The Case for Multilateral Treaties

[Cerian Quilor]

So if Queen Elizabeth II makes predjucidial remarks about President Cheeto McTangerine, the US should end its alliance with the UK?

Careful there. While the rule is mostly used in NationStates General, political nicknaming (this includes disparaging nicknames for politicians) is against the rules.

Ergo, knock it off.

The Blaatschapen - Nationstates Moderator

I didn't know that was against the rules. My apologies.

[Solorni]

Wait, even if it's RL politicians and not NS politicians?

[Onderkelkia]

I'm sorry, but doesn't the Balderan Constitution reserve actual power for the Statsminister?

The Statsminister is Onder for christ's sake, CQ.

Does Onder disagree with the Queen of Balder's statement on the South Pacific? I think we all can guess the answer to that one but I'm open to being surprised.

The Queen was expressing a personal opinion. As she has explained, she has no authority over the conduct of Balder's foreign policy.

In ordinary circumstances, it is appropriate for a region's executive officials to refrain from publicly criticising another region with which they are allied (a standard, incidentally, which Glen-Rhodes often failed to observe while serving as Foreign Minister of The South Pacific). However, the Queen is not an executive official in Balder. She has no more authority over foreign affairs than any other member. Beyond safeguarding the Delegacy, her role is largely ceremonial. In addition, while the treaty remains in legal force, there has evidently been a change in the expected etiquette - as a consequence of the Cabinet of The South Pacific issuing a statement last year attacking Balder and, without following the lawful process, purporting to terminate our treaty. With the ongoing situation created by that statement, there are inevitably different expectations; you cannot publicly attack a region and expect all of their members to happily observe the same standards of cordial communications as might have otherwise have been expected. If The South Pacific wishes to repair that situation, I am sure that we could have have a more positive relationship. As it is, we are still pending a mutual resolution of the matter.

[The Blaatschapen]

Wait, even if it's RL politicians and not NS politicians?

Yes.

Well, the rule is mostly in place since nicknames were being used to bait other players.

Careful there. While the rule is mostly used in NationStates General, political nicknaming (this includes disparaging nicknames for politicians) is against the rules.

Ergo, knock it off.

The Blaatschapen - Nationstates Moderator

I didn't know that was against the rules. My apologies.

It's alright, I figured that since you're returning to the forums after a long while, the more subtle rules might have been forgotten. Hence why I only yelled.

[Consular]

Normally I'd be inclined to agree with Unibot really -- A ceremonial head of state, even devoid of actual control over foreign policy, still has considerable influence and therefore a responsibility to maybe not blatantly undermine allies in public.

However like Onder said, TSP hasn't got a stellar record in that area (in fact their record of public behaviour towards allies is imo quite atrocious), so I don't really think they can expect completely cordial treatment. Rachel isn't being dogged for making those comments because you pretty much single handedly destroyed any expectations of diplomacy when dealing with TSP, G-R.

[Cormactopia Prime]

However like Onder said, TSP hasn't got a stellar record in that area (in fact their record of public behaviour towards allies is imo quite atrocious), so I don't really think they can expect completely cordial treatment. Rachel isn't being dogged for making those comments because you pretty much single handedly destroyed any expectations of diplomacy when dealing with TSP, G-R.

I mean, to be clear, if Rach had been rude to Glen-Rhodes it would be pretty understandable, but she took swipes at the South Pacific as a regional community. Glen-Rhodes isn't even in the Cabinet at the moment. "Glen-Rhodes was rude when he was Minister of Foreign Affairs" can only go so far as an excuse, when he is no longer Minister of Foreign Affairs and yet antagonism from the Queen of Balder not simply toward Glen-Rhodes but toward the entire community of the South Pacific persists, even while Balder insists upon continuing the farce that Balder and the South Pacific are allies.

One wonders, if the Queen of Balder can't be civil toward the South Pacific as a community and if the government of Balder is going to back up her incivility, why Balder insists upon keeping the treaty alliance with the South Pacific. Is it just about sticking it to Glen-Rhodes by keeping the treaty on the books at this point? Obviously Balder finds nothing of any value in the alliance. Maybe it's time to do the mature thing and terminate the treaty instead of engaging in this petty back-and-forth and pretending to be allies throughout the public display of hostility.

