[Passed] Repeal Liberate The United Kingdom of Britain

[Delegate Vinage]

Why would we want this resolution repealed? In a region like ours, passwords are only used as a weapon for destruction. In my opinion the inability to set passwords on our region is our best possible protection to future attempts of destruction.

You'll want to speak to Onder/Newation as to why but, basically, it'll allow the region to regrow and redevelop itself. With the ability to place a password lost the region could be recaptured at ease when the current protectors leave - so, although it may seem odd, being able to lock the region will help you in the long term.

We are also afraid that the Security Counsil will not be as helpfull again the next time someone passwords our region. We should keep the resulution for the safety of The United Kingdom of Britain and in respect for the International Community that took action though the Security Council.

Actually.... the Security Council had very little to do with the retaking of The United Kingdom of Britain. The capture itself happened a day before the original Liberation came into effect. Who you should really be thanking is, again, Onder' and the LKE.

[De ultramontanen]

if a region like ours sets a password, we will simply shrink to zero, because no new nations can ever arrive. the only reason we would consider a password is to prevent an invasion. sadly no invaders announce their invasion early enough to allow us to take such measures.
this means that we will never use a password for defensive reasons, and that a password will only be used by occupation armies as a powerfull offensive weapon.
it is not the 'tag-raids' we fear. those are harmless and will restore the region to it's normal state in just a few days. it is the destruction we saw recently that we fear and is effectively prevented by the liberation resolution.


we are very thankfull for the liberation by the LKE, but next time the GGR or any other group may be more carefull with their password. maybe it's the pending resolution that made them nervous? i just want to say that we didn't have to wait the resolution to be passed because of the inability of the GGR to keep the password secret and that is not something i'd like to count on for a future attempt of destruction.

[Zemnaya Svoboda]

if a region like ours sets a password, we will simply shrink to zero, because no new nations can ever arrive. the only reason we would consider a password is to prevent an invasion. sadly no invaders announce their invasion early enough to allow us to take such measures.
this means that we will never use a password for defensive reasons, and that a password will only be used by occupation armies as a powerfull offensive weapon.
it is not the 'tag-raids' we fear. those are harmless and will restore the region to it's normal state in just a few days. it is the destruction we saw recently that we fear and is effectively prevented by the liberation resolution.


we are very thankfull for the liberation by the LKE, but next time the GGR or any other group may be more carefull with their password. maybe it's the pending resolution that made them nervous? i just want to say that we didn't have to wait the resolution to be passed because of the inability of the GGR to keep the password secret and that is not something i'd like to count on for a future attempt of destruction.

"These arguments may hold weight in The North Pacific in reinforcing the opinions of those who have been skeptical of this resolution, my government will present them to them shortly."

[Goobergunchia]

Due to native opposition, I have cast my vote against the repeal.

[Whiskum]

Before people rush to any hasty decisions, the expression of opposition by De ultramontanen should be read in the context of the region's history, the prospects for its future as a functioning region and the wishes of the UKB Government.

Originally, the region which came to exist in 'The United Kingdom of Britain' originally did not reside in that region but was instead founded as 'United Kingdom of Britain' by Lucius Winslow, later known as Emperor Lucius III, my predecessor as Emperor of The LKE and I was the region's initial monarch under the regnal name Alfred. It operated out of this forum. During this time, a change of monarch occurred in June 2009 to Lawrence Cornwallis and again in February 2010 to George, known as Winston Churchill. In January 2010 the region had entered into a pact (The LKE-UKB Unification Treaty) with The LKE, which from October 2008 to October 2009 had been in a full political union with UKB, making it part of the LKE Empire giving The LKE authority over UKB foreign affairs and making the King of UKB a vassal of The LKE Crown. In April 2010, under the Treaty of Realignment, the UKB throne merged with The LKE Crown entirely. Due to Lucius's inactivity, the founder nation died and the region was invaded by the FRA in May 2010 when they saw LKE units enter the region (presuming they were raiding it apparently), only for the founder nation to be revived with an LKE member left with the password in the case of an emergency and the FRA units ejected.

