate to speak up. Firstly, to address the elephant in the room regarding the collision. He leaned over to his microphone and activated it to call on the attention of the chamber, giving it a few moments of silence before he begun to speak.

"I think we are all in agreement that this situation should have a form of solution by now, and that we are going around in circles so I would very much like to focus on solutions as opposed to point scoring. Therefore, I'd like to address all the points that we keep going around on between each party having their thoughts. I suspect we all think the same regarding the sinking of the Swedish vessel, Snö, and the death of her crew, the tragedy of this collision will not be forgotten. Specifically, I'd like to actually address the situation with facts and evidence. As the Brazilian Ambassador has defended, and the Swedish Government claims:

• The Swedish Vessel should have navigated out of the way and by going in front of the vessel, they are accountability.
  or
• The Argentine Vessel was approaching Swedish Territorial Waters, thus should have turned away.

A British Search and Rescue team was sent to the wreck to attempt to save... recover, those lost in the incident which means aside from Argentina, the United Kingdom is the only one that has seen the outcome. We have reviewed the footage and the damage to the Swedish Vessel begun on the port side, this indicated that the Swedish Vessel was approaching from the Starboard side of the Argentine Vessel. Why is this important? The International Maritime Organisation, which both Sweden and Argentina is part of, has a regulation for this. It's called the International Regulation for Preventing Collisions at Sea. This highlights the 'Rules of the Road at Sea' which discusses priorities which identifies that: A vessel coming from your starboard side.. their right side for those non-sailors, is the “Stand On” vessel and you should make a clear move to the starboard side and pass behind the other vessel. If we take this into account, you would actually find that the Argentine vessel should have moved and given priority to the Swedish Frigate. Whilst not the ICJ, I feel this information is relevant here because of the constant in-fighting in relation to that vessel and debating who was responsible. The ICJ will no doubt be the party to handle it, and of course, any evidence and information should be sent over to them accordingly. My point here is that there is laws and regulations around this, and it is easy to find who should have done what. Whether it was intentional or not, is not for me to say.

I have no doubt that this will try to be disproved, but the UK has remained and will remain neutral in this scenario, we are only presenting what we have seen and in accordance with the International Maritime Organisation. All footage and references will be handed to the International Court of Justice as evidence. I hope we can now put that issue behind us, and leave it to the relevant authorities to resolve.

Furthermore, I would like to address the concerns which are very prominent that Argentina is not a member of the Global Assembly, thus the resolution is not as binding compared to others. I would like to raise the prospect of, in good faith and reassurance for their commitment to peace and the resolution that Argentina joins the Global Assembly. I am not sure of the ground behind why they didn't previously but it is evident that Argentina seeks a voice regarding this matter, and bounded by the Global Assembly would show their commitment to cooperation and international democracy. We foresee a situation where Argentina, Sweden and all other parties have an equal say in the proposed agreement but should stress that environmental factors and research should be priority."

 

[Hollie]

Global Assembly

" I'm simply and politely informing Ambassador Cardona and Ilchuk to withdraw from using certain adjectives which are inappropriately used.
Otherwise, I must insist the honorable gentleman's withdraw from this chamber. How is it people legitimately think to behave so indecently? "

Naio90 and GingeOrCringe
_______________________

" Ambassador Noronha, the objective of today's session is to discuss the national sovereignty of Antarctica which is becoming ever so complex.
Not to explore the unfortunate events taking place in Antarctica, including the facts surrounding the death of the some, one-hundred sailors. "

JakeDorent
_______________________

" The U.S Ambassador has kindly amended the draft resolution, offering a compromise on demilitarization for the small few who are reluctant.
Unfortunately, you have to give up part of what you want for us to avoid conflict, accomplish things together and to feel satisfied afterwards.
None of you should have come here with the expectation of getting exactly what you want. We must recognize and acknowledge the desires
of others, not just your own self interests. We must stop exploiting areas of disagreement, creating additional conflicts to be addressed and
slowing down the overall progress and productivity of this session. Let's not exacerbate an already tense situation. Thank you, Ambassadors "

Odinson, JakeDorent, Connor and Naio90
​

 

[Drivindeath]

The Irish ambassador would get up and step outside the building, she would smoke 2 cigarettes, while enjoying the peace and quiet. She would then walk back inside the chambers and take the seat next to the American Ambassador once more.

 

[Bruno]

The Spanish Ambassador would again speak.

"Regarding the Military Personnel, it would be best to just not militarize the continente, no military on Antarctica is the best possible outcome, only logistics to provide scientific operations with supplies. And total free movement should be a must, no nation can deny entry of scientific personnel into Antarctica."

 

[Hollie]

Global Assembly

" Ambassador Anderson, I don't believe you're following the seating arrangements for this session. Would you mind returning
to your correct seat. You may have your opportunity to sit closer once we determine what delegation will occupy the first seat
in January. We do this to ensure that there's parity, equal distribution and equal opportunity to sit in the front, as in the back.
A small few have decided it upon themselves to ignore my arrangement, would they correct themselves at once. Thank you. "

Drivindeath , Tuzi , Connor and ManBear
​