CHAPTER I
LIFTING THOR’S HAMMER – WAS I WORTHY?

Originally, I had little ambitions for higher office, or at least I was unsure that I had the necessary qualifications and political support to obtain it. As I confided Escade in August 2013, I had a vague hope of running for Chair of the Assembly that December, mainly because it seemed like an easy office to hold, requiring little in the way of prior experience. Instead, she nominated me for Minister of Foreign Affairs, and after a short reflection, I decided to accept.

I should be upfront about my lack of experience, a point that I’ve already made a few times in the past, but still bears repeating. I was completely lacking in foreign affairs experience, to the point that I had absolutely no idea of what a GCR was. I felt lost when more experienced members talked of “UDL relations” and felt that I had little to contribute in terms of prior experience or foreign affairs knowledge. What I did bring to the table was a fresh new outlook, a perspective devoid of prejudices or preconceived views about the state of our foreign policy, and therefore able to make honest assessments about how we should engage our partners and other regions.

Balancing Fresh Outlooks

To this day, I still don’t know how much of a good thing a fresh new outlook is. It certainly has its benefits, which I outlined above, but there are some important drawbacks that make it a risk; that is something that I have experienced in later years, as I see newer members implement policies that, while not inherently wrong, are different from the ones I would want to push forward.

I would say that fresh new outlooks are a double-edged sword. On the one hand, they do provide a clean perspective on issues, lacking in prejudices that can tank an honest discussion on changes that may be needed to keep the region from stagnation. There are times when long-held views need to give way to new perspectives, and that doesn’t happen if all views adhere to the prevailing orthodoxy, and remain closed to new possibilities. In that sense, a fresh new outlook can be positive, and even instrumental in helping move the region forward.

On the other hand, a fresh new outlook can often ignore the reasons why an orthodoxy is such, and risk bringing back policies and practices that had a good reason for being rejected. Some regions are simply bad partners, who cannot be trusted to engage in good faith. Some activities are just too complex to develop or will not gain widespread acceptance. In those situations, more experienced members know that bringing those back would simply be a waste of time that could be better invested in other activities that have more potential to succeed.

I believe that both are needed, and both need to have a healthy respect for each out. A newcomer brings much energy and innovation to government, but they also need to listen to the considerable experience of older members, who have been there and done that. They know what it’s like to run things, and can provide valuable perspective to the table. At the same time, older members need to realise when things aren’t working, or are in need of a change, or even when a change, even if not sorely needed, would not be at all harmful. In those cases, they would benefit from listening to a newer generation, which will eventually inherit the reins of government anyway, so they can work together to implement the good ideas that they both have.

Deciding to Run

I served as Minister of Foreign Affairs for a full term under Belschaft. Overall, I would say this was a valuable experience, and I consider myself lucky to have served under him. I go into more detail later in this chapter about why I consider my experience there valuable, but let me say for now that I gained valuable skills in terms of administering a government agency, understanding the realities of citizen involvement, and learning how to deal with foreign governments. Obviously, that comes along with the inherent value of being part of the Cabinet, and learning how executive business is conducted in that context.

This serves to make the point that I was elected Vice Delegate in December 2013 with considerably more experience than I had four months earlier. I had fully staffed the Foreign Service, trimmed down our number of embassies abroad, negotiated a Non-Aggression Pact with the People’s Republic of Lazarus and helped Escade organise our successful bid to host the 2013 NationStates World Fair. I knew more about what it took to lead the region, and was eager to help Escade implement our vision of a region whose motto was “friendship and cooperation”.

It was difficult then when I logged into IRC on Christmas Eve 2013 to see that Escade had been accused of secretly being Neenee, which meant her impending assumption of the gameside delegacy had been delayed while the Committee for State Security investigated the claim. This was a trying time, and I tried my best to let Escade know that this would pass, and that there was no reason for her to resign so early in her term. In my mind I kept wondering if I wasn’t a fool for insisting that she stay, thinking that this was a unique opportunity for me to become Delegate. That is a rather devious and selfish thought, but there it was nonetheless.

I convinced myself that this was not the right thing to do, and the rest is history: Escade went on to have a successful term as Delegate, which laid the groundwork for many of the policies that permeated my two terms in the delegacy, and even beyond. Among her various achievements are the origins of the re-examination of our role within the Independence sphere, the organisation of South Pacific Inter-Regional Games, the enlargement of the CSS and the strengthening of alliances. In particular, she was a strong proponent of the principle that allies should talk to each other, rather than take their ties for granted, and insisted on having regular contact with those regions with which we had treaties.

