European Nuclear Applications Authority (ENAA)


  • Admin

    EUROPEAN NUCLEAR APPLICATIONS AUTHORITY

    This is the EU-wide regulatory authority on nuclear proliferation in the region, established by the Nuclear Proliferation Act of 2009, amended 2012. Its current membership is as follows:

    Permanent Members:

    ? The Aelir of the Kendro-Laatzenian Dominions of the Duxburian Union

    ? The Federal Chancellor of the Federal Republic of the Gro?deutsches Reich

    ? The Prime Minister of the Apostolic Kingdom of Angleter

    Elected Members:

    ? The President of the Federal Commonwealth of Pax Aurea

    ? The President of the Hipster Republic of Rhine Ruhr

    Before becoming a nuclear state, a nation must apply to the ENAA for a Licence for Nuclear Proliferation. The ENAA shall deliberate before offering one of three possible final decisions by a majority vote:

    -Licence for Nuclear Proliferation (Unconditional): The nation is free to build as many nuclear weapons as it desires.

    -Licence for Nuclear Proliferation (Limited): The nation is free to build nuclear weapons, but may have no more than a certain number (decided by the ENAA's majority vote) of nuclear weapons at any one time. Failure to comply would be....unwise...

    -Ban on creating a Nuclear Arsenal: The nation cannot own a nuclear arsenal and must begin disarmament immediately if it has any nuclear weapons. Failure to comply, or to disarm at a rate satisfactory to the ENAA, would be...unwise...

    To initiate an application, start a topic with the following information:

    Nation Name
    Applicant's name and applicant's authority to apply on behalf of their nation
    Nation's IC Count (must be greater than 0)
    Does your nation meet minimum requirements for nuclear weapon production? (Find this in your war list in the technology section) Your answer does not necessarily have to be yes, although your license will be for trade only if you are not capable of producing your own weaponry.
    Reasons for applying: Why do you want to produce a nuclear arsenal?
    Reasons for approval: Why should the ENAA grant approval?

    The ENAA must come to a decision within 7 days from the date you apply. Failure to decide on time shall be considered an abstention and you are free to apply again.


  • Admin

    Halsberg's application has expired without a final decision. However, since the authority has only recently acquired a space to convene and given the uncertain rules concerning a quorum, I think it would be fair to automatically reconsider this application.

    The Duxburian Union proposes that a super majority of 4/5 be sufficient to approve an ENAA application. A simple majority of 3/5 is also on the table. There would be no quorum requirements, other than attaining a majority in order to approve anything.



  • As the ENAA deals with extremely important matters that have a major impact on the overall state of the entire continent, Pax Aurea supports the 4/5 super majority vote proposal by the Duxburian Union.



  • QUOTE

    To the members of the ENAA,

    I'm writing to you as I have heard rumors that you plan on instituting a required 4 out of 5 result to accept any ENAA application. I must inform you that the Nuclear Proliferation Act in its newly amended form calls for a much different standard.

    Section Two:

    "To ratify a vote within the ENAA, a majority of 51% or greater of the present voting members is required."

    This means that however many members that you are able to convene for vote must only reach a percentage of 51% to pass a decree. So if only 3 members can meet to discuss the application and vote it would take 2 out of 3 of the members to approve an application and the subsequent restrictions.

    If you run into a scenario where there are an even number of voters present and they are split 50-50 on a decree that means that they have not reached approval and the status quo is maintained. The rejected nation could always apply again.

    Failure to comply with the bill in the following ways will lead to ECoJ action:

    1. Instituting a procedure that requires all members be present to reach a decision
    2. Instituting a procedure where the vote threshold to pass a decree is greater than 51%
    3. Instituting any other procedures that are against the procedures outlined in the present bill.

    Please take this clarification of the law and act accordingly.

