I need to clarify that this was a tentative agreement, fully dependent on the approval of both the Cabinet and the CSS, as opposing fronts of this conflict. I immediately consulted those members who were awake at the time, and consulted the rest when they were online the following day. There was a unanimous agreement (my vote included) that the agreement was not in the best interest of the Coalition.

I really do appreciate the role of the North Pacific in this conflict, but Hileville was not compromising towards us. He may have been towards TNP, but whenever we approached him, he was adamanat that there would be no going back. Based on the extensive conversation I had with him the second night of the coup, which included an admission that there had been no threat to coup by any admin, I have to conclude that he did not have any intention to restore the Coalition, at the time.

On to the subject of amnesty and reconciliation. I have had time to listen to the different positions, and my own has been evolving. I still believe that those from the Cabinet who did not defect should face a fair trial. However, I do recognise that the region calls for reconciliation. I believe that the right way to ensure that would be to grant amnesty only to those Cabinet members to acknowledge their role in the coup and express a willingness to be a positive force in whatever reforms we consider. Yes, we want to reintegrate those citizens back into our community, but we also need to make sure they understand there is a better path towards enacting change. This is not about shaming, this is simply about ensuring they commit to respecting our democracy.