(02-26-2017, 07:03 PM)Kris Kringle Wrote: Cormac isn't saying TSP should denounce the new governing structure in Spiritus. He's saying the treaty, as currently worded, doesn't support it, which means we should make a new treaty. In other words:

Treaty recognises only the "Elemental Republic of Spiritus" + "Elemental Republic of Spiritus" is dissolved = Treaty that recognises the new government

Exactly. I'm not calling for any change in our partnership with Spiritus, nor objecting to their decision to extralegally dissolve their government and convene a constitutional convention. I was skeptical of that decision at first, but having talked to Tim and heard from other people why they made the decision, I understand it, and it was probably the best decision they could have made under the circumstances. None of my concerns are about their new government and we shouldn't reject their new government -- I just don't want us to cut corners for convenience.

An alternative to repealing the Lampshade Accords now and then negotiating a new treaty later would be to instead negotiate a new treaty with the new government in advance of repealing the Lampshade Accords, so that we have a new treaty immediately in place when the old one is repealed. We could even make repeal of the previous treaty a provision of the new treaty, so that repeal is automatic when the new treaty is ratified, and separate repeal votes aren't even necessary by either government. That would be fine. It would be minimal fuss for both parties. It would not lead to any interruption in our partnership.

The only thing I'm not okay with is signing a MOU recognizing this new government as a legally enacted successor government under the terms of the current Lampshade Accords, when it is clear this new government was not legally enacted. We shouldn't sign a MOU that is a lie. Lying is not good diplomatic policy.