    -Dr. William Roebuck, The Confederacy of Gun-Toting Animals' Councilor to the EU



  • The ENAA has decided to grant Halsberg a limited Licence for Nuclear Proliferation. The nuclear cap for Halsberg will be 40 missiles for the purpose of nuclear deterrence. A majority of the ENAA see 40 to be enough to provide a fair deterrence while still keeping the missile count relatively low. One of the determining reasons is Halsberg's recent history of terrorist attacks. The nation had captured those responsible but have yet to prove that they could stop terror in the act or prematurely. The Confederacy of Halsberg can always apply again if they wish to be granted an increase in Nuclear weapons.



  • The ENAA has decided to deny Mogo Mogo nuclear proliferation. The main determining factors were the lack of history Mogo Mogo has in the EU; and most importantly, the nation's lack of a standing military. The Aelir of the Kendro-Laatzenian Dominions of the Duxburian Union put it best regarding our concerns for Mogo Mogo having nuclear weapons:

    QUOTE

    The deal killer is the lack of an army. Not only to protect the missiles, but also to prevent 1st strike nuclear war. If a country has to go to war with Mogo Mogo, its only options would be nuclear or not to attack, for MM has no way to retaliate except by nuclear missile. Now in some logic systems, this would prevent war. It would not, if at any point it becomes feasible to take a nuclear exchange and not be destroyed, while MM is destroyed. A very large country with interception capabilities might be above water in such an equation. I am thus wary of a militaryless state having nukes...

    The Federal Chancellor of the Federal Republic of the Grossdeutsches Reich shared an opinion that I think would help Mogo Mogo best, if they still wish to pursue nuclear proliferation QUOTE

    We would advise Mogo Mogo to build up an army and wait for some additional time before asking for a nuclear license again.

    The ENAA appreciates that the people of Mogo Mogo are willing to follow the proper channels when it comes to obtaining nuclear proliferation. Although the nation's application has been denied, we encourage Mogo Mogo to reapply once the nation feels that it is ready to own and protect its missiles.



  • The European Nuclear Applications Authority has decide to cautiously grant The United Kingdom a license in order to manage newly acquired nuclear weapons from the former colony of Australia. I say cautiously, because the Authority recognizes that The United Kingdom participated in two wars in the past year. We recognize that the UK went to war for both regional and national security, but we too recognize that the state voluntarily chose to become belligerent. Also, since discussions about The United Kingdom's application began, the state has been attacked by a terrorist organization. With the re-emergence of the CACB as an national actor, the concern over the protection of these weapons have influenced our decision. The United Kingdom needs to prove that they can protect their nuclear stockpile from those that seek to do harm to the nation and region. Failure to do so will invite the ENAA to re-evaluate The United Kingdom's grant.


  • Admin

    The European Nuclear Applications Authority has decided to grant Rhine Ruhr a licence for up to 40 nuclear missiles, which should allow the Rhinian authorities to develop an effective deterrent. Despite its participation in the Dromund Kaas War, other events, such as its role the search and rescue operation for Aurean relief workers, have shown Rhine Ruhr to be a generally peaceful and internationally prudent state, and there is no reason to fear Rhine Ruhr becoming aggressive or using its nuclear warheads liberally. It has no civil disturbances of note that could lead to nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hands, governmental or otherwise, and its military appears strong and capable of safely holding a nuclear deterrent. Therefore, we see no issue with allowing Rhine Ruhr to become a nuclear state.


  • Admin

    The ENAA split 2-2 on whether to grant Nouvelle Picardie a nuclear arsenal. Thus, the application should be considered to have been rejected.

    Positive points include the nation's lack of involvement in warfare, willingness to open testing sites to other nations, stable economics, and intent to replace is biological arsenal.

    Negative points include its form of government and lack of checks on executive power. The nation also has a short history in the European Union and is a relatively unknown entity.

    The ENAA understands the importance of deterrence and that a biological weapons ban is rumored to be on the horizon. If Nouvelle Picardie can win the trust of European nations over time, there is no reason that the ENAA can't reevaluate this decision.