Unfortunately, due to Lucius's return to inactivity, the UKB founder died again and in September 2010 Avakael refounded the region. Later, The LKE attempted diplomatic efforts to obtain the return of the region but a group of former UKB residents (led by Keiren Scott, subsequently known as William Mountbatten-Windsor and now as William VI of UKB) created the region 'The United Kingdom of Britain' (to reiterate, the region now in issue, TUKB). They asserted independence from The LKE. These claims of independence were renounced in April 2011 (the link to a copy of a posted text is here, but I included a copy as a spoiler):

April 21st 2011 Agreement

We of United Kingdom of Britain recognize that Lucius was our King from April 13th, 2010 to December 30th, 2010 and after him, Onder Kelkia from then to now. We recognize that we were a colony of Land of Kings and Emperors during this time. It is upon the issue of this statement that the United Kingdom of Britain agrees to the previous statements and that we will never become a member of the Founderless Region's Alliance nor will we ever declare a state of war on the Land of Kings and Emperors. We, the people and government of the colony of the United Kingdom of Britain agree to this upon the expectation that our independence is granted by His Supreme Majesty Onder Kelkia. We also reject the recognition of the 'Pretender Kings' during that period, and will continue to do so under the Agreement.

user posted image
Charles Beckett

user posted image
Alex Beckett aka Seneca

user posted image
Keiren W. M. Scott - UKB Envoy to the LKE

The LKE subsequently granted the properly requested independence to UKB (again I include a spoiler with the statement, in this instance, from the time):

There has been a dispute over the United Kingdom of Britain in this region since October 2009, with UKB becoming an LKE dominion on 13th April 2010 provoking controversy from Cornwallis and Churchill, with trouble being caused by UKB rebels to this day. As the UKB rebels have now unconditionally recognised the Imperial Crown from 13th April 2010 to now, I am inclined to peacefully resolve this dispute, which was not helped by the FRA invading UKB in May 2010, which we shall remain at war with the FRA over. Subject to three conditions, I hereby command United Kingdom of Britain to be seceded from the Empire and thus it is now independent of the Imperial Crown. It must look to its own defences (subject to the Kelkia Doctrine).

These conditions are that the peoples of "The UKB" and their associates continue to recognise the Imperial Crown having reigned, and not any pretender kings, between 13th April 2010, that they do not go to war with the LKE and that they do not join the FRA, all of which are justified in light of the region's history. In a personal capacity, I hereby abdicate the throne of UKB (but naturally not the Imperial Crown) to Charles Beckett. Having been the UKB's first King (also in a personal capacity) between October 2008 and June 2009, I wish the region well. However, if the conditions are broken, I warn that so is UKB's independence. I am pleased we have finally put an end to this conflict.'

The newly legitimate UKB government was residing in the region 'The United Kingdom of Britain' (the region now in issue) at the time of independence because Avakael was still holding on to the original UKB region. This is why TUKB is considered to be former LKE colonial territory. Several TUKB kings passed since then. Eventually, Keiren Scott/now William VI was on the throne but after he posted threatening content on another region's regional message board, the founder nation of TUKB, Templar nations (his nation), was deleted by the NationStates moderators. Subsequently, some danger emerged to the region and you can read the concern which my native nation posted in TUKB at the time when forces (later established to be UDL) entered the region. After that the UKB Government changed kings too many times and went round several regions, including 'The United Kingdoms of Britain', where they took refuge.

Yet, in February 2012, Avakael turned over the founder nation of the original 'United Kingdom of Britain' to the legitimate UKB monarch (Keiren Scott/William VI once again). Therefore, the UKB native nations, including my own, returned there from the regions we had been nomadically migrating to and from. However, after the initial shift out of TUKB, some of the UKB native nations (including Helertia, whose nation NS History will confirm to have been the original UKB region's Delegate going back to my original reign as Alfred) which weren't on the forums and did not follow events, remained resident in TUKB. The region became dormant. The recent invasion by GGR then took place. GGR forces have now been removed by The LKE and there are currently two such native nations left in the region. The region, while founderless, will remain under constant threat of invasion by forces such as GGR and cannot hope to sustain an active community.

TUKB was founded as property of what, after The LKE's grant of independence in April 2011, became the legitimate UKB Government because the original UKB region was unavailable. It is now available. It makes no sense to allow an insecure community to be attacked in TUKB, as a stain on UKB and on The LKE, when nations can now be directed to a perfectly secure region where UKB can flourish. Consequently, The LKE and UKB governments have decided to close TUKB down, redirecting all traffic to the original UKB region. This decision, approved by the legitimate UKB Government, is the correct decision for UKB's future. The repeal of the liberation resolution should aid in this purpose.

