Author Topic: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific  (Read 2937 times)

Offline Bustos

  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 6041
  • Spam Deity
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #30 on: March 05, 2015, 07:18:00 AM »
Wow, I can feel the hate seeping though that post.

 :clap:
Allied States of Bustos (WIP)


Brought to you by Bustos


Offline Myroria

  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4345
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #32 on: March 16, 2015, 01:08:05 AM »
Tomb, SillyString, Eluvatar and I worked out this final draft. It is currently before TNP's legislature for discussion.

Quote
The Taijitu-North Pacific Alliance
A treaty renewing the alliance between Taijitu and the North Pacific.

Preamble
1. Aware of the long and special relationship between Taijitu and the North Pacific, the two regions’ shared commitment to freedom, liberty, and democracy, and the kindred ties between them, the Regional Assembly of the North Pacific and the Ecclesia of the Citizens’ Democracy of Taijitu formalize this alliance of mutual defense and cooperation.

Section One - Establishment

1. The signatories will recognize the constitutional governments in force at the time of ratification of this treaty, and any legally enacted successor governments, as the sole legitimate governments of their respective regions.
2. The signatories agree to maintain both on- and off-site embassies with each other.
3. The signatories agree to penalize willful violation of the other party’s rules for RMB posts on that party’s RMB should the other party allow embassy RMB posts.

Section Two - Security

1. If the sovereignty of either party is materially threatened, the other will respond with the implied or explicit consent of the aggrieved party.
2. The responding party will assist in coordination with the aggrieved party and in proportion to the grievance.
3. The signatories will collaborate militarily on request, according to established laws or policies.
4. Participation by the signatories on opposite sides of a military engagement that does not constitute an attack on either signatory's home region shall not be considered "military hostilities against one another" for this purpose.
5. The signatories will not in any way, direct or indirect, initiate or participate in espionage, subterfuge, or other clandestine operations against one another. For this purpose, a "clandestine operation" is one or more persons acting under false pretenses in one signatory's home region or regional forum at the direction of the other signatory's government without the knowledge of the affected signatory..
6. The signatories will share any intelligence relevant to the defense of the other party. If this intelligence relates to the North Pacific, it shall be provided to the Security Council of the North Pacific. If this intelligence relates to Taijitu, it shall be provided to the delegate of Taijitu.

Section Three - Cultural Cooperation

1. The signatories will endeavor to organize cultural events on the regional off-site forums or regional message board of one or the other party, with the goal of mutually enriching both communities.

Section Four - Amendment and Dissolution

1. This treaty may be amended by mutual consent through the normal ratification processes of the two signatories.
2. Either party shall give a week’s notice prior to withdrawing from the treaty.
3. Either party shall exhaust all reasonable diplomatic options before withdrawing from the treaty.
"I assure you -- I will be quite content to be a mere mortal again, dedicated to my own amusements."

Offline Delfos

  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 6966
  • Who is Aniane?
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #33 on: March 16, 2015, 01:12:40 AM »
retrove les alluettes

Offline Cormac

  • *
  • Posts: 374
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #34 on: March 16, 2015, 08:44:42 PM »
So, this is something we've discussed a bit on IRC. I'm not sure about this alliance anymore -- what do we really have in common with The North Pacific these days?

They mostly raid, we mostly defend.

They're a bureaucratic republic, some would say an oligarchy, and we're a direct democracy.

Our RPers don't even like their RPs.  :-P

So, what, aside from history, is the reason we should continue an alliance with them? How does it benefit us?
Cormac Sethos
Pharaoh of the Osiris Fraternal Order

Offline Eluvatar

  • Tech Monkey
  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3108
  • O_O
    • Taijitu.org
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #35 on: March 16, 2015, 09:37:30 PM »
So, this is something we've discussed a bit on IRC. I'm not sure about this alliance anymore -- what do we really have in common with The North Pacific these days?
TNP is still the single region we have the most members in common with, as far as I know. We have been allied with TNP for some time now, and TNP has stood by that alliance, even when it might have been convenient not to during times of our inactivity. Leaving aside my personal involvement in TNP, I would be ashamed if we were to drop an alliance which the other party had respected through thick and thin, as it were, on a "but what have you done for me lately" basis.
They mostly raid, we mostly defend.
It's a shame that United Celts left The North Pacific when it did, as the makeup of operations undertaken by the NPA has changed. While the ongoing delegacy transfer(s) following mcmasterdonia's unanticipated resignation have limited the NPA's mobility, I have it on good authority that it has participated in update defenses recently as well as warzone attacks, and indeed helped defend the region of European Union from a raid orchestrated by The Black Hawks which was many months in the making.
They're a bureaucratic republic, some would say an oligarchy, and we're a direct democracy.
I beg to differ. Bureaucratic TNP may be, but that is not an undemocratic thing. To the contrary, carefully detailed procedures are often a mark of a pursuit of fairness and the removal of official discretion a mark of limited authority. While it is certainly true that there are persons in The North Pacific whose arguments and advice are more often considered, such respect does not an oligarchy make.