  • When the United Kingdom's application was evaluated, the involvement in two wars over the past year was considered to be a negative aspect, speaking against the nuclear license. The same was true while Rhine Ruhr's application was processed: the Hipster Republic's declaration of war on Dromund Kaas was seen as a possible impediment to the license. Both applicants were eventually accepted, however, after the ENAA had carefully weighted the other significant qualities that supported their claims.


  • Admin

    The European Nuclear Applications Authority has decided to provisionally deny Davishire a licence for nuclear proliferation. Notwithstanding any argument about Davishire's suitability as a nation to hold nuclear weapons, the ENAA sees no point in granting, or definitively denying, a licence to Davishire until it commits to recognising and accepting the ENAA's - and other European institutions' - authority. Until that happens, any ENAA decision would be effectively worthless, and so the ENAA shall refrain from making a definite decision on Davishire's application until that decision actually has weight.



  • With two votes for an Unconditional License and one vote for a Conditional License, the European Nuclear Applications Authority has decided to grant Gun-toting Animals with an Unconditional License for Nuclear Proliferation.

    Here is the position of Fredrick Jefferey who supported the Unconditional License:

    QUOTE (Rhine Ruhr @ April 9th, 2013 - 16:40)

    I'd like to argue for an Unconditional License for Nuclear Proliferation. The Confederacy has proven itself to be one of the most stable nations in the entire region both internally and with their relations with other member states.

    We must not continue to allow a double standard to exist when it comes to nuclear powers. I think three of the current participants of the war in Dromund Kaas have unlimited arsenals (due to the grandfather clause) and have been allowed to keep said stockpiles, while new applicants are being limited because of their involvement in the same conflict.

    I also would not like to continue the precedent of limiting the nuclear capabilities of each nation that approaches the ENAA for approval. Halsberg was given a conditional license based on internal issues and their relative time in the region at the time of the application. We allowed the precedent of our first ruling to carry over onto Rhine Ruhr's and I really advise against making it the norm.

    Although this became the prevailing argument, GTA's involvement with the Dromund Kaas conflict was a cause of concern. It is always a risk to grant nuclear proliferation to a nation with a recent history of belligerency and even more so when they are actively participating in a war at the time of application. I'd also like to point out that since the ENAA was overhauled less than a year ago, seven nations have applied for licenses. The past year has witnessed the emergence of four new nuclear powers in European Union which leads this body to wonder if the trend of European militarization will continue on throughout 2013.



  • QUOTE (Angleter @ April 13th, 2013 - 18:04)

    The European Nuclear Applications Authority has decided to provisionally deny Davishire a licence for nuclear proliferation. Notwithstanding any argument about Davishire's suitability as a nation to hold nuclear weapons, the ENAA sees no point in granting, or definitively denying, a licence to Davishire until it commits to recognising and accepting the ENAA's - and other European institutions' - authority. Until that happens, any ENAA decision would be effectively worthless, and so the ENAA shall refrain from making a definite decision on Davishire's application until that decision actually has weight.

    The current Imperial Government of Davishire does understand the ENAAs decision regarding our current nuclear weapons stockpile however due to security issues and the general election the Imperial Commonwealth will not be abiding by the ruling and will continue to possess nuclear weapons. This matter will be discussed within the cabinet over the coming weeks.

    It is expected that the Cabinet will discuss all of the issues that the ENAA has bought to the attention of the Imperial Commonwealth and will then discuss the feasability of getting those hurdles moved.

    regards,

    Minister of State for the European Union & Co-Leader of the Conservative Party
    Rt Hon Steve Baker MP



  • The ENAA has decided to deny Davishire?s nuclear application. While we are pleased with much of the progress Davishire has made toward recognizing and respecting the authority of European Institutions, there are still some concerns especially with the Overall Section of the European Parliament and European Commission Act. Imperial decree is still a get out of jail free card for ignoring European Institutions whenever Davishire?s government can drum up a reason why a law might be a security threat.