[Unibot III]

Maturity? Christ, that would be novel.

[Solorni]

Despite abusing his admin position on multiple occasions, Glen-Rhodes remains an admin. This was despite his admin abuses being the leading cause of Hileville taking extra-judiciary measures to clean up the region. Yet, he is still an admin in the region and he is listed in the region as a "World Assembly Adviser". So it's not like his destabilizing influence has been removed. For me, it is about striking a balance between the short term goals and the more long term in promoting a stable and prosperous TSP. So the reason, that I think Balder insists on continuing the treaty is in the long term hope that the region will continue to improve and that the relations between Balder and TSP will improve.

As I stated earlier, there are signs that The South Pacific continues to improve. The South Pacific has taken note of Balder's changes and adopted many of them, putting them in the same boat as Osiris who also sought to emulate us. At the very least, TSP following our model of democratic principles puts them in the same ideological boat as us. There are many awkward alliances in the real world and it is my hope that TSP continues to improve and that one day the alliance does become more firm and real again. As well as much less awkward. Like Balder, the USA also has alliances with allies that it must constantly strive to balance its approach to. If those alliances can hold then I am sure that Balder and TSP can mend their ties, particularly given both regions similar structure and ideology.

[Onderkelkia]

I mean, to be clear, if Rach had been rude to Glen-Rhodes it would be pretty understandable, but she took swipes at the South Pacific as a regional community. Glen-Rhodes isn't even in the Cabinet at the moment. "Glen-Rhodes was rude when he was Minister of Foreign Affairs" can only go so far as an excuse, when he is no longer Minister of Foreign Affairs and yet antagonism from the Queen of Balder not simply toward Glen-Rhodes but toward the entire community of the South Pacific persists, even while Balder insists upon continuing the farce that Balder and the South Pacific are allies.

One wonders, if the Queen of Balder can't be civil toward the South Pacific as a community and if the government of Balder is going to back up her incivility, why Balder insists upon keeping the treaty alliance with the South Pacific. Is it just about sticking it to Glen-Rhodes by keeping the treaty on the books at this point? Obviously Balder finds nothing of any value in the alliance. Maybe it's time to do the mature thing and terminate the treaty instead of engaging in this petty back-and-forth and pretending to be allies throughout the public display of hostility.

If you read my post, you will see that the reference to Glen-Rhodes's habit of making comments criticsing TSP allies was not advanced by Balder "as an excuse" for anything. That said, we disagree with the notion that the slate is wiped clean when there is a change in occupant of the Foreign Ministry. The arguments I advanced were firstly that the Queen is not an executive official of Balder and so her comments do not represent the position of the Government, and secondly that the statement of the Cabinet of The South Pacific - attacking Balder publicly - transformed the expected etiquette.

Balder does not "inist upon continuing" anything - acknowledging that the treaty remains in legal force does not mean we regard it as necessary for us. The initiative in seeking to terminate the treaty has come entirely from within The South Pacific, so the onus is really on them to resolve the mess created by their statement falsely purporting to terminate the alliance. It is not the job of Balder to give effect to the wishes of a faction within The South Pacific that relations should be destroyed. Balder believes that there might be potential for a more positive relationship in the future - though that will depend on whether The South Pacific is prepared to engage constructively and professionally, rather than mirroring the approach exhibited by their earlier statement.

[Roavin]

As I stated earlier, there are signs that The South Pacific continues to improve. The South Pacific has taken note of Balder's changes and adopted many of them, putting them in the same boat as Osiris who also sought to emulate us. At the very least, TSP following our model of democratic principles puts them in the same ideological boat as us. There are many awkward alliances in the real world and it is my hope that TSP continues to improve and that one day the alliance does become more firm and real again. As well as much less awkward. Like Balder, the USA also has alliances with allies that it must constantly strive to balance its approach to. If those alliances can hold then I am sure that Balder and TSP can mend their ties, particularly given both regions similar structure and ideology.

