DITCHED: We'll Sea

[Australian rePublic]

[title] We'll Sea

[validity] all, I guess

[desc] Lanment, @@NAME@@'s landlocked neighbour, has offered to pay you a substantial amount of money, equal to a quarter of their annual GDP, for a remote, sparsely populated strip of land stretching from their border to @@NAME@@'s coast, so that they can have access to the sea

[option] "Please @@LEADER@@, we need the sea access," begs @@RANDOMNAME_1@@, the prime minister of Lanment, whilst holding up a surf living save flag. "Our country cannot see the sea! We estimate that our GDP would be 50% larger within the first 5 years alone if we had a deep water, warm water port. How are supposed to trade with the rest of the world if we can't send our goods to the sea without having to rely on the mercy of our neighbours not charging us taxes and closing the border? Please sell us this land!"
[effect] 20,000 persons have woken up to discover that they're no longer @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ residents

[option] "I don't wanna live in Lamnent!" complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, one of the 2 000 residents who live in the proposed Lamnetti corridor. "The country is poor, and the people there are filled with Lamnetations! I don't want Lamnetations, and I don't wanna leave my home either. I've lived here for 8 generations! Besides, being Lamnent's only ocean access, our towns will be developed into large cities, and we can't have that!"
[effect] stubborn land owners often tell foreigners to get off their lawn

[option] "Why don't we just build a port for Lamnet?" asks @@RANDOMNAME@@, your minister of creative solutions, whilst drawing a line on your map of @@NAME@@ with a permanent marker. "See, we build a rail line suitable for double stack container trains here, and a port here. The rail line and port are both Lamnetti , and subject to Lambetti law, whilst anything above or below the rail line, including bridges and tunnels, are ours? We could do this for half the price they're currently willing to pay. What could possibly go wrong?"
[effect] if a foreign freight train crashes in @@DENONYM@@ territory it's not @@NAME@@'s problem

[title] We'll Sea

[validity] all, I guess

[desc] Lanment, @@NAME@@'s landlocked neighbour, has offered to pay you a substantial amount of money, equal to a quarter of their annual GDP, for a remote, sparsely populated strip of @@NAME@@'s coast, so that they can have access to the sea

[option] "Please @@LEADER@@, we need the sea access," begs @@RANDOMNAME_1@@, the prime minister of Lanment, whilst holding up a surf living save flag. "Our country cannot see the sea! We estimate that our GDP would be 50% larger within the first 5 years alone if we had a deep water, warm water coastline. Please sell us this land!"
[effect] 20,000 persons have woken up to discover that they're no longer @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ residents

[option] "I don't wanna live in Lamnent!" complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, one of the 2 000 residents who live in the proposed Lamnetti corridor. "The country is poor, and the people there are filled with Lamnetations! I don't want Lamnetations, and I don't wanna leave my home either. I've lived here for 8 generatioms! Besides, being Lamnent's only ocean access, our towns will be developed into large cities, and we can't have that!"
[effect] stubborn land owners often tell foreigners to get off their lawn

[option] "Why don't we just build a port for Lamnet?" asks @@RANDOMNAME@@, your minister of creative solutions, whilst drawing a line on your map of @@NAME@@ with a permanent marker. "See, we build a rail line here, and a port here. The rail line and port are both Lamnetti , and subject to Lambetti law, whilst anything above or below the rail line, including bridges and tunnels, are ours? What could possibly go wrong?"
[effect] if a foreign freight train crashes in @@DENONYM@@ territory it's not @@NAME@@’s problem

[Honeydewistania]

Generations spelled wrong in option two.

Also a quarter of their GDP seems quite unrealistic to take over a small town in a small strip of water. They could be using that money to improve the lives of the poor people in their nation, which they are so abundant of.

[Westinor]

Generations spelled wrong in option two.

Also a quarter of their GDP seems quite unrealistic to take over a small town in a small strip of water. They could be using that money to improve the lives of the poor people in their nation, which they are so abundant of.

I think depending on the size and economic state of Lanment this could be feasible. If it's something like the Croatia/Bosnia situation (which is what I'm imagining) they're purchasing a very valuable strip of land, and access to deep sea water for a landlocked country is extremely invaluable and important to future development to a country.

In terms of this issue, I like the premise. I wonder though, if there's an economic side to this? Would @@NAME@@ be appreciative of a suddenly competitive neighbor right next to it? Though I like the perspective coming from the citizen, and I'm not advocating for a change.

[Honeydewistania]

I think spending a quarter is way too much though.

[Noahs Second Country]

[desc] Lanment, @@NAME@@'s landlocked neighbour, has offered to pay you a substantial amount of money, equal to a quarter of their annual GDP, for a remote, sparsely populated strip of @@NAME@@'s coast, so that they can have access to the sea

Unless you really want to stress the magnitude of this amount of money, simply keeping it at 'substantial' should be enough, clarifying with " equal to a quarter of their annual GDP," may not be necessary.

[option] "Please @@LEADER@@, we need the sea access," begs @@RANDOMNAME_1@@, the prime minister of Lanment, whilst holding up a surf living save flag. "Our country cannot see the sea! We estimate that our GDP would be 50% larger within the first 5 years alone if we had a deep water, warm water coastline. Please sell us this land!"

Rather than focusing on the angle of a boosted GDP, focusing on development of the country may be more reasonable and appealing to @@NAME@@.

