The argentine representative would speak, first in response to the british intervention:
"We thank you for your input, and consider Britain's status as a witness to the Snö incident very relevant. As you might have seen on the recordings, both argentine and swedish, the swedish frigate did not only cross the linear navigation path of our icebraker, but also stopped in front of it with the clear intention to force a reaction and not just to move forward or out of the way, in clear opposition to the navigation rules mentioned by you. Nevertheless, this is not the place or time to discuss this.
As for the Agreement, we prefer to have Antarctica demilitarized, but ultimately can negotiation on this. Far more important for us is the fact that we cannot and will not sign a Document where it states that Sweden has any control or claim over Antarctica, since de do not recognize the annexation as rightful. The GA can manage it how it likes and say what it wants, but if you keep that out of the Document, it will make it possible for us to eventually subscribe.
Finally, as for the point of Argentine joining the GA, I must sadly say that it is completely out of the question at this very moment. We just saw couple of weeks ago how Canada was accused of being "a nazi state" and brought with no real proofs to the GA with a draft Resolution that would have crippled its economy and only failed by 1 vote. This showed to us the danger of the current workings of this multilateral organization, that can easily be exploited by national interests of some of the member nations. While noble at heart, we see too many flaws and dangers to our sovereignty for the Argentine Republic to join.
We prefer to be here on our own good will and with the compromise to try reach a Resolution, that we will comply to if we put our signature on it."
The British Delegate leans forward, "Apologies if I confused you, Special Representative. As per the navigation rules I specified, it would actually show your Argentine vessel should have moved starboard side and behind the Swedish Frigate.
If it had stopped in front of your vessel, or continued, your navy would have still been able to go around it as the vessel that is on your starboard side, if crossing into your path, has priority and the right of way.
Apologies, Mr Speaker, I just felt like I needed to correct myself as it sounded like the Special Representative may have misinterpreted my last speech. To summarize: The Swedish Vessel had priority and whether it stopped or continued, it was the responsibility of the Argentine vessel to move Starboard side around it.
I actually have, one seco--" he paused, shuffling into his suitcase and pulled out an illustration, presenting it to the chamber. "Apologies again, Mr Speaker. I felt like I had to clear that up."
"Given the intentions of the swedish frigate to just impede the advancement of the argentine ship, any maneuver to just dodge him would have possibly been responded with another blockade, since the swedish frigate was not simply navigating but trying to avoid the argentine ship from advancing.
But lets keep this discussion for other circumstances."
Carlo diDermi, Senator and representative URIS, takes a deep breathe, enters the chamber begins scan for the Italian seat. While standing in the back of the room to wait so he doesn’t interrupting proceedings, he starts to hum Finiculi, Finicula to curb his rather nervous demeanor.
"Can we please get back on track?" Ambassador Anderson would stand and say in a stern voice. "We are literally getting no where and we are talking in circles. I say lets review each of the proposals and break it down piece by piece and try to find a compromise, rather than arguing about the entire thing at once." She would then sit back down and cross her arms. Clearly annoyed by the childish acts of the assembly members and the guest.
With the Chamber in quite the disarray diDermi just goes and claims his seat, with only a few foot barrier to keep him safe from the mad woman. As he does so he manages to set his case on beneath his feet. He already begins to write a note for himself, keeping it well hidden from his peers higher on the alphabet, to call his colleagues in Ireland to figure out if all Irish people act this way.
Fernando would be confused by the direct mentioning of his name by the Secretary-General, seeing how other representatives had been speaking about the topic before he himself did, but alas, he moved along with it.
"Yes, let us get back on track and calm ourselves. This discussion has already derailed for long enough."
diDermi shifts awkwardly in his seat, observing the chaos. He begins to review the docket of the resolution.
“So how did the topic of a couple nations’ naval forces come up in a resolution on Antarctica? I’ll admit Italy has been out of the fold for a while, but anarchy seems to have replaced decently.”
The Portuguese ambassador Clemente Rollo Wembly, visibly strained, would wait until the Italian representative finished talking. He would lean in and begin to speak.
"Gentlemen, shall we not yet again bicker over and over again over the same problems? This session was called to discuss the resolution at hand as civilized people. We may disagree yes, but we should also take into account the words of our counterparts, understand their views, and create compromise. Simply taking a hard stance and being stubborn will not help advance the discussion. I request we calm ourselves down and present our issues as calmly as possible.
To address Italian Ambassador diDermi, Sweden has considerably lost hundreds of souls on board in an effort to enforce her sovereignty over the continent, the accident of which was caused by the parties of Sweden, and Argentina. This event was considerably, a hot topic that was mentioned during the Antarctic summit, but surprisingly is still being tossed around. Nonetheless, I wish to address the whole reason why we're reaching this blockade in the goal of a peaceful conclusion.
