Users browsing this thread:

***Kris Kringle*** · 02-01-2021, 07:28 AM

I’m guessing our Executive received convincing evidence that CCD remains a fascist region? For those of us not in the know, I wonder if we could get an update?

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

***Roavin*** · 06-14-2021, 03:22 PM

Fellow South Pacificans,

roughly 5 months later, we've now finally come to a resolution on this. To summarize, TNP has issued a statement clarifying that they do not consider us to support fascism, and after, we came to a good compromise on the quorum raiding issue that has us continue to operate as we have except in incredibly rare circumstances.

When this Cabinet was elected back in late February, we quickly reached out to TNP to amicably resolve the standing issue. We (Prime Minister Sandaoguo and myself) talked to our TNP counterparts at the time, Delegate McMasterdonia and MoFA Praetor. The discussion can be summarized as such:

We stated from the beginning that we find a public clarification of McMasterdonia's statement on the quorum raid operation reasonable and appropriate (or in other words, that they state in public that they didn't mean to say, nor imply, nor think, that TSP "sanctions fascism" in any way). We mentioned that TNP's MoFA Praetor had already given that clarification, but informally in the unofficial NSGP Discord rather than in any formal capacity. Praetor did not see the need to give us that public clarification we were looking for, since an informal clarification was already given.
There was a very long, drawn out discussion about quorum raiding. McMasterdonia reiterated that they consider us defending against their quorum raids against CCD in any fashion to be a violation of the spirit of the Aurora Alliance. We ended up agreeing to disagree on this issue.
We conceded that there were communication mishaps arising between the TSP and TNP Cabinets in January.
Finally, the conversation turned back to our desire for TNP to publicly clarify their statement. I explained in detail why it was important to us and that their statement hurt and enraged South Pacificans. Ironically, given the concession we had just made, McMasterdonia and Praetor then outright ghosted us.

At this point, we could have simply asked the Assembly to repeal the alliance, which would seem like a reasonable step. However, I decided against doing so at that time. Diplomatic incidents with McMasterdonia aren't new — for example, in January 2020, with TSP Prime Minister Seraph and TNP Delegate McMasterdonia again, we had a short issue with McMasterdonia about a specific WA vote. That issue didn't play out in public and ended up with a private apology to us, but it fit several patterns we now saw again this year. We knew that McMasterdonia and Praetor would leave office soon, before our Cabinet's term ends, and wanted to see if the incoming administration felt differently, with the option to then still pull the treaty if things played out the same way again.

The new administration under Delegate Robespierre and MoFA Madjack has been much more amenable and we had some very productive discussion. First, they offered without any other condition to issue the public clarification that we had been asking of them. With that out of the way, we discussed the issue of quorum raids again. They confirmed to us that they, unlike McMasterdonia, did not consider our actions to be a violation of the spirit of the Aurora Alliance. Nonetheless, they requested that there would be certain quorum raid operations were they would like to see us refrain from defending against them. With this much better framework for negotiation, we quickly reached a gentleman's agreement on how to operate in the future.

The agreement wasn't written in formal text, but can be summarized roughly like this: If either party decides to quorum raid, it's by default fair game for the other party to defend against it, just like in any other R/D operation. In the rare case where there is a SC resolution about to reach quorum that benefits the causes of hateful ideologies (for example fascism), one party may ask the other to refrain from defending against a quorum raid targeting that resolution if certain preconditions are met. If any soldiers of the military being asked to refrain still defends against those quorum raids on their own or through another military, the party being asked to refrain won't be held responsible for it. The preconditions are:

The other party must be given reasonable notice beforehand (at the very least before the game update in question begins).
Targets that themselves espouse hateful ideologies are to be strictly prioritized.
Regions that are allied or allied to an ally will not ever be hit.
Any potential target must have been reasonably communicated with beforehand, through at least Telegrams and ideally also through things such as Discord (if available). In no case shall a region be hit where this did not occur.
Any other potential target will only be hit if the success of the operation strictly depends on it.

