| TRR treaty |
|
GR, let's be clear that we are negotiating a treaty with whoever is in power at TRR and that's Unibot. Treaties are made between two regions but they are articulated, enacted and function as legitimate because of the players involved.
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
So we should be enforcing our treaties depending on who is in power at the time? That's the same argument made by those who opposed the NAP with Lazarus, just because Milograd was Chairman at the time. New leaders came, but the NAP is still here and is still legally binding. Unibot will step down at some point, but we would still have a legally binding treaty with the Rejected Realms.
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
(05-07-2014, 07:44 PM)Escade Wrote: GR, let's be clear that we are negotiating a treaty with whoever is in power at TRR and that's Unibot. Treaties are made between two regions but they are articulated, enacted and function as legitimate because of the players involved. It's easy to let your personal opinion of Unibot crowd out everything else. You won't be personally negotiating with Unibot at all, anyways. On the TRR side, I'll be working with Guy, who is TRR's foreign affairs officer. I get that you don't like Unibot's style, but that really has nothing to do with the value of this treaty. This isn't personal politics. It's regional diplomacy. The UDL treaty didn't work out because everybody made things personal. Please let's not do it again to this treaty.
Argh. At the risk of putting words in Escade's mouth, that wasn't her point.
Her point was that Unibot tends to not be the most delicate individual and likes to cause shit. That doesn't mean the treaty would not be helpful or should not be perused, but that we need to be aware of the individual we are dealing with now. To argue that "the treaty is with TRR" but ignore the fact that the person you need to that to is Unibot, is akin to saying you can develop a treaty with TSP without talking to Kris. Certainly, its with the region, but we also need to deal with their leadership at the moment during the negotiations.
I sense animosity in her posts. I don't want the Cabinet to go into negotiations already skeptical simply because of Unibot. I think that is an unreasonable approach that stereotypes Unibot's behavior. He doesn't "lash out." He tells the truth, which I tend to agree with.
The UDL agreement was dead in the water by the time Unibot began arguing in the Assembly. He didn't cause the project to fall apart. The Assembly did. In particular, the members of the Assembly who are staunchly pro TNI blocked the UDL project from the very start. We are going to be up against that again, which is why I want all of us to not be so pessimistic. If we go into negotiations thinking they will fail, then they will fail. That's they sentiment I got from Escades post. We also need to keep all of this top secret until we're ready to unveil it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Honestly, GR -- I have to disagree. As soon as something stops going Unibot's way he's willing to blow it up by "lashing out" when he "feels his voice isn't being heard." Frame it however you want, but we've all seen it.
Since FA isn't my area, do what you want. But don't go into this with rose-colored glasses.
(05-08-2014, 01:08 PM)Tsunamy Wrote: Honestly, GR -- I have to disagree. As soon as something stops going Unibot's way he's willing to blow it up by "lashing out" when he "feels his voice isn't being heard." Frame it however you want, but we've all seen it. Yes, that's what happened with the UDL project. Once he saw that the Assembly was going to derail it, he began arguing. I think everybody views his arguing as different than others, but honestly half this region acts the same as Unibot. He simply has a prior reputation, so people roll their eyes and go, "Unibot's at it again." The point I want to stress is that approaching negotiations thinking that Unibot is going to screw them, will mean that the negotiations will fail. You'll go into it with bad faith, because you think they're doomed from the start. That is not helpful. We need to go into this as a united front, believing that we can achieve an alliance that has been out of reach for years. Let me deal with Unibot. Ignore that he exists for now and just think about this objectively. Otherwise we might as well just stop while we're ahead.
So, Unibot has shared a draft for a treaty. Personally I like it, but if we go through with it I do think we should reword the mutual assistance clause (Article I, Clause 5), to better explain under which circumstances can each party aid the other
EDIT: Including a mention of GCR sovereignty.: Unibot Wrote:<Something TSP and TRR something something> 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
We conducted negotiations tonight and came up with this second draft:
========== Treaty of Peace and Amity Preamble Lorem ipsum dolar sit amet... Article I. Mutual Recognition of Government Legitimacy. Section 1. The parties to this treaty recognize the government of each region, based upon its constitutions and laws, as legitimate, and will not extend that recognition to any government that comes to power through means not proscribed by law, which shall be determined by the legitimate government in question. Section 2. Should the government of either party fundamentally change, but not violate the terms of the previous section, the parties may adopt a memorandum of understanding extending the provisions of this treaty to the new government. Article II. Non-Aggression Pact. Section 1. The parties to this treaty will refrain from engaging in any decisive and purposeful action that will undermine the regional security of either party. Section 2. Both parties will refrain from conspiring, either directly or through a third party, to destabilize or overthrow the legitimate government of either party. Section 3. Both parties will refrain from conducting clandestine operations, espionage, or other forms of spying against either party. Section 4. Both parties will, in good faith, report any known threat or concern related to the other party's security, to the appropriate security organs. Article III. Mutual Defense. Section 1. The parties to this treaty may seek assistance for their self-defense by lodging an official request with the appropriate officials. Section 2. Both parties agree to aid each other against attempts to illegally overthrow the in-game Delegate of their respective home regions. Section 3. All other requests for aid will be considered on a case-by-case basis, and subject to Article IV's conditions. Article IV. Cooperation on Military Affairs. Section 1. The parties to this treaty agree to work with each other, from time to time, and as circumstances permit, on mutually beneficial military operations, including training missions and confidence-building measures. Section 2. Both parties agree that diplomatic and political concerns may prevent military cooperation, and will not consider the rejection of cooperation as hostile posturing. Section 3. Both parties agree to keep classified any information regarding military affairs, and only publish that information in a manner mutually agreed upon. Section 4. Both parties agree to share intelligence as circumstances permit. Article V. Cultural Exchange and Cooperation. The parties to this treaty will endeavor to conduct communal cultural activities, to the benefit of the people of both parties, and to strengthen the institutions of peace and liberty. Article VI. Peaceful Settlement of Disputes. The parties to this treaty undertake to settle any and all disputes between them through peaceful means, in such a way that friendship and cooperation between them are not harmed, and to refrain from using the threat of force or sanction while this treaty is in force. Article VII. Deposit and Clarification of Terms. Section 1. This treaty shall be deposited in a publicly accessible area of the community forums of both parties. Section 2. The parties to this treaty may, from time to time, clarify the terms of this treaty through memorandums of understanding, which shall be posted alongside the treaty. Article VIII. Suspension of Terms and Termination of the Treaty. Section 1. Either party may suspend the terms of the treaty, if the other party has materially breached its terms, until such a time that both parties peacefully settle the dispute and adopt a memorandum of understanding that the treaty is again in force. Section 2. Either party may terminate the treaty with five days notice, posted publicly in the forum of deposit in both regions, after which the terms of treaty are no longer binding on either party.
Bump. Any thoughts?
|
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 3 Guest(s) |