The North Pacific is quite like Taijitu in its fierce commitment to democracy. Arguments like "but they took away Unibot's free speech" are somewhat ridiculous given that Unibot left TNP of his own choice years ago, and was faced with diplomatic consequences to a tendency to habitually denigrate The North Pacific in outside publications while Delegate of the Rejected Realms. Does Taijitu respect the free speech rights of, say, Govindia? No, because Govindia is not a Taijituan.
Our RPers don't even like their RPs.  :-P
Another overgeneralization. I imagine that our RPers like their own RPs posted in TNP, for one thing. For another, TNP RP is fairly varied and there are TNP RPers interested in more story-focused and less game-ish RP like ours.
So, what, aside from history, is the reason we should continue an alliance with them? How does it benefit us?
History is by no means an invalid reason. That aside, however, in my studies of our foreign policy the alliance with The North Pacific stands out as one of 3 links between The North Pacific and the less imperialist-friendly independent regions, themselves closely linked with outright defender regions. From a strategic standpoint, I think this linkage is beneficial. Breaking it could push TNP to embrace the imperialists outright, which I would argue is about as far from our interests in this regard as can be imagined. Our part is not negligible in this role.
                                 
(click to show/hide)

Offline Cormac

  • *
  • Posts: 374
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #36 on: March 16, 2015, 10:23:01 PM »
TNP is still the single region we have the most members in common with, as far as I know. We have been allied with TNP for some time now, and TNP has stood by that alliance, even when it might have been convenient not to during times of our inactivity. Leaving aside my personal involvement in TNP, I would be ashamed if we were to drop an alliance which the other party had respected through thick and thin, as it were, on a "but what have you done for me lately" basis.

I don't mean it in a "what have you done for me lately" sense more as in the sense of what do we really have in common with them? Shared citizens, yes. But both our political and community culture are very different from The North Pacific's. We are much more laid back and they are much more political. Our community is far less interested in gameplay than theirs. Our community hates the kind of bureaucracy that thrives in TNP. And once again, and I'll get to this point below, our military primarily defends and theirs primarily raids.

It's a shame that United Celts left The North Pacific when it did, as the makeup of operations undertaken by the NPA has changed. While the ongoing delegacy transfer(s) following mcmasterdonia's unanticipated resignation have limited the NPA's mobility, I have it on good authority that it has participated in update defenses recently as well as warzone attacks, and indeed helped defend the region of European Union from a raid orchestrated by The Black Hawks which was many months in the making.

Eluvatar, with all due respect, that you are currently Minister of Defense because Gladio wouldn't take the job again does not represent a significant change in TNP policy or military operations. This is an anomaly. The NPA for the past several years has been more actively involved in raiding than in defending, and TNP's political community has also taken every opportunity to stick it to defenders -- the UDL, XKI, TRR -- whenever a reasonable opportunity presents itself. The idea that TNP is on the verge of becoming much more friendly to defenders is absurd. TNP's treaties and the continued activity of the people who have made TNP so hostile to defending indicate otherwise.

I beg to differ. Bureaucratic TNP may be, but that is not an undemocratic thing. To the contrary, carefully detailed procedures are often a mark of a pursuit of fairness and the removal of official discretion a mark of limited authority. While it is certainly true that there are persons in The North Pacific whose arguments and advice are more often considered, such respect does not an oligarchy make.

The North Pacific is quite like Taijitu in its fierce commitment to democracy. Arguments like "but they took away Unibot's free speech" are somewhat ridiculous given that Unibot left TNP of his own choice years ago, and was faced with diplomatic consequences to a tendency to habitually denigrate The North Pacific in outside publications while Delegate of the Rejected Realms. Does Taijitu respect the free speech rights of, say, Govindia? No, because Govindia is not a Taijituan.