As the April 2014 election approached, and Escade confided that she was not particularly interested in seeking a second term, I considered my own prospects. I knew I wanted to become Delegate: I had had a front row seat in my capacity as Vice Delegate, and I wanted my own chance at making decisions and taking the region in the direction I felt was best, continuing the good work that Escade and I had been doing since we first joined the Cabinet. I did insist that Escade be my Vice Delegate, since I already knew how she worked and wanted her continued advice. She accepted, and we formally announced our candidacies shortly after.

We ran a close campaign against Rebeltopia and Arbiter, two fine citizens who had a solid platform, and the ability to implement it. They relied on their experience and ideas, emphasising unity and a return to cooperation, after the dramatic days of the forum move. In turn, Escade and I ran a campaign with the motto of “Community and Strength”, focusing on citizen involvement, the strengthening of our culture scene and a continuation of the ongoing policy of forging alliances and making sure our incumbent ones were properly maintained. This platform obtained the confidence of the majority, and we were fortunate enough to receive the opportunity to lead the region for another four months.

Was I Ready?

I don’t know if anything can truly prepare someone to serve as Delegate of the South Pacific, or as Prime Minister in the present day. Obviously the region has changed in the four years since my election, but the fundamental fact remains that ours is a large and complex region, with various challenges and aspects to navigate, and anyone who thinks that they are ready to lead it will be surprised when they face the many unexpected situations that will undoubtedly surface. That doesn’t mean one can’t have enough experience as to be able to navigate these situations, and in that sense there is no such thing as too much experience, since the job requires as much of it as one can have.

By the time I was elected Delegate, I had served as Vice Delegate, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Minister of Regional Affairs, and I had already a few months of experience in the Assembly. That is less experience than some of my predecessors, such as Belschaft, who led us, and quite successfully, with less time and experience in the region. That begs the question: what does it take for one to be sufficiently ready to lead the region?

As I said earlier, I tend to believe that every bit of experience is a plus, with the notable exception of having couped a region, so prior experience in government is, if not sufficient, at least necessary for a minimum of qualification. A leader who has no notion of the mechanics of military gameplay or about the organisation of festivals has no hope of understanding their importance, having intelligent discussions about them or making informed decisions. At the same time, experience in all possible areas is unrealistic and unnecessary, since ministers are there precisely because they will have a more focused expertise on their respective areas, and will implement the minutiae of public policy. As leader of the Cabinet, the Delegate or Prime Minister help set broad guidelines and ensure that the government is moving in the right direction, as agreed by them and their colleagues.

Similarly important is having political savviness, and an ability to lead. A Delegate or Prime Minister is not any minister: they have to direct policy and ensure the region moves in a certain direction. If they have no ability to lead, to inspire others and to “get stuff done”, any amount of personal inspiration or grand plans will be useless. This is a lesson I learned during my ordeal in trying to pass what became the 2013 Bill of Rights, but also in watching as Belschaft led the region during his second term. He set clear guidelines, met with each minister to discuss and align our goals, sought to keep the Cabinet working as a team, and made good on many of his legislative promises, all good things that meant he truly led the region, as opposed to letting ministers implement their individual policies in a disjointed manner.

After all this, was I deserving or even ready to be Delegate? Truthfully I would never dare to even suggest that I was worthy or deserving of the delegacy. To serve as Delegate is a privilege that is granted by the region, and therefore the office must be held only by those who wish to use it for the good of the region. I did have those intentions, but I also had ambition. Was that good? Was that bad? Probably nobody actually “deserves” to serve as Delegate, since the position doesn’t belong to them. I do think I was reasonably ready for it, being experienced enough that I knew what I was doing, but also still being fairly new and open to different views. I think that allowed me to pursue policies that helped the region go in the direction that was best for it, regardless of what the conventional wisdom said.

To answer the question of this chapter’s title, which I chose not out of a sense of self-importance, but merely because I like making this sort of movie references, I don’t think I was, or could ever be, worthy of the delegacy. I simply had good skills and experience, was there at the right time, and took the opportunity to get the office. It was an informed gamble, and it allowed me to get the main prize. That’s where the analogy ends, because unlike any prize, the delegacy is a complex job that requires focus, discipline and a sincere dedication to the region and its people.