[Goobergunchia]

TUKB was founded as property of what, after The LKE's grant of independence in April 2011, became the legitimate UKB Government because the original UKB region was unavailable. It is now available. It makes no sense to allow an insecure community to be attacked in TUKB, as a stain on UKB and on The LKE, when nations can now be directed to a perfectly secure region where UKB can flourish. Consequently, The LKE and UKB governments have decided to close TUKB down, redirecting all traffic to the original UKB region. This decision, approved by the legitimate UKB Government, is the correct decision for UKB's future. The repeal of the liberation resolution should aid in this purpose.

So you want the resolution repealed so you can empty the region? Thank you for confirming that my decision to vote against the repeal was correct.

(And no, I don't recognize LKE extraterritorial claims.)

[Newation]

TUKB was founded as property of what, after The LKE's grant of independence in April 2011, became the legitimate UKB Government because the original UKB region was unavailable. It is now available. It makes no sense to allow an insecure community to be attacked in TUKB, as a stain on UKB and on The LKE, when nations can now be directed to a perfectly secure region where UKB can flourish. Consequently, The LKE and UKB governments have decided to close TUKB down, redirecting all traffic to the original UKB region. This decision, approved by the legitimate UKB Government, is the correct decision for UKB's future. The repeal of the liberation resolution should aid in this purpose.

So you want the resolution repealed so you can empty the region? Thank you for confirming that my decision to vote against the repeal was correct.

(And no, I don't recognize LKE extraterritorial claims.)

We have no intention of removing any natives from the region, hence exactly why the restoration of a pasword is an easier method of providing security. We want the resolution repealed so it can be secured so the region that did exist can be sustained where it previously existed rather than invaded as TUKB.

The LKE makes no claim to have current sovereignty of TUKB and the claims we had over UKB previousy are legitimate and fully recognised. We do claim to have obligations to it, as an ally and under the Kelkia Doctrine, but that is entirely different.

We are respecting the sovereignty of the UKB people which we granted independence to; the people which controlled the founder nation of TUKB before it was deleted and are now resident in UKB. Those are two fundamentally different things.

I am as much a native of UKB, of which TUKB was created as a representation of, as either of the two nations left in TUKB were: indeed I spent a a significant amount of resident within TUKB itself, as the record shows, before the forum community moved, leaving some nations behind. The legitimate government has taken a decision and have entrusted it toThe LKE because it is a current ally of TUKB:

Treaty of Renewed Friendship (9 December 2011)

Preamble:

We, the governments of the regions of The United Kingdom of Britain [emboldened for this post] hereafter referred to as UKB, and The Land of Kings and Emperors, hereafter referred to as the LKE, hereby do enter into the following alliance in order to cement the relationship between our two regions. We enter into this alliance in the spirit of friendship and with the desire to reaffirm the old ties that these two regions once enjoyed.

Article 1 - Non-Aggression against Signatories
1. No Signatory shall conduct military operations against another Signatory Region.
2. No Signatory shall directly or indirectly support military operations against another Signatory Region.

Article 2 - Defence of Signatories Under Attack
1. Where any Signatory Region has had military action conducted against it, then the other Signatory that is aware of that action must provide as much military support as it can provide without resulting in a significant threat to its own military security, and will do everything possible to mobilise that support.
2. A Signatory is aware of military action when it has been informed on its forums or on its Regional Message Board, or when it has noticed the action itself.
3. Paragraph 1 does not apply for a Signatory under Paragraph 2 when the military action in question is conducted by an ally of that Signatory.
4. For the purposes of this Article, an ally of a Signatory is a region with a Treaty with a Signatory that provides positive material benefit to a Signatory going beyond non-aggression. Each Signatory must inform the other Signatory of their allies.

Article 3 - Counterattack
1. Where a Signatory Region has had military action conducted against it by any other region or organisation, the other Signatory will provide as much military support as can be given for the purposes of any counterattack that the Signatory may wish to undertake, without causing a significant threat to its own military security.
2. In order Paragraph 1 to apply, the Signatory in question must have informed the other Signatories of its intention to make a counterattack within one month of the last military action, and in any case does not apply if two months have passed since the last military action.
3. Paragraph 1 does not apply for a Signatory required to provide military support under that Paragraph when the military action in question is conducted against an ally of that Signatory.
4. For the purposes of this Article, an ally of a Signatory is a region with a Treaty with a Signatory that provides positive material benefit to a Signatory going beyond non-aggression. Each Signatory must inform the other Signatory of their allies.

Article 4 - Other Military Support
In situations that do not fall elsewhere under this Part, each Signatory will endeavour to provide military support to the other Signatory when requested by that other Signatory, and where it is consistent with their own policies.