[effect] 20,000 persons have woken up to discover that they're no longer @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ residents

I doubt this will be the result here - actually designating the land and developing it is something that happens over time. Even then, 20000 people being displaced seems to contradict the coastline being 'sparely populated,' although I guess 20K is relatively small in terms of NS population.

[option] "I don't wanna live in Lamnent!" complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, one of the 2 000 residents who live in the proposed Lamnetti corridor. "The country is poor, and the people there are filled with Lamnetations! I don't want Lamnetations, and I don't wanna leave my home either. I've lived here for 8 generatioms! Besides, being Lamnent's only ocean access, our towns will be developed into large cities, and we can't have that!"
[effect] stubborn land owners often tell foreigners to get off their lawn

This is a viable stance, but I'm a little unsure of what you're going for with the people being 'filled with Lamnetations'.

[option] "Why don't we just build a port for Lamnet?" asks @@RANDOMNAME@@, your minister of creative solutions, whilst drawing a line on your map of @@NAME@@ with a permanent marker. "See, we build a rail line here, and a port here. The rail line and port are both Lamnetti , and subject to Lambetti law, whilst anything above or below the rail line, including bridges and tunnels, are ours? What could possibly go wrong?"
[effect] if a foreign freight train crashes in @@DENONYM@@ territory it's not @@NAME@@’s problem

How is this beneficial for @@NAME@@? Perhaps you should mention taxing goods that come through the port/railway or something along those lines.

EDIT: you may also want to take a look at #1103

[Candlewhisper Archive]

If they're landlocked by @@NAME@@, how would they access this sparse strip of coastal land without crossing your nation? I'm not sure the topology of this premise makes sense, unless we assume that @@NAME@@ currently landlocks them by owning a sparse strip of coastal land between them and the sea.

Overall, the whole thing doesn't seem to make much sense. Is there a RL case you're basing this off?

[Australian rePublic]

Thanks gor your imput everyone. I've made a second draft

Generations spelled wrong in option two.

Also a quarter of their GDP seems quite unrealistic to take over a small town in a small strip of water. They could be using that money to improve the lives of the poor people in their nation, which they are so abundant of.

Fixed the spelling, as for a quarter of the GDP, it's really not unrealistic, especially considering that @@NAME@@, by virtue of having a coastline, has a GDP orders of magnitude larger than Lamnet's, almost exclusively because of the coastline. As the guy from Lamnent said, their GDP will increase expencially if this happens

Generations spelled wrong in option two.

Also a quarter of their GDP seems quite unrealistic to take over a small town in a small strip of water. They could be using that money to improve the lives of the poor people in their nation, which they are so abundant of.

I think depending on the size and economic state of Lanment this could be feasible. If it's something like the Croatia/Bosnia situation (which is what I'm imagining) they're purchasing a very valuable strip of land, and access to deep sea water for a landlocked country is extremely invaluable and important to future development to a country.

In terms of this issue, I like the premise. I wonder though, if there's an economic side to this? Would @@NAME@@ be appreciative of a suddenly competitive neighbor right next to it? Though I like the perspective coming from the citizen, and I'm not advocating for a change.

Why not? Are you suggesting that Lamnent would pose some kind of threat?

[desc] Lanment, @@NAME@@'s landlocked neighbour, has offered to pay you a substantial amount of money, equal to a quarter of their annual GDP, for a remote, sparsely populated strip of @@NAME@@'s coast, so that they can have access to the sea

Unless you really want to stress the magnitude of this amount of money, simply keeping it at 'substantial' should be enough, clarifying with " equal to a quarter of their annual GDP," may not be necessary.

[option] "Please @@LEADER@@, we need the sea access," begs @@RANDOMNAME_1@@, the prime minister of Lanment, whilst holding up a surf living save flag. "Our country cannot see the sea! We estimate that our GDP would be 50% larger within the first 5 years alone if we had a deep water, warm water coastline. Please sell us this land!"

Rather than focusing on the angle of a boosted GDP, focusing on development of the country may be more reasonable and appealing to @@NAME@@.

[effect] 20,000 persons have woken up to discover that they're no longer @@DENONYMADJECTIVE@@ residents

I doubt this will be the result here - actually designating the land and developing it is something that happens over time. Even then, 20000 people being displaced seems to contradict the coastline being 'sparely populated,' although I guess 20K is relatively small in terms of NS population.

[option] "I don't wanna live in Lamnent!" complains @@RANDOMNAME@@, one of the 2 000 residents who live in the proposed Lamnetti corridor. "The country is poor, and the people there are filled with Lamnetations! I don't want Lamnetations, and I don't wanna leave my home either. I've lived here for 8 generatioms! Besides, being Lamnent's only ocean access, our towns will be developed into large cities, and we can't have that!"
[effect] stubborn land owners often tell foreigners to get off their lawn

This is a viable stance, but I'm a little unsure of what you're going for with the people being 'filled with Lamnetations'.

[option] "Why don't we just build a port for Lamnet?" asks @@RANDOMNAME@@, your minister of creative solutions, whilst drawing a line on your map of @@NAME@@ with a permanent marker. "See, we build a rail line here, and a port here. The rail line and port are both Lamnetti , and subject to Lambetti law, whilst anything above or below the rail line, including bridges and tunnels, are ours? What could possibly go wrong?"
[effect] if a foreign freight train crashes in @@DENONYM@@ territory it's not @