This is a good compromise, in my opinion. First off, operations like this are very rare and TNP itself (even under McMasterdonia) did not intend to do this sort of operation regularly, but only when a situation such as the one in January with the "Repeal: Liberate CCD" resolution. I am of the understanding that this reflects the wishes of TNP citizens as well. Second, even if such an operation occurs, the primary targets will be regions that we won't be willing to defend against anyway (i.e. those espousing hateful ideologies). Third, even in the incredibly rare case that regions beyond hateful ones need to be hit by TNP for their operation to be a success, less innocent regions will be hit in total with this protocol in place, not only because hateful regions are strictly prioritized, but also because only those regions in their target selection will be affected, unlike in January where due to our defense of various regions, TNP performed a second quorum raid run, including other previously untargeted innocent regions, to achieve their goal. Finally, this aligns us with other defender groups that had similar agreements with TNP but with less preconditions overall, and with our preconditions, we have implicitly strengthened their similar agreements as well.

So, overall? Not perfect, but pretty damn good, and I'm very happy to have been able to resolve this before the end of the term so that the incoming Cabinet can start without that issue hanging over their heads.

I can imagine that you have a lot of questions and I'm happy to answer all of them as soon as possible.

-- Roavin, your friendly lampshade-wearing MoFA

**Belschaft** · 06-14-2021, 03:35 PM

This seems to be an eminently sensible agreement, and it is very pleasing that the change in TNP's government has allowed this to be settled amicably.

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

PREVIOUS ROLES

**Jay Coop** · 06-14-2021, 05:01 PM

I think this is the best agreement we could have come to. It's not perfect, but compromises never are.

4× Cabinet minister /// 1× OWL director /// CRS member /// SPSF

My History

Altmoras · 06-14-2021, 07:30 PM

Is it just me or is TNP's statement a bit of a cop out? On one hand they say this like it was all some big misunderstanding that people perceived them of accusing TSP and our allies of aiding the cause of fascism.

Quote:Following a re-engagement with The South Pacific after previous talks broke up without a resolution, The North Pacific has agreed to release a firm and final statement clarifying a position that at the time we had thought was evident, but we accept now that some misunderstood our statement. The North Pacific does not consider The South Pacific to be a region that sanctions, condones or endorses fascism, in any way.

Meanwhile their actual statements literally say that those who blocked their quorum raid "sanctioned activities that aided the cause of fascism".

Quote: Unfortunately a number of individuals and regional organisations affiliated with Libcord, attempted to prevent this operation from succeeding on our second attempt. These regions do not accept that this proposal is an affront to our vital regional interests, some have even stated great pride in their failed efforts to prevent our quorum raid, and indicated a willingness to continue to oppose our anti-fascist efforts through quorum raiding.

In attempting to prevent the defence of our vital regional interests, these regions and individuals have sanctioned activities that have ultimately aided the causes of fascism and heightened the profile of the Confederation and assisted them in their goals in the World Assembly.

Quote:Supported the North Pacific Army and the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs in preventing a fascist resolution from reaching the voting floor and dealing in the aftermath when our allies sanctioned activities that aided the causes of fascism.

Is it really a retraction if you just handwave away your original statement and say that it never meant what it literally says?

With that aside I'm glad we're moving past this issue and I hope we can go a few terms without one of our oldest allies pissing in our cheerios again.

Benevolent Thomas-Today at 11:15 AM
"I'm not sure if Altmoras has ever been wrong about anything."

**Amerion** · 06-15-2021, 12:22 AM

I second Alt's thoughts on the matter.

I did not expect a public statement from TNP rightly apologising profusely for making such a incendiary characterisation but this particular statement seems like one foot in the door and one foot out.

Nevertheless, I appreciate and applaud the efforts of the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs in both Cabinet administrations for their tireless work on coming to a resolution to this issue.

Admiral General of the South Pacific

***Kris Kringle*** · 06-15-2021, 11:03 AM

Out of curiosity, is there a reason why the protocol is remaining private?

