Actaea

This isn't entirely my conclusion. I mainly wanted to emphasize that those who wouldn't use chemical weapons anyway will be the ones who suffer the most. And the mini-goal – to protect countries from chemical weapons – won't be achieved. Because all potential aggressors (except Ventorum) are outside the jurisdiction of the First Council and cannot be controlled by it.

Ah, so you think the council can't influence a country that isn't a member of the council?
Firstly, the statement "wouldn't use chemical weapons anyway" is quite debatable. Governments change, and no one can guarantee anything about the present situation, especially in retaliation.
Secondly, the council can require members to eliminate chemical weapons within their own borders, and force non-members to do the same. No one is saying that the council will tolerate chemical weapons in, say, the Steelmen, and even less allow them to be used and put their own countries in a disadvantageous position.

And this problem is easily solved for the Second Council (come and make peaceful decisions. Most of the countries of Actaea will likely make exactly such decisions), but it is not solvable for the First.

I don't see a big difference between the First and the Second. :confused:
All problems are solvable.