Nonetheless, the point is that TNP's system has very little in common with our own. There are other regions -- like our current ally, The Rejected Realms, or The South Pacific -- that have much more politically in common with us, as well as militarily. So I question why we're pursuing TNP.

Another overgeneralization. I imagine that our RPers like their own RPs posted in TNP, for one thing. For another, TNP RP is fairly varied and there are TNP RPers interested in more story-focused and less game-ish RP like ours.

I'm not an RPer, so I really can't weigh in here with any real knowledge. I hope St Oz will weigh in since he's one of the RPers who commented on not enjoying TNP's RPs.

History is by no means an invalid reason. That aside, however, in my studies of our foreign policy the alliance with The North Pacific stands out as one of 3 links between The North Pacific and the less imperialist-friendly independent regions, themselves closely linked with outright defender regions. From a strategic standpoint, I think this linkage is beneficial. Breaking it could push TNP to embrace the imperialists outright, which I would argue is about as far from our interests in this regard as can be imagined. Our part is not negligible in this role.

I think it's silly to assume that the treaty with us is going to have any impact on a decision TNP has already made. It is independent, leaning heavily in favor of raiding, and that is not going to change. If anything, what is more likely to happen is that changes will occur here, and not changes for the better. You're looking at this from the perspective of our influence on them, but they're not only a Feeder, but the largest and most influential Feeder. We need to be looking at this from the perspective of their influence on us as well. I don't want people migrating here after this treaty draws more attention to Taijitu pushing TNP's crappy political, military, and community culture in Taijitu.
Cormac Sethos
Pharaoh of the Osiris Fraternal Order

Offline Eluvatar

  • Tech Monkey
  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3108
  • O_O
    • Taijitu.org
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #37 on: March 17, 2015, 12:25:27 AM »
TNP is still the single region we have the most members in common with, as far as I know. We have been allied with TNP for some time now, and TNP has stood by that alliance, even when it might have been convenient not to during times of our inactivity. Leaving aside my personal involvement in TNP, I would be ashamed if we were to drop an alliance which the other party had respected through thick and thin, as it were, on a "but what have you done for me lately" basis.

I don't mean it in a "what have you done for me lately" sense more as in the sense of what do we really have in common with them? Shared citizens, yes. But both our political and community culture are very different from The North Pacific's. We are much more laid back and they are much more political. Our community is far less interested in gameplay than theirs. Our community hates the kind of bureaucracy that thrives in TNP. And once again, and I'll get to this point below, our military primarily defends and theirs primarily raids.
Yes, we're more laid back. I like that we are.

We don't have to expect everyone we're friends with to be like us in every way.

As far as I'm concerned, the only internal political expectation we have any right to of our allies is that they respect the sovereign rights of their people: that they are fundamentally democratic. I believe TNP qualifies.
It's a shame that United Celts left The North Pacific when it did, as the makeup of operations undertaken by the NPA has changed. While the ongoing delegacy transfer(s) following mcmasterdonia's unanticipated resignation have limited the NPA's mobility, I have it on good authority that it has participated in update defenses recently as well as warzone attacks, and indeed helped defend the region of European Union from a raid orchestrated by The Black Hawks which was many months in the making.

Eluvatar, with all due respect, that you are currently Minister of Defense because Gladio wouldn't take the job again does not represent a significant change in TNP policy or military operations. This is an anomaly. The NPA for the past several years has been more actively involved in raiding than in defending, and TNP's political community has also taken every opportunity to stick it to defenders -- the UDL, XKI, TRR -- whenever a reasonable opportunity presents itself. The idea that TNP is on the verge of becoming much more friendly to defenders is absurd. TNP's treaties and the continued activity of the people who have made TNP so hostile to defending indicate otherwise.

I suspect you're confusing some cause and effect. Both mcmasterdonia and I in our platforms in January said that the NPA needed to defend more, and take more care when attacking. One might surmise that Gladio decided he didn't want to be responsible for implementing such a mandate. I couldn't say, one way or the other.

Regarding conflict between TNP and the UDL, I have to say it's strange to see you call that a black mark on TNP. Unibot made that happen. Ties were strained by Unibot's frequent belligerence and ultimately broken in the fallout of Ravania leaking to the UDL's command staff the contents of a private NPA discussion about a very dubious order by Blue Wolf II as Acting Delegate and Unibot's aggressive misuse of this information. I believe I recall that you left the UDL following the Ravania incident that ended cooperation between UDL and NPA and allowed A.G. Gaspo (later revealed to be in TNP to mess with its Judiciary) to go looking for ways to get rid of more UDL members.

