Users browsing this thread:

**Belschaft** · 02-25-2017, 07:26 PM

If Cormac had opened with a proposal like that then I would have been on-board from the beginning.

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

~~Cormac~~ · 02-25-2017, 09:54 PM

(02-25-2017, 07:26 PM)Belschaft Wrote: If Cormac had opened with a proposal like that then I would have been on-board from the beginning.

Uh, that was literally my proposal, restated by Kris. He probably stated it better though. Regardless, yes, that is what I'm proposing.

(This post was last modified: 02-25-2017, 09:59 PM by Cormac.)

**Belschaft** · 02-25-2017, 10:16 PM

(02-25-2017, 09:54 PM)Cormac Wrote:
(02-25-2017, 07:26 PM)Belschaft Wrote: If Cormac had opened with a proposal like that then I would have been on-board from the beginning.

Uh, that was literally my proposal, restated by Kris. He probably stated it better though. Regardless, yes, that is what I'm proposing.

Well, I brought my opposition to your argument here from Discord via the Court, were it was little less nuanced.

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

PREVIOUS ROLES

~~Cormac~~ · 02-25-2017, 10:19 PM

(02-25-2017, 10:16 PM)Belschaft Wrote: Well, I brought my opposition to your argument here from Discord via the Court, were it was little less nuanced.

True. In any event, yes, the very reasonable course of action Kris just proposed is also what I'm proposing.

Escade · 02-26-2017, 12:23 AM

Isn't it beautiful when things are framed positively and therefore constructively!

I will talk to Tim, Salaxalans and the cabinet as well Smile

Escade

~ Positions Held in TSP ~
Delegate | Vice Delegate
Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | Minister of Military Affairs
~ The Sparkly One ~

My Pinterest

***sandaoguo*** · 02-26-2017, 12:44 PM

When a region forms a new regime, treaties shouldn't simply dissolve automatically. It should be up to the Cabinet to decide if the new government is one TSP should be allied with. When Lazarus formed a new regime, we signed an MOU that acknowledged the treaty transferred to that new regime. That seems like the sensible option here.

Cormac is wrong when he says that "it doesn't matter if there's a resistance." Diplomacy isn't a rigid formula. It's all about politics and context. That's the way it has to be, because there's no overarching NationStates-wide government to tell two regions they have to follow the same interpretations of treaties, laws, etc. It's also important to maintain flexibility. The people who will be in Spiritus following their constitutional convention are going to be, in all likelihood, the same people we signed a treaty with. There was no big purge of people, or a crackdown and closing of the region. The bilateral relationship is still there, and TSP shouldn't require renegotiation of treaties every time a UCR starts over in order to address the death of their community.

**Farengeto** · 02-26-2017, 02:25 PM

I would advise that any future UCR treaties, including renegotiations of existing ones like Spiritus', be set up to address situations like this in the future.

~~Cormac~~ · 02-26-2017, 03:32 PM

(02-26-2017, 12:44 PM)sandaoguo Wrote: When a region forms a new regime, treaties shouldn't simply dissolve automatically. It should be up to the Cabinet to decide if the new government is one TSP should be allied with. When Lazarus formed a new regime, we signed an MOU that acknowledged the treaty transferred to that new regime. That seems like the sensible option here.

Cormac is wrong when he says that "it doesn't matter if there's a resistance." Diplomacy isn't a rigid formula. It's all about politics and context. That's the way it has to be, because there's no overarching NationStates-wide government to tell two regions they have to follow the same interpretations of treaties, laws, etc. It's also important to maintain flexibility. The people who will be in Spiritus following their constitutional convention are going to be, in all likelihood, the same people we signed a treaty with. There was no big purge of people, or a crackdown and closing of the region. The bilateral relationship is still there, and TSP shouldn't require renegotiation of treaties every time a UCR starts over in order to address the death of their community.

I don't even disagree with much of what you say here, but if this is going to be our way of addressing extralegal change in user-created regions, then as Farengeto says that needs to be written into our treaties with user-created regions. It is not appropriate for us to recognize an extralegal government as a "legally enacted successor government" -- which is the only type of government, other than the Elemental Republic of Spiritus, that the Lampshade Accords permit us to recognize as the legitimate government of Spiritus.

I'm not saying we shouldn't recognize the new government of Spiritus. I'm saying we shouldn't recognize the new government of Spiritus in the context of the Lampshade Accords, which only permit us to recognize a legally enacted successor government. Cutting corners by saying that an extralegal government is a legally enacted successor government isn't the way to go. It either is legally enacted or it isn't. Cabinet decree doesn't make a government that wasn't legally enacted magically a legally enacted government, it just makes the Cabinet engage in open deception. That would set a dangerous precedent, not only for our allies but more importantly for us. We use the same or similar language in other treaties. If we can recognize any government we want as a legally enacted successor government, our allies can recognize any government they want in the South Pacific as a legally enacted successor government as well. Subjecting the definition of "legally enacted" to relativistic interpretation based on convenience is not in our interests.

There's no reason, other than convenience, that we can't repeal the treaty and pursue a new one with the new government of Spiritus, and even help them with building a new and hopefully more democratic government. So let's just do that even if it might be a little inconvenient, instead of calling this new government a legally enacted successor government when it clearly isn't. And then if we don't want to go through this in the future with user-created regions, let's write our treaties with user-created regions in a different way so that the Cabinet decides whether to recognize a new government, perhaps with some mechanism for legislative oversight, rather than basing it on whether the government is a legally enacted successor government.

(This post was last modified: 02-26-2017, 03:55 PM by Cormac.)

Escade · 02-26-2017, 03:46 PM

(02-26-2017, 02:25 PM)Farengeto Wrote: I would advise that any future UCR treaties, including renegotiations of existing ones like Spiritus', be set up to address situations like this in the future.

That is what I was thinking as well.

Escade

~ Positions Held in TSP ~
Delegate | Vice Delegate
Minister of Regional Affairs, | Minister of Foreign Affairs | Minister of Military Affairs
~ The Sparkly One ~

My Pinterest

***sandaoguo*** · 02-26-2017, 04:15 PM

@~~Cormac~~: An MOU would be saying "We recognize this new government as the legal successor to the Elemental Republic"

There are better hills to die on.