Article 5 - Non-Transmission of Information to Non-Allies
1. A Signatory may not pass on any information that concerns the military or security of the other Signatory to any party, unless the Signatory that the information concerns gives its consent.
2. Paragraph 1 applies to, but is not limited to, information about military operations and intelligence operations.
3. A Signatory may not pass on any information provided by the other Signatory unless that information is already in the public domain or if the Signatory providing the information gives its consent.

Article 6 - Intelligence Requests
Each Signatory will endeavour to provide information to the other Signatory when requested to do so by that other Signatory, when it is within their power to provide it, and where it is consistent with their own policies to do so and where it is consistent with Invisionfree and Zetaboards terms of service.

Article 7 - Training Exercises
Signatories will endeavour to undertake military training exercises together, including exercises in Warzones, for which they will use as much of their military as they can reasonably mobilise.

Article 8 - Diplomacy and Support
1. Each Signatory will endeavour to provide diplomatic support to the other Signatory where it is possible for them to do so while being consistent with their own policies.
2. Neither signatory will engage in diplomatic relations with a defender organisation and member regions of a defender organisation without the consent of the other signatory. Doing so shall end in the immediate termination of diplomatic relations.

Article 9 - Cultural Activities
1. Each signatory will endeavour, where appropriate and/or possible to engage in social and cultural activities with the other signatory. This can include, but is not limited to, festivals, competitions and university sharing events.
2. To celebrate the history of both signatories, each signatory shall endeavour to host a conference every two months on their respective forums where discussions of culture and advancing the relationship between both signatories will take place.

Article 10 - Embassies and ambassadors
Each signatory shall prepare a designated embassy for the other signatory on their forums and shall provide a representative from their region who will act as an ambassador from their particular signatory region. Each signatory will endeavour to keep the other up-to-date on their regional affairs.
Each ambassador shall behave in a respectable manner towards the signatory region. This includes, but is not limited to, the obeying of regional laws where it is applicable and following any ambassadorial protocol that the signatory region has already in place.
Either signatory region may request that the ambassador sent to them by the other signatory be replaced if it is deemed that the above clause has not been followed appropriately by that individual.

Article 11 - Recognitions
Upon signing of this treaty, the region of UKB recognises the constitutional LKE government and other regional institutions as legitimate.
Upon the signing of this treaty, the region of The Land of Kings and Emperors hereby recognises the constitutional UKB government and other regional institutions as legitimate.

Article 12 - Termination of Diplomatic Relations
Either signatory may, at any time terminate diplomatic relations with the other. Termination of diplomatic relations nullifies this treaty and all agreements within after a two day period, starting from the time when the termination is announced.
Such announcements must be made on the forums of the other signatory.

Article 13 - Definitions
For the purposes of this Treaty, the following definitions shall apply:
(i) Signatories: The governments of the regions the LKE and UKB, which have signed this Treaty.
(ii) Signatory Region: A Region whose government has signed this Treaty, or whose foreign policy is legally subordinated to such a region either by statute or by treaty, and with other Signatory having been informed of that status.
(iii) Military action: Attempting to change the WA Delegacy of a region other than by a legal process of that region.
(iv) Military support: Endorsing a nation that is the nominated WA Delegate of the supported Signatory, whether in a Signatory Region or elsewhere, on any terms that may be set by the supported Signatory.
(v) Endeavour: This has the effect of making a provision non-binding on the Signatories, while imposing a duty to act in good faith in relation to the provision.
(vi) Intelligence information: This refers to any information gathered on intelligence missions either within a signatory region or in another region by a member of a signatory region working for that regions intelligence department or similar organisation. Information can refer to individuals, groups
(viii) Cultural activities: Any activities which do not fall under military activity, for example university exchanges or recruitment competitions.

What possible sense does it make to operate an insecure founderless region, contrary to the wishes of its legitimate government, created to substitute for its original founded region when that secure founded region is once again available?

[Goobergunchia]

Oooookay. What exactly are you planning on doing to the NationStates region (not the governmental construct, not "United Kingdom of Region", but the actual in-game region) "The United Kingdom of Britain"?

[Whiskum]

Oooookay. What exactly are you planning on doing to the NationStates region (not the governmental construct, not "United Kingdom of Region", but the actual in-game region) "The United Kingdom of Britain"?