10000 Islands is one region where I deeply regret how Blue Wolf II was allowed to mess with those relations. However, before he broke them, they were not close. I'm not aware of any instance where TNP has actually harmed 10000 Islands.

The Rejected Realms have come into contention with TNP for the same reason the UDL did: their Delegate, Unibot. Unibot is a committed defender, he invests great effort and substantial intellect into his projects, but a diplomat he is not.

I have no idea who you mean by "people who have made TNP so hostile to defending," so I cannot counter that criticism.

I beg to differ. Bureaucratic TNP may be, but that is not an undemocratic thing. To the contrary, carefully detailed procedures are often a mark of a pursuit of fairness and the removal of official discretion a mark of limited authority. While it is certainly true that there are persons in The North Pacific whose arguments and advice are more often considered, such respect does not an oligarchy make.

The North Pacific is quite like Taijitu in its fierce commitment to democracy. Arguments like "but they took away Unibot's free speech" are somewhat ridiculous given that Unibot left TNP of his own choice years ago, and was faced with diplomatic consequences to a tendency to habitually denigrate The North Pacific in outside publications while Delegate of the Rejected Realms. Does Taijitu respect the free speech rights of, say, Govindia? No, because Govindia is not a Taijituan.

Nonetheless, the point is that TNP's system has very little in common with our own. There are other regions -- like our current ally, The Rejected Realms, or The South Pacific -- that have much more politically in common with us, as well as militarily. So I question why we're pursuing TNP.

First, I object to the notion that TNP is not our current ally.

That said, while I would support pursuing an alliance with the South Pacific, I am confused as to why you think tSP is more like Taijitu than TNP is. From my observations, tSP has more drama and conflict in it than TNP does at this time.

I don't think one alliance gets in the way of the other, either. After all, the South Pacific is allied with TNP, and the current leadership there considers this alliance a priority. Being allied with TNP is a plus, not a minus, in approaching tSP.

History is by no means an invalid reason. That aside, however, in my studies of our foreign policy the alliance with The North Pacific stands out as one of 3 links between The North Pacific and the less imperialist-friendly independent regions, themselves closely linked with outright defender regions. From a strategic standpoint, I think this linkage is beneficial. Breaking it could push TNP to embrace the imperialists outright, which I would argue is about as far from our interests in this regard as can be imagined. Our part is not negligible in this role.

I think it's silly to assume that the treaty with us is going to have any impact on a decision TNP has already made. It is independent, leaning heavily in favor of raiding, and that is not going to change. If anything, what is more likely to happen is that changes will occur here, and not changes for the better. You're looking at this from the perspective of our influence on them, but they're not only a Feeder, but the largest and most influential Feeder. We need to be looking at this from the perspective of their influence on us as well. I don't want people migrating here after this treaty draws more attention to Taijitu pushing TNP's crappy political, military, and community culture in Taijitu.

I disagree. TNP does not want to be a raider region, and is not one. I also didn't say that renewing this treaty will cause TNP to change to be more like us. I said that ending our alliance with TNP could help push it to change to be less like us, which is a different concern.

I'm generally not opposed to migration to Taijitu. I think we should be open to anyone who wants to be part of our community and does not disrupt it (beyond our level of tolerance). That said, I don't think anyone would think Taijitu renewing a many-year-old treaty with TNP is a sign that it wants to become more like Europeia. We did fairly recently tell Europeia exactly what we thought of its diplomatic and military policies. Adopting this replacement alliance treaty with TNP will not in any way push us to reexamine that.

TNP has different culture from us, but so does every other region in NationStates. I don't think TNP is more different from us than most other regions we could consider allying. I think that for reasons of historical ties, a common belief in democracy as opposed to a person or group owning a region, and the strategic purpose of maintaining and strengthening diplomatic ties between political defenderish regions and the feeders, we should continue this alliance.
                                 
(click to show/hide)

Offline Funkadelia

  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 1060
  • Contre nous de la tyrannie
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #38 on: March 17, 2015, 12:29:40 AM »
Putting "TNP needs to defend more" is boilerplate in TNP political culture. It's a farce until it actually happens, which I haven't seen much of yet.
Today's date is: Today is Jocidi, 5 Cielidor AR 5 - Day 1770 of the Glorious Revolution.

Many trials make manifest
The stranger's fate, the curses' bane.
Many touchstones try the stranger
Many fall, but one remains.

