The Bethany Accords

[Myroria]

Over the past few weeks, as Lazarus has recovered from its coup and gotten back on its feet, I have been discussing with their delegate, our very own Funkadelia, about a treaty of alliance between us.

The new Lazarene government shares many things with Taijitu - a commitment to democracy on a level only known by people who have seen it oppressed themselves previously, an open legislature open to all residents, and an active, thriving new community.

In addition, many Taijituans including (in no particular order), Eluvatar, Gulliver, Church of Satan, St. Oz, and myself   have been active over there since the legitimate government's restoration. St. Oz in particular devoted a great deal of his time to creating a map for their first-ever RP community and helping to foster it as it grows.

I strongly urge the Ecclesia to look over the following treaty carefully, and hope you endorse it.

The Bethany Accords
A treaty of friendship between Taijitu and Lazarus

Preamble

The sovereign regions of Taijitu and Lazarus, as governed democratically by the open legislatures of the respective regions, are independent and sovereign. The two regions share citizens, political and military interests, and directly-democratic forms of government. Recognizing these similarities, as well as the friendship between the two regions’ peoples, they hereby enact the following treaty of amity and friendship.

Article One
1. The parties agree to maintain a mutual embassy relationship, onsite and offsite.
2. The parties 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.
3. From time to time, the parties will organize cultural events on the regional offsite forums or RMB of one or the other party.

Article Two
1. If the sovereignty of a party’s legitimate government is threatened, the other party will assist proportionately in coordination with and by the consent of the threatened party.
2. Military activity in another region does not constitute extension of the region’s sovereignty.
3. The parties will collaborate militarily on request when their forces are not otherwise needed.
4. Cooperation may only be requested for operations consistent with Article Three, other agreements entered into by the requested party, and the requested party’s regional law.

Article Three
1. The parties, recognizing the overriding principles of respect for regional sovereignty, diplomatic integrity, and interregional cooperation, pledge to one another to hold faith with all their treaties and behave honorably with their diplomatic partners.

Article Four
1. Any violation of this treaty is grounds for immediate termination.
2. Either party may withdraw from the treaty with seven days’ notice.

Article Five
1. This treaty may be amended by mutual consent, through the normal ratification processes of the two parties.

[St Oz]

Let's put it up for vote, sounds good to me

[Dyr Nasad]

* Dyr Nasad is saddened that the oldest taijituan lazarene was not mentioned

I've already added my input to these Accords and support them in their current form. I also support a vote once the requisite time has passed.

[Cormac]

I support this treaty in principle, but I think 3.1 is ill-advised language that shouldn't be included here or replicated in future treaties. Was this in our recently ratified treaties? If so, it slipped by me, but I firmly believe that diplomatic relations of ours that don't affect Lazarus, or diplomatic relations of Lazarus' that don't affect us, should have no bearing at all on our bilateral alliance.

So, while supporting this in principle, if 3.1 is still in the treaty when it goes to vote, I'll unfortunately have to vote against. I can easily see that language coming back to bite us, or Lazarus, and especially if this language becomes standard in our future treaties as well.

[Lindisfarne]

I support this treaty in principle. It is a logical follow up of the policy we decided on in our relation to Lazarus.

As for §3.1, I understand its meaning, but as Cormac just stated, I think the way it is formulated, it can be misunderstood in the future (when being interpreted under new circumstances) and so I must agree with Cormac on either deleting it or rephrasing it.

[Myroria]

I support this treaty in principle, but I think 3.1 is ill-advised language that shouldn't be included here or replicated in future treaties. Was this in our recently ratified treaties? If so, it slipped by me, but I firmly believe that diplomatic relations of ours that don't affect Lazarus, or diplomatic relations of Lazarus' that don't affect us, should have no bearing at all on our bilateral alliance.

The intent of this section was to punish either region for being jerks in their foreign relations - in my opinion, it is important that Lazarus, or any region we're allied with, is not dishonorable in their foreign relations that don't concern us. It forces both of us to think about the consequences of our actions abroad, and slows us from following a course with another region that may be destructive. "Grounds for termination" does not mean the treaty will be terminated, just that it may if either party is bothered enough by what happened.

