Users browsing this thread:

**Belschaft** · 04-20-2016, 01:29 PM

Wouldn't we just be making a statement to make a statement though? Unless we actually have the political will and capacity to effect events we're essentially injecting ourselves so as to promulgate our own moral superiority. I'm entirely in favour of taking action to oppose autocratic coups, but only when we're actually going to take action; putting out a statement saying "We don't like this but we're not going to do anything about it" just makes us look weak.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

***Kris Kringle*** · 04-20-2016, 01:39 PM

I think we need to be consistent with our beliefs. If we oppose coups, then we have to condemn them when they happen. If we genuinely can't offer more material help (as would be the case now) then there's little we can do about it, but at the very least we went on record, we proved that we have the willingness, even if not the ability, to help. That's what I think is at stake here. Our willingness to speak up.

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

Resentine · 04-20-2016, 01:40 PM

I think the decision on whether to do anything other than a statement falls to the cabinet, more specificly, me. Just to clarify.

An eye for an eye just makes the whole world go blind.
~Mahatma Gandhi

RP-Government Information

Army Ops

(This post was last modified: 04-20-2016, 01:40 PM by Resentine.)

**Belschaft** · 04-20-2016, 01:40 PM

But isn't that an empty statement on our part? We're involving ourselves in a conflict we have no ability to effect, and thus exposing ourselves to events we can't influence and consequences we can't control.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

**Belschaft** · 04-20-2016, 01:42 PM

(04-20-2016, 01:40 PM)Resentine Wrote: I think the decision on whether to do anything other than a statement falls to the cabinet, more specificly, me. Just to clarify.

The Assembly has both the power and authority to direct the Cabinet to act in a certain manner, and has done so in the past on multiple occasions. Whilst foreign policy is in normal circumstances the responsibility of the Cabinet, the Assembly can impose it's will on the Cabinet.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

***Kris Kringle*** · 04-20-2016, 01:47 PM

I think there's a big difference between getting materially involved and simply saying that we believe this coup is wrong. There is no need to write an inflammatory statement that will seriously angatonise the parties involved. But simply saying we are concerned and believe Osirans should be able to elect their own leaders is reasonable and hardly dangerous.

Sure, it'd be much weaker than the actual condemnation I'd prefer, but I think the more important point here is to uphold our democratic values. A coup, no matter how they want to spin it, is not democratic. Many regions are agreeing with that, and we should join them.

Former Delegate of the South Pacific
Posts outside High Court venues should be taken as those of any other legislator.
I do not participate in the regional server, but I am happy to talk through instant messaging or on the forum.

Legal Resources:
THE MATT-DUCK Law Archive | Mavenu Diplomatic Archive | Rules of the High Court | Case Submission System | Online Rulings Consultation System

***sandaoguo*** · 04-20-2016, 01:51 PM

To be fair, when have we ever done more than a statement? Like meaningful action?

I do think it's possible to write a "pox on both your houses" statement. Of course, that won't earn any friends.

**Belschaft** · 04-20-2016, 01:53 PM

I think putting out a weak statement of principle is fairly pointless, which is why I oppose that. If we're going to oppose something we need to actually oppose it, and as we can't do that right now we should just not get involved. Moral condemnation and statement of principle is hollow without action.

_{Minister of Media, Subversion and Sandwich Making}
^{Associate Justice of the High Court and Senior Moderator}

PREVIOUS ROLES

***Tsunamy*** · 04-20-2016, 07:22 PM

Oh for f---'s sake! Since we want to have this debate in public — let's have at it.

I've been making the case to the Cabinet that a statement of neutrality or minor condemnation would be ideal. Nothing major, just something along the lines saying that two people shouldn't get to overrule an entire government — whether or not there are questions — and that we hope the entire situation is resolved quickly.

As a region that has minimal contact with Osiris, I see no reason for us to whip our d--- out, but I do think it would be beneficial to come out in support of democracy, whether or not we explicitly condemn the "transitional government."

For the record, I have already told Res that he and the SPSF can assist in any way they can. Since several of our allies are taking up arms in support, we have plenty of opportunity to.

-tsunamy
[forum admin]

***sandaoguo*** · 04-20-2016, 09:00 PM

(04-20-2016, 07:22 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: Oh for f---'s sake! Since we want to have this debate in public — let's have at it.

Come on.