Offline Cormac

  • *
  • Posts: 374
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #39 on: March 17, 2015, 12:33:13 AM »
I did not leave the UDL following the Ravania incident, for the record. I did not leave the UDL until well after Unibot's resignation, well into the Conclave process. I don't mind the error as I'm sure it was an honest mistake, but I did want to correct it. I was as subject to Blue Wolf's and Gaspo's anti-defender witch hunt as anyone else.

Anyway, I honestly don't feel like debating this to death. I feel that Taijitu and The North Pacific have very little in common, and I'm not the only one who feels that way. I'll be voting Nay, though I appreciate the time and energy that has been put into this on our end.
Cormac Sethos
Pharaoh of the Osiris Fraternal Order

Offline Myroria

  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 4345
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #40 on: March 17, 2015, 12:35:38 AM »
As Citizen-Diplomat, it is my job to guide, focus, and make real the foreign policy initiatives of the Citizen-Delegate. There are things I like about this treaty, and things I dislike about the North Pacific. As someone who holds two deputy ministerial positions over there, I agree their political culture can be bureaucratic, stifling, and toxic.

I don't think that the existence of this treaty will bring their occasional toxicity over here. But I would hate to see the arguments over this treaty bring that toxicity over here. Let's be honest - this is called gameplay for a reason. I don't want to see this community chipped away at by this argument.

EDIT: Also their RP isn't that terrible. We were exactly like that once.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2015, 12:37:54 AM by Myroria »
"I assure you -- I will be quite content to be a mere mortal again, dedicated to my own amusements."

Offline Delfos

  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 6966
  • Who is Aniane?
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #41 on: March 17, 2015, 12:43:40 AM »
so much talk about TNP, TNP this, TNP that. Either burn it down or leave it.

Offline Cormac

  • *
  • Posts: 374
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #42 on: March 17, 2015, 12:44:49 AM »
so much talk about TNP, TNP this, TNP that. Either burn it down or leave it.

Generally one would expect to hear talk about TNP in a discussion about a treaty with TNP.  :-P

As a side note, noting that we have more in common with TSP than TNP was an example, not an indication that I think we should pursue a treaty with TSP -- let alone both, which is literally like the NS version of a horror movie to me. "From the Pacifics, they devour."

If we're going to pursue GCR treaties, it would seem to me to make sense to pursue them with Lazarus and The East Pacific. We have common ground there.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2015, 12:51:15 AM by Cormac »
Cormac Sethos
Pharaoh of the Osiris Fraternal Order

Offline Delfos

  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 6966
  • Who is Aniane?
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #43 on: March 17, 2015, 12:53:31 AM »
so much talk about TNP, TNP this, TNP that. Either burn it down or leave it.

Generally one would expect to hear talk about TNP in a discussion about a treaty with TNP.  :-P

not internal soap operas that don't say sh*t about what we want to accomplish with this discussion. You did point a few things, a ton of posts followed justifying our own taiji's actions as TNP members, like their justification holds any premise for this relations.

Offline Eluvatar

  • Tech Monkey
  • Citizen
  • *
  • Posts: 3108
  • O_O
    • Taijitu.org
Re: Alliance Between Taijitu and The North Pacific
« Reply #44 on: March 17, 2015, 01:57:04 AM »
I did not leave the UDL following the Ravania incident, for the record. I did not leave the UDL until well after Unibot's resignation, well into the Conclave process. I don't mind the error as I'm sure it was an honest mistake, but I did want to correct it. I was as subject to Blue Wolf's and Gaspo's anti-defender witch hunt as anyone else.

Anyway, I honestly don't feel like debating this to death. I feel that Taijitu and The North Pacific have very little in common, and I'm not the only one who feels that way. I'll be voting Nay, though I appreciate the time and energy that has been put into this on our end.

I'm sorry I got that detail wrong.

What was definitely the case however was that you felt, at the time, that the UDL was in the wrong in that instance.

I was a bit peeved by the hunt you mention myself, as was flemingovia -- in the end, only Ravania was convicted. Plenty of TNPers from the old (exclusively)  defender NPA days are still around and kicking, in essential roles.

I'm going to put the military issue in simple terms. If we are allied with TNP, then in a UIAF raid TNP chooses between allies (in conditions where the alliances do not require its support). If we end our alliance, then it potentially has only one ally involved: Albion. Our alliance gives TNP more room to choose to oppose a UIAF raid. I think this is in our interest.
                                 
(click to show/hide)