European Nuclear Applications Authority (ENAA)



  • 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.