The very definition of 'Historical Claim' is muddy to be exact, and I wish to start the foundation on clearing that. Historical Claims, as we can see right now, are not strong enough to enforce a demand over land. An old exiled government may claim jurisdiction over land of the new one, but without any real action, it is simply hearsay. An old Portuguese King can say Portugal controls the moon, but we all know that is no basis for owning an entire planet. The world favors those who are in control, and as we stand, Sweden, who has undoubtedly poured many resources over securing the antarctic continent, is the one who bears that title. While Sweden has graciously offered us the chance to discuss the territorial concessions of the continent, we should remember to respect them the same as any valid party in the current discussion.
Historically yes, Sweden from what I've known, has never made any claim over the continent. However, we should remember that for a large amount of time no one really made a major move in securing their claimed areas as well. I do not know when Sweden officially made the decision to secure Antarctica for themselves, but as it we can see, gentlemen, Sweden has de facto control over the continent, which in my eyes, can be considered as an official claim, perhaps even a historical one.
But I would undoubtedly agree with the concerns of the Brazilian Ambassador, I do believe demilitarization of the continent would be good for everyone. So I would agree with the current amendment made by the Argentine Special representative.
We should not let the arrogant claims of the past destabilize our promise of a better future."
"As a clarification to the portuguese representative, and just for the record, the Argentine Republic mantianed uninterrumpted permanent presence, summer and winter, in Antarctica from 1904 up to 1995, aside from conducting seveal scientific and survey campaigns, mantaining over 10 stations and providing SAR coverage for over a century. All this accompanied by the corresponding claim."
“Thank you for the clarifications gentlemen. I sympathize the Swedish people for the lives lost. A demilitarized Antarctica would be a welcomed one however, I would like to inquire into the freedom of information that would be managed, pardon me if this was already discussed, but wouldn’t creating GA scientific institute for the Antarctic. The oversight for individual countries need not be in place with this method. Representative researchers would all be coordinating with their international partners would not only provide that the GA resolution would be followed if passed, but improve international relations in from a scientific standpoint rather just a diplomatic one? This would also tie all partner nations together if an incident would occur that would require an immediate response to protect the researchers rather than just having their nations of origin to fend for them.”
"Coming in late and already making the most sense here. Ireland supports the suggestion from the Italian Ambassador. There is no need for weapons on Antarctica. It's a block of ice on land. There is much left to discover there. Along with Ambassador diDermi's suggestion, may I also suggest we call for a recess and bring in scientist that have been to Antarctica to this resolution, I feel their input could prove vital to this. Lets be honest how many of you here have actually been to Antarctica? I know I haven't."
"That is a complete lie, there are no research stations in Antarctica and it has remain uninhabited since its discovery - no nation has exercised a permanent residence and there is no evidence of any constructed research facilities. If this meeting is to continue on a productive past the nations involved need to be honest and transparent throughout, as Sweden has done.
I am growing frustrated with throwing aside the subject of the catastrophic and torturous murder of one hundred and twenty servicemen and woman aboard HSwMS Sno - it may not be relevant to your own nations but it is an extremely sensitive subject which not only displays the sheer hostility shown by the Argentine armed forces but also their untrustworthy nature following the editing of recorded media for the press in order to manipulate the truth. It is relevant as for the prosperity of the continent we need to see the signatories held accountable for any deviation from this resolution, particularly when they are not a member state of the Global Assembly and made it abundantly clear to the chamber that they do not have any respect for the organisation or its members and never intends to have either. Please mind your manners and consider the fact that the subject you are 'tired of discussing' is a subject the hundreds of families that lost their loved ones cannot forget for the rest of their lives. It is absolutely relevant to this resolution.
I'd like to thank the Spanish, British, Ukrainian, Portuguese, Irish, Italian and German Ambassadors for their input and very relevant points. I suggest to the Secretary General that we take a temporary recess to allow our respective governments to review the proposed resolution thusfar and any amendments to be forwarded back for our resitting in a few hours"
"For the sake of this debate, I will no longer engage directly with the swedish representative, which seems to have his script clearly memorized and doesn't move an inch from it.
We support the motion to take a recess to review the proposal, but be clear that as long as the phrase concerning the, for us illegit, occupation of Sweden in Antarctica is depicted on the draft, the Argentine Republic will not subscribe it. On the rest of the draft, we have no objection and agree to all of it.
Said said, I would request the SG to indicate which final version is put forward for review."
While waiting for the 60 minutes to be over, the argentine special representative would take out from his pocket one of those new toys he bought for his daughter that are apparently the latest thing. Tamagotchi or something like that. Apparently it needed to be fed.