I can assure you that Balder is not the place that the South Pacific has been trying to emulate with the continuous improvements we have been making in the past year. One of the reasons - We couldn't even see your laws until a few days ago!

[Solorni]

As I stated earlier, there are signs that The South Pacific continues to improve. The South Pacific has taken note of Balder's changes and adopted many of them, putting them in the same boat as Osiris who also sought to emulate us. At the very least, TSP following our model of democratic principles puts them in the same ideological boat as us. There are many awkward alliances in the real world and it is my hope that TSP continues to improve and that one day the alliance does become more firm and real again. As well as much less awkward. Like Balder, the USA also has alliances with allies that it must constantly strive to balance its approach to. If those alliances can hold then I am sure that Balder and TSP can mend their ties, particularly given both regions similar structure and ideology.

I can assure you that Balder is not the place that the South Pacific has been trying to emulate with the continuous improvements we have been making in the past year. One of the reasons - We couldn't even see your laws until a few days ago!

Our changes have been quite public and well known. As well anyone who registered for the Balder forums could see the laws. But as they say "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". So I'm flattered that TSP has striven to copy Balder's system.

[Roavin]

I can assure you that Balder is not the place that the South Pacific has been trying to emulate with the continuous improvements we have been making in the past year. One of the reasons - We couldn't even see your laws until a few days ago!

Our changes have been quite public and well known. As well anyone who registered for the Balder forums could see the laws. But as they say "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". So I'm flattered that TSP has striven to copy Balder's system.

If it makes you feel better to think that way - by all means. But since we're in public here, I do have to point out that the entire subforum of our Great Council in 2016 is available publicly without registration, and a quick search (with the convenient search field at the bottom) reveals that there is exactly one mention of Balder, which relates to an idea on how to conduct in-game votes that wasn't even implemented. Doesn't look like TSP copying Balder to me.

[Solorni]

Our changes have been quite public and well known. As well anyone who registered for the Balder forums could see the laws. But as they say "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". So I'm flattered that TSP has striven to copy Balder's system.

If it makes you feel better to think that way - by all means. But since we're in public here, I do have to point out that the entire subforum of our Great Council in 2016 is available publicly without registration, and a quick search (with the convenient search field at the bottom) reveals that there is exactly one mention of Balder, which relates to an idea on how to conduct in-game votes that wasn't even implemented. Doesn't look like TSP copying Balder to me.

Balder's changes were completed in November 2015. Ironically, the system for in-game votes in Balder also was not implemented in Balder itself. So even if TSP did not copy Balder directly, it reached the exact sort of conclusions and system that we did a year earlier

[Tsunamy]

There's not need to fight over who/what/if TSP was emulating anyone.

Normally I'd be inclined to agree with Unibot really -- A ceremonial head of state, even devoid of actual control over foreign policy, still has considerable influence and therefore a responsibility to maybe not blatantly undermine allies in public.

However like Onder said, TSP hasn't got a stellar record in that area (in fact their record of public behaviour towards allies is imo quite atrocious), so I don't really think they can expect completely cordial treatment. Rachel isn't being dogged for making those comments because you pretty much single handedly destroyed any expectations of diplomacy when dealing with TSP, G-R.

Can you please expand upon this point? Specific examples would be useful seeing that I don't entangle myself here much.

[Glen-Rhodes]

The Statsminister is Onder for christ's sake, CQ.

Does Onder disagree with the Queen of Balder's statement on the South Pacific? I think we all can guess the answer to that one but I'm open to being surprised.

The Queen was expressing a personal opinion. As she has explained, she has no authority over the conduct of Balder's foreign policy.

And yet you've marched right on in whenever I spoke any kind of word against Balder, TNI, or Euro, when I never held any office at all. (I wasn't MoFA from August 2015-June 2016!) Rach is now saying that I should be purged from TSP, and yet you, her, and so many others have lambasted anybody who wouldn't speak out against Laz purging imperialists. This coming after her support of Hileville's coup, simply because she doesn't like me, of course.