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

**Amerion** · 06-17-2021, 01:31 AM

I believe it is because the general policy has been that anything related to security or military matters are to be restricted to the private halls.

Admiral General of the South Pacific

Witchcraft and Sorcery · 06-17-2021, 12:34 PM

I feel at least partly responsible for this whole situation, since I'm the officer who made the call to defend in the first place. As the officer in charge who has since served a full term as Minister of Defense and is now about to take the reins as Prime Minister, I must say I'm very happy this has come to an amicable resolution. I had a long conversation with TNP's Delegate Robespierre and Vice Delegate Cretox State shortly after they posted this statement, which happened to coincide somewhat with my election as PM. The three of us found ourselves in a public voice channel and committed to doing what we could to shore up relations and work together to preserve the alliance.

While we acknowledge that we come from different positions on the issue, we were all very happy that we could put the issue behind us and that the incoming administrations would not have to deal with it. The general sentiment of both governments now seems to be "Let's work together like allies and not enemies trying to get a PR win" and I'll do everything I can to make sure things stay that way. I have a very strong relationship with Robespierre stemming from several different parts of the game, so it's my sincere hope that we can begin to normalize relations.

Witchcraft and Sorcery

Former Prime Minister and Minister of Defense. Formerly many things in other regions. Defender. Ideologue. he/they.

***sandaoguo*** · 06-25-2021, 06:21 PM

I want to address something that based on discussions I had with Minister of Defense HumanSanity within the Partnership for Sovereignty Discord server. For background, the Security Council is likely to have a new feature to submit and vote on "Declarations" that are basically a "sense of the Security Council" type of document. There was a discussion about a draft declaration in opposition to quorum raiding. The Minister felt that PfS shouldn't support a declaration like that in the Security Council, because it would cause issues with regions like TNP and we should be "strategically" courting independent/non-aligned regions. Not wanting to "deal with" TNP's reaction was given as a specific reason for why the PfS shouldn't try to push an anti-quorum raiding stance in the SC.

The Assembly should probably discuss that as a topic in own right. What I want to clear up here is what the intent was in my administration wrapping up these negotiations with TNP. The sole reason this was done was to help the incoming Cabinet out by taking it off their plate. Nothing more should be read into it. I feel that there's a misunderstanding about the state of TNP relations following this agreement. As Prime Minister, I did not and I still do not (as a private citizen) see this agreement as a "normalization" of relations. In other words, things are not hunky-dory with TNP. There are still deep cleavages that will continue to be an issue with TNP. I would say that, at most, the agreement staved off a dissolution of the alliance, but that a dissolution is more than likely inevitable in the future.

What I'm worried is that the current administration will return to a status quo of deferring to the wants and wills of regions like TNP, in order to "court" them for military purposes. That would be a mistake. We did that for far too long and returning to that dynamic would be a net negative for TSP. We don't hold the same values and beliefs, particularly around quorum raiding and raiding in general, as TNP. The only reason this agreement happened was because of the idiosyncrasies of who is currently in office in TNP, which means that after their next election there's no telling what their stance will be. This isn't a binding agreement and shouldn't be treated as one. Before I left office, I offered a word of wisdom to the incoming administration that TNP can't be trusted to uphold this agreement beyond the current Robespierre administration. Our relations with TNP have been strained a lot over the years, largely because of TNP's raider-leaning governments, and this agreement shouldn't be seen as repairing those strains or even papering over them.

So that all being said, TSP's FA shouldn't be impacted by this agreement. We shouldn't be doing anything that we wouldn't otherwise do, just to avoid annoying or angering TNP or ruffling their feathers. That wasn't the purpose of the negotiations. When it comes to quorum raiding specifically, we made 100% clear to TNP that we don't view quorum raiding as legitimate overall. Opposition to quorum raiding is TSP policy, so much so that the Partnership for Sovereignty treaty explicitly enshrines it. It would be a disappointing mistake for any TSP administration going forward to temper or moderate our overall opposition to quorum raiding in some misguided attempt to play nice with TNP, TEP, or any other non-defender region.