As it stands now, the Collosean Federation refuses to comply.
Can you please be more clear; does this apply to civilians only or civilians AND combatants? During times of war, we would not sit well with an organization healing and protecting the enemy combatants so that they could return to the field to fight us and kill more of our own people.
Even if this only applied to civilians, we still have a problem with this line:
"* there should be fire seize after intense fighting for a couple of hours to let the White Hearts evacuate the dead."
We refuse to allow the enemy the chance to regroup during a battle. Battles never last forever, the White Hearts could enter AFTER it's over, but not during.
A problem we forsee is that in asymetrical warfare, where insurgents and rebels don't where uniforms and mesh with the civilian population, enemy combatants could be mistaken for a civilians. This however is something we could look over, if the other complaint is responded to.
- Philonexus II, Foreign Minister of the Collosean Federation.
Any person, civilian or combatant, islamic or catholic, black or white, we don't care, any person injured in reach of we can help will be offered the White Heart help. Note that line you referenced is a suggestion, "*there
should be", so the insurgent matter is more than answered, if we can help them sure, why not. They are people like you and me. This is a respect of neutrality, if we enter the battlefield to evacuate the wounded and dead we hope we don't get shot at, and all security shall be offered to the wounded and dead. In the case you present, we would evacuate them to an hospital ship or White Heart campaign area, we don't send anyone back, if they are fully healed they will be discharged, if they are dead they will be preserved and the families will be contacted. If you respect human lives and humanitarian help, there shouldn't be any problem with this treaty.
In case of disrespect of the White Hearts and any get killed in combat, the killer in question will be charged with assassination of a citizen in humanitarian relief, and soldier or army will have to face the justice of the nationality of the dead one. But be sure there won't be any campaign while the fight lasts, it's a matter of respect, if you don't respect it's your problem.
ooc: off track? the 1st post in the convention post, there will be more issues to attend.
ic: President of New Delfos: "Launching an issue: Rules of Engagement. Giving a sequence tot he Safe Waters Treaty, that only apply to waters, we are hoping we can extend it to land and air, specially air where there was an incident few years ago with delfian jets needing of an emergency landing and were both destroyed before reaching an airfield. I would like to know who are the nations interested in a ROE treaty to prevent this incidents to happen. Also would like to know anyone's opinion, even the ones against it, to make sure we can get a nice ROE treaty with most of the people agreeing on. Shall we start to draft any points?
-Any individual/small number of military/civilian vessel(s), in distress shall be not stricken, aid shall be given or refused, unless the vessel in question doesn't support alternatives and has to land on the closest available airfield.