As stated, and following discussions with the King of UKB in the last day, we plan to use a password to secure the region. We then intend to keep the WFE and flag as they are now, with the link to the original UKB there (possibly making the re-direct clearer and possibly removing the red text at the end about no entry once the password is up). The two nations resident prior to GGR's invasion will be permitted to stay. Beyond that, in terms of withdrawing our forces, depends on the circumstances necessary to implement the above measures, but we we will not proclaim TUKB to be an LKE colony or do anything to assert LKE sovereignty over the region. Our forces in the region, aided by many members of the inter-regional community, are present as allies and protectors.

[Goobergunchia]

Got it. Thanks for the clarification.

[Unibot II]

We are also afraid that the Security Counsil will not be as helpfull again the next time someone passwords our region. We should keep the resulution for the safety of The United Kingdom of Britain and in respect for the International Community that took action though the Security Council.

Actually.... the Security Council had very little to do with the retaking of The United Kingdom of Britain. The capture itself happened a day before the original Liberation came into effect. Who you should really be thanking is, again, Onder' and the LKE.

Not exactly, a Security Council liberation put pressure on GGR to get more people to support them in the region; otherwise they wouldn't have needed to trust the password with anyone or move nations into the region for people to use as support. Same reason why Belgium was liberated before the password was removed; the liberation forced Macedon's hand to be vulnerable to reconnaissance and infiltration.

[New Heathera]

Is there any good reason NOT to repeal liberation? The region is in the hands of defenders, and I am sure they will hand control back to natives once the issue of preventing a second raid is handled.

[Free South Califas]

The Seventh Federal Assembly of the Free Communities and Economies of South Califas passed 7FA WASC British Liberation Reinforcement Act today, to wit;

The Seventh Federal Assembly, cognizant of its roots in the people's expropriation of false private claims,

RECOGNIZING the antidemocratic praxis inherent in regal claims to territory,

REAFFIRMING the mandate of the Property Rights Constitution to refuse recognition to all private claims beyond that minimum which is required for an individualist to secure a comfortable and peaceful lifestyle for oneself and one's family, be they domestic or foreign,

RECOGNIZING FURTHER that the British issue involves multiple regal empires which have colluded in a shameful land grab,

FEARING the military domination of TUKB which could result from a WASC lieration repeal at this time,

HAVING HEARD lke's reassurance to that effect loud and clear,

SUPPORTING the recent democratization of the region,

OFFERING solidarity to the people of De ultramontanen and other peoples in resistance to imperial domination, domestic and foreign,

NOTING that De ultramontanen is ruled by an iron fist by a despicable tinpot airhead who will surely be first against the wall when its inevitable revolution comes;

FURTHER REAFFIRMS the mandate of 1FA International Private Claims Act to take every WASC voting opportunity to increase & support freedom in a region or international community,

RECOGNIZING that it is clearly mandated to vote on this issue by domestic legislation,

RELUCTANTLY INTERPRETING the mandate of 'IPCA' as requiring its support for the political opposition spearheaded by the fascistic, repressive, thoroughly dishonorable delegation of De ultramontanen,

FAVORING their opinion as weighed against the disgraceful lke, their would-be dominators with open contempt for democracy and liberty, noted invaders who should be trusted no further than this august body can be thrown,

HEREBY MANDATES that the Security Council Detachment of the 7FA World Assembly Delegation vote AGAINST this resolution, subject to instant recall if they disobey the people's wishes on this matter, in accord with the Constitution Regarding Freedom of Association.

[Wewak]

The proposal to Liberate United Kingdom of Great Britain has been brought before this WA and I voted against it inorder for the issues to be properly deliberated and re-submitted for voting. The mere removal of block to accessing passwords for refounding nation states concerned does not mean the issues concerning proposal to Liberate the United Kingdom of Great Britain has been resovled. Let us allow this proposal to stand for proper consideration and resolution. For now I will vote Against this resolution as per my justification abovemention. In return for turning this proposal down, I will remove my vote against the Foreign Marriage Recognition Act as I would remain neutral in issues of marriage which depends on individuals' consent and their nation states' practices subject to their own recognized laws.

[Delegate Vinage]

Thank you my fellow ambassadors for seeing to this passing with some relative ease. The region on The United Kingdom of Britain can now look to rebuilding itself without fear of invaders exploiting the lack of a password.

[Socialist Republic of Hayate]

We must set free the United Kingdom

[Severisen]

It passed, but has not been enacted yet. Does it take until the following update to take effect?

[Sedgistan]

Liberation repeals have to be manually applied by GMs. Sorted.

[Fischistan]

Liberation repeals have to be manually applied by GMs. Sorted.

Huh, I never knew that. Is there a special reason that they are different than C&C's?