It's hypocrisy all around. But, really, nothing I shouldn't expect. You've all been like this for years. You really like to pride yourself on being professional, but really Balder is one of the least professional GCRs in the game. That you won't tell your own monarch it's inappropriate to advocate purges of another GCR's forum administrator, and then call the entire region systemically corrupt, is just the latest in a long string of unprofessional behavior coming from Balder.

However like Onder said, TSP hasn't got a stellar record in that area (in fact their record of public behaviour towards allies is imo quite atrocious), so I don't really think they can expect completely cordial treatment. Rachel isn't being dogged for making those comments because you pretty much single handedly destroyed any expectations of diplomacy when dealing with TSP, G-R.

In my 18 month tenure as MoFA, I was respectful to all of TSP's true allies. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Cerian Quilor]

Lovely convenient little mental construct for you, the idea of "true allies". Really makes it easy for you.

[Solorni]

I should note that I do not think that Glen-Rhodes should be purged, simply that he should have been removed as an admin for his admin abuses and corruption a long time ago. I do like Glen-Rhodes the person, but the fact that he has chosen to role-play as such a figure is disheartening. He had the chance to make things right after Hileville felt he was forced to coup the region because of GR's misdeeds, but instead focused on putting individual gain above the region.

I am perfectly content with Glen-Rhodes being a citizen in The South Pacific. But personally, I would not tolerate admin abuse and such corruption from my admins and neither would most other developed regions. It speaks volumes that even Unibot has not defended GR in this thread.

[Cormactopia Prime]

Lovely convenient little mental construct for you, the idea of "true allies". Really makes it easy for you.

It's safe to say that a true ally doesn't attack their ally and subtly hint that the reason they're clinging to the alliance is that they're holding out for regime change and purges.

Balder has demonstrated that it can be a solid ally to other regions, but it has not demonstrated such to the South Pacific, and certainly is demonstrating the opposite now.

[Solorni]

It should be noted that I have not advocated for any regime change having stated that I like it that TSP has emulated Balder's system and that I have also certainly not advocated for purges. Particularly when Balder itself has never had a purge and that we've only banned the worst of the worst.

[Kringalia]

The South Pacific has taken note of Balder's changes and adopted many of them, putting them in the same boat as Osiris who also sought to emulate us. At the very least, TSP following our model of democratic principles puts them in the same ideological boat as us.

Like I already said once:

In all fairness, what TSP did was return to its original system, the one adopted in 2003 and reformed in 2010 (?).

The South Pacific has not in any way copied anything that anyone is doing in Balder; it returned to a system that it first established in 2003, long before Balder was even a thought in Max Barry's mind.

[Glen-Rhodes]

Lovely convenient little mental construct for you, the idea of "true allies". Really makes it easy for you.

Well, let's see:

TNI told us if we allied with defenders, and didn't raid more than we defended, they would have a big problem with it. Not a position worth respecting. We allied with TRR & Lazarus, so that alliance died. Good riddance-- Onder disrespected Geomania when he ran our military, and treated TSP as a junior partner in the alliance. It wasn't just me that felt that way. TSP has been better off without that ball and chain holding us down.

Balder is basically controlled by former UIAF imperialists, so that relationship was hostile the moment I was elected. It was an inactive alliance since its ratification, so whatever, I mostly just put it on the back burner. Should've been dissolved a long time ago. Rach then supported Hileville's coup, which only solidified the fact that Balder wasn't a real ally. She's still supporting it, repeating the lies Hileville & Imki used to justify their powergrab. That's the behavior of a real ally?

Euro, though few in TSP like to admit it, schemed to undermine our alliances with TRR & Lazarus with the asinine behavior over the Independence Conference and the Regional Sovereignty Conference. It was tacitly admitted by Euro at the time that this scheme was being pushed by their imperialist allies. Euro threatened TSP that they "[wouldn't] be held responsible for the actions of some of [their] allies" if TSP didn't snub our other alliances and disavow the Regional Sovereignty Conference.

Those aren't real alliances. Those are region that were hostile against a TSP that wasn't firmly in the Independent-imperialist sphere. Regions that sought to undermine TSP's foreign affairs at every available opportunity. There's a reason I didn't respect them, and it's because they didn't respect TSP. They only liked TSP when its FA was controlled by Belschaft, and any attempt to separate ourselves from the Independent-imperialist sphere led that trifecta of "allies" to behave more like enemies.