That being said, I understand there have been some issues with this clause in Lazarus' legislature as well. I would not be heartbroken if it was removed. If a diplomatic partner was being especially belligerent abroad we could always terminate the treaty under clause 4.1.

Also there were two typoes in article four I corrected - the list skipped from 1 to 3, skipping 2, and I added a closing period to 4.1.

[Delfos]

take the time to make the previous "liberation manifesto" obsolete.

[Myroria]

take the time to make the previous "liberation manifesto" obsolete.

I don't know what you mean by this.

[Khem]

I'll support this as is.

[Delfos]

take the time to make the previous "liberation manifesto" obsolete.

I don't know what you mean by this.

I can't find it but I thought we had a sort-of-treaty with the Underground Government, like we'd support them or something...

[Myroria]

Oh, we pledged support informally but we never concluded a formal treaty.

[Delfos]

Oh, we pledged support informally but we never concluded a formal treaty.

in that case disregard my edit proposal. It's fine, well written and all

there's no way to salvage this treaty, not because of the writting, because of the feeble elevation of random regions that don't mean that much to Taijitu collectively...take away those who are personally invested in that place (deny are you're a traitor baby) and...nothing...silence, maybe some whispers...same old problem. Instead of collective investment there's few self-centered pseudo-politicians making excuses to play around with NS politics. I feel nothing for the place, why would I do anything for it? Why do we need this treaty? Oh yeah, friends, "our very own Funkadelia". I'm ok with that, lets pass this. If they love that place so much, how about investing in improving Taijitu's collective feelings for the place instead of assuming it's a great place because...Funkadelia and some others are personally invested in there? The treaty doesn't need it, but maybe they could visit our IRC channel once a month and we'd do the same to theirs, share our trolling stories...and joke with Myro's beverage poor taste.

I expect this treaty to pass with standing ovation.

[Myroria]

there's no way to salvage this treaty, not because of the writting, because of the feeble elevation of random regions that don't mean that much to Taijitu collectively...take away those who are personally invested in that place (deny are you're a traitor baby) and...nothing...silence, maybe some whispers...same old problem. Instead of collective investment there's few self-centered pseudo-politicians making excuses to play around with NS politics. I feel nothing for the place, why would I do anything for it? Why do we need this treaty? Oh yeah, friends, "our very own Funkadelia". I'm ok with that, lets pass this. If they love that place so much, how about investing in improving Taijitu's collective feelings for the place instead of assuming it's a great place because...Funkadelia and some others are personally invested in there? The treaty doesn't need it, but maybe they could visit our IRC channel once a month and we'd do the same to theirs, share our trolling stories...and joke with Myro's beverage poor taste.

[Eluvatar]

I actually think article 3 serves an important purpose, consistent with our policy on expecting honorable behavior from our friends.

One example of our region stating such expectations in the past is our decision not to open relations with Europeia.

I think it would be entirely necessary for us to question the worth of an alliance with Lazarus if Lazarus were to willfully violate another alliance or invade a diplomatic partner.

[Cormac]

I actually think article 3 serves an important purpose, consistent with our policy on expecting honorable behavior from our friends.

One example of our region stating such expectations in the past is our decision not to open relations with Europeia.

I think it would be entirely necessary for us to question the worth of an alliance with Lazarus if Lazarus were to willfully violate another alliance or invade a diplomatic partner.

There's a huge difference between denying the embassy request of a brand new applicant and cancelling a treaty alliance, so this really is completely different from the Europeia situation.

This looks reasonable under the very specific circumstances you've mentioned, but would be less reasonable under other circumstances. What if Lazarus closes their embassy with The North Pacific, our ally, for what we consider frivolous reasons but Lazarus doesn't? What if Lazarus publishes something insulting about TNP in its media? Those are also potential grounds for invocation of this clause, and I could see it being frivolously invoked in this way either here or in Lazarus. Not even to mention if we keep using this language in future treaties.