    We also worry about the stability of Davishire and its capability of securing a nuclear stockpile. On April 28th Davishire was attacked by what the government deemed socialist rebels at the Sandy Island Air Force base. These rebels had 5 destroyer naval ships and a fairly sizable force. Any rebel group that has the resources to build, purchase, or steal such warships is a high security risk. Furthermore it is rather questionable that Davishire?s intelligence could not foresee such a large attack and for 5 days escalated tensions with accusations and increased nuclear readiness against other European nations.

    It is for these reasons that we will deny Davishire?s nuclear application. We also suspend Davishire from applying again for nuclear license with this body for another two months so that it can work on these issues. In the past Davishire has hastily reapplied for nuclear license and we wish to avoid this without seeing it give ample time to address our concerns.



  • First we would like to apologize to Inimicus for the delay. We had reached a consensus opinion on its application during its first submission but there was a mix up in who would be writing the official decision.

    The ENAA has looked over and discussed Inimicus? application and each argument kept coming back to the same premise: instability. Inimicus has made great strides as a nation on the European stage but this is still the same nation that used chemical weapons on its own people in a violation of European law. It leads one to question if Inimicus can do that to its own people, would it really be averse to using nukes against foreign nations. The specter of the Telum Incident looms large today over this ENAA decision, just like it has loomed over the past year of events in Inimicus.

    The events at Telum were likely the spark for a series of planned terrorist attacks at military installations across Inimicus. The ENAA must call into question the security of military bases in Inimicus when one weapons storage area after another was compromised in the exact same way, with plenty of warning and all from the first attack. The application promises that Inimicus will ?make absolutely sure the nuclear weapons are stored in secret, top-security locations in rural Inimician areas? but this is a claim that we cannot take at face value and are justified in being skeptical about. Furthermore, terrorism is so organized and effective in Inimicus that terrorists were able to successfully infiltrate the Imperial Palace, at a time when the country was on high alert due to attacks on military bases, and create an explosion that resulted in the death of the Emperor.

    Most recently there were days worth of riots in October. With the seemingly constant divisiveness of issues in Inimicus regularly turning into violent events, the ENAA sees Inimicus? prospects at future stability to be questionable as well at this time. It is for all the above reasons that the ENAA has decided to deny Inimicus? application for nuclear weapons.


  • Admin

    Apologies to Qvait for the delay in our coming to this decision.

    The ENAA would first like to clarify that there is no need for a licence to generate nuclear power for civilian purposes - it is, and always was, free to have nuclear power. Our remit only limits the right of nations to develop nuclear weapons.

    On the issue of Qvait's application to develop a nuclear arsenal, the ENAA cannot ignore the fact that Qvait only emerged three weeks ago from an often brutal, half-century-long, civil war. It currently appears to essentially occupy the territory of 'North Qvait' and is organising a referendum that could see Qvait annex large pieces of "ravaged" territory. Moreover, only last month did a major diplomatic incident arise from the revelation that corrupt, rogue members of Qvait's intelligence services had stepped well beyond the remit that their superiors had given to them.

    It is clear to the ENAA, therefore, that Qvait is a long way from the level of stability needed to reassure us that a nuclear arsenal would be safe and secure in Qvait. As a result, we have decided to deny Qvait's application to develop or procure a nuclear deterrent. Qvait may resubmit when it feels that the serious issues highlighted above have been adequately addressed.



  • The ENAA has decided to increase the limit on the amount of nuclear missiles Halsberg can have to 300.



  • The ENAA has decided to allow Poland-Lithuania a limited license for nuclear proliferation. The number of warheads shall be limited to 250 for the time being, however we'd welcome an application to increase the limit at some point in the future should the Polish government so wish. We apologise for the delay in coming to a decision.


  • Admin

    Applications are closed in accordance with the Nuclear Weapons Act 2015.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to NS European Union was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.