CHAPTER V
LEARNING FROM SOKOVIA

Unlike Sovokia, I don’t believe that my delegacy left the South Pacific as a pile of rubble. That doesn’t mean, however, that I did a perfect job, nor does it mean that there aren’t some lessons to be learned from my experience leading the region. I think these lessons are useful not only for someone who holds a leadership position, but also for anyone seeking to hold public office in the region. It has been a long time since I served as Delegate, but the core lessons that I will convey still are every bit as applicable, in their own way, to the region as it stands today.

Serving

I think one of the most importance lessons one can learn is that the delegacy, and any public office for that matter, is a service. Sure, we probably enjoy politics, and seek offices because we want to try our hands at them, perhaps even wield the power that comes with them. I can absolutely understand and sympathise with that, but I also try to remember the fact that I wasn’t working as Delegate: I was serving as Delegate, solely because I had twice obtained the consent of the region, and therefore I had a responsibility to all South Pacificans, to ensure that I did right by them.

As future leaders take the reins of the region, they would be well served to remember that offices are not theirs to hold, nor are their ideas the only ones that hold validity. I myself have fallen victim to this mindset, but it is incumbent on each of us to realise that we operate under a democracy, and therefore we all must be due credit to all ideas proposed in good faith, so that we can keep having fun in what is and must remain, first and foremost, a game.

It being a game, however, doesn’t mean we should take the delegacy, or any other position, any less seriously. NationStates is a game, but we are still elected with the idea that we will do our best to keep our promises and leave behind a better region. Let’s remember that when we serve the people who elected or entrusted us with positions, so that we may continue to do right by them, rather than benefit only ourselves. That is an easy trap to fall into, even for the most honest ones, so we must remain vigilant, and always aware of the innocence that we had at first, when our goal, even if we wanted power, was also to make the region better for our peers. They should be our inspiration.

Cabinet Relations

There isn’t much to say about this topic that I haven’t already implied elsewhere, but I think it still bears mentioning: the Delegate or Prime Minister must set clear goals, but also ensure that the relationship within remains harmonious and collegial. These are four people that will share the same responsibilities for four months, possibly even longer, so they will have to learn how to work for each other, collaborate with each other, and harmonise their goals, so that the Cabinet functions as a unified and effective institution.

I was fortunate enough not to need to intervene much during my two terms as Delegate, since the Cabinet was fairly harmonious within itself, and I made sure to keep everyone aware of our common goals through the use of the Cabinet Office and #tsp-cabinet. There was still the occasional tension, as is natural, but I feel it remained at manageable levels, focus on specific details rather than broad policies, and that contributed to unified action on key policies. We were not so fortunate with other Cabinets, and in those cases, the role of the Delegate was key in keeping the peace, setting clear guidelines, and moving forward as a unified institution, at least in the areas where we did have agreement.

Using the Forum

I’m a strong believer that there must be a responsible balance between the use of the forum and the use of the chat. Some conversations, especially those of an ephemeral nature, are well suited for the chat; other discussions, particularly those that should withstand the test of time, should remain on the regional forum, where they can be properly logged, archived and consulted by future generations. During my delegacy, the use of the forum for executive discussions was still very much the norm, and so we had little issues in that regard. I understand that this is not the case nowadays.

If I may offer some advice, the forum should still be the primary repository for government discussions, especially those with wide-ranging consequences for the region. When votes are taken and policies are decided, there should be a record that can be consulted in the future. That is not only a matter of historical importance, though I’ll admit that my concerns are mainly historical, but it’s also a matter of political accountability, since chat posts cannot be moved to public channels or archived for others to see. A forum archive, as it exists for past Cabinets, is necessary for us to keep our history, examine it years later, and also to keep our leaders accountable.

Let’s use the full capabilities of the chat when appropriate, but let’s also acknowledge that there are some cases where the forum is a better venue, be that for executive records, more comprehensive festivals or simply for ease of archival, for the benefit of future historians. As someone who has researched the early history of the Coalition, I cannot stress how useful it is to have records from the 2003. Our knowledge of these early days would be irreparably poorer, had some of these discussions taken place over AIM or MSN, rather than on the forums, whose contents remain available to this day.

Stepping Down

I’ve long been fascinated by US political history, particularly the history and evolution of the presidency, and even more particularly the fact that so many presidents followed the two-terms rule before it was codified as the 22nd Amendment. It should come as no surprise then that, when my second term came to a close, I was very clear about my intent to step down. I felt that two terms as Delegate were a decent time leading the region, and it was time to let someone else to take the mantle and have their chance at taking us in a new and better direction.

I have thought a lot about this decision, and whether it was right, given subsequent events. I have often thought that, if only I had run for a third term, helped consolidate some more cultural and foreign policies, perhaps I could have avoided some of the fault lines that led to the Cabinet Coup. Or perhaps that’s a flawed premise, and there were other ways to avoid the Coup. Or perhaps it was unavoidable, just like fighting the current of a river, and the only way to avoid crashing into the rocks was to submit.

However it may be, the fact is that I did step down after two terms, and I think that was a good decision, if anything because every leader should think, at some point, about when they will step down. It does good to high officials to remember that power is not theirs to possess, but is simply entrusted to them for a limited time. That trust may be renewed, but eventually it is best for both that official, and for the people, for a change to happen. One may be a fantastic leader, and be rewarded with multiple terms of service, but eventually, and ideally sooner rather than later, they should allow others to take the reins, and either seek another position, or take the post of elder statesman, giving valuable and timely advice, but otherwise remaining without an executive position.

In the case of the Delegate or the Prime Minister, positions that wield a significant power in the region, both hard and soft, this decision becomes even more important. A Delegate or Prime Minister has a privileged platform to influence and shape the region, and while they may use that power for good, and indeed most such leaders have, that does not mean that their intentions will not be misguided at some point, or that they may feel capable, but stifle the growth of other alternatives who would also be good leaders for the region. It is important to remember that one might be a good leader, as I think I was, but by refusing to step down, one might prevent the next Tsunamy from taking the lead.