This is all ancient history. It's been re-litigated for the past 3 years. Can't we just admit by now that an "independent" TSP was never a thing, and the Independent-imperialist bloc is simply anti-defender? All of this is pretty easy to understand once you realize that. A defender-leaning TSP just won't be on good terms with the opposing sphere of Gameplay.

[Canton Empire]

What's even the point of alliances? Most of the GCRs are pretty stable. Most.

[Unibot III]

In all fairness, what TSP did was return to its original system, the one adopted in 2003 and reformed in 2010 (?).

The South Pacific has not in any way copied anything that anyone is doing in Balder; it returned to a system that it first established in 2003, long before Balder was even a thought in Max Barry's mind.

Or the Blackshear Constitution in TNP (2004-5). Certainly I think it's silly to say TSP is "copying" Balder. And I'm not sure why commentators are surprised by Queen Rachel's behaviour in this thread; Balder has always been Government by Regina George for as long as I can remember. It's precisely that diplomatic instability for foreign democratic actors that makes Balder an uneasy choice of treatied ally without a strong imperialist/invader association.

And I love that after this little tirade...

Both have had multiple coups in recent years and each actually had a communist dictator take charge. The corruption in TSP was so bad at one point that there was a popular coup to get rid of it. Many of those who were widely held to be responsible for that corruption are still in the region and still doing what most developed regions would consider 'shady'.

... the Queen made her region's treaties available publicly, so that we could see for ourselves that Balder maintains treaties with the only major region that could have held a claim to being a communist dictatorship after the demise of the PRL. Presumably because of their invader connections. *rubs the sleep out of his eyes with withering, tortured incredulity*

This is all ancient history. It's been re-litigated for the past 3 years. Can't we just admit by now that an "independent" TSP was never a thing, and the Independent-imperialist bloc is simply anti-defender? All of this is pretty easy to understand once you realize that. A defender-leaning TSP just won't be on good terms with the opposing sphere of Gameplay.

Glen-Rhodes sums it up sufficiently here. Balder's foreign policy is based on an ideological resistance to defenders, more or less. And in that sense, it has no respect for the sovereign capacity of regions to develop their own military and political agenda. It spent several years trying to tie TSP's hands. They were quite possibly the worst of allies.

[Solorni]

Time to bring in Glen-Rhodes Achilles heel, facts and stats.

Balder is basically controlled by former UIAF imperialists

Wrong. Less than 25% of the legislature has any association with UIAF imperialists and we've had former FRA arch chancellors serve in the cabinet (like Falconias). Balder's SM is not from UIAF and he is not an imperialist. I myself am not an imperialist and was best known prior to Balder for my work in Europeia. But the fact that you know nothing about Balder is of little surprise.

She's still supporting it, repeating the lies Hileville & Imki used to justify their powergrab. That's the behavior of a real ally?

How can I support something that is no longer occurring? As I stated earlier, no one has actually said you are not corrupt and that you haven’t abused your admin position on multiple occasions. So I have no idea what you mean when I am repeating the lies Hileville & Imki used to justify their powergrab. Ideally you would resign or be replaced if possible. Personally I do not really believe in coups or purges, which is consistent with what Balder has been.

As I have stated, I have supported the changes TSP has made. But considering that you have never once thought about TSP Glen-Rhodes and have always chosen what benefits you and not the region, it should be of no surprise that I do not approve of you as an admin there. I see corruption as a personal affront.

[Cormactopia Prime]

In Balder's defense, they have been a strong ally to Osiris, even when there were tensions in the past, and even when Balder and Osiris did not share a gameplay alignment. I don't think it's as cut and dry as "Balder hates defenders" or "Balder is diplomatically unstable," nor do I think it's as cut and dry as "Glen-Rhodes made us mad." Both sides are oversimplifying everything.

Whatever the root causes and animosities, it's clear there is a lot of bad blood that won't be easily resolved. Just go your separate ways. It's not hard.

This is also becoming a massive threadjack, as it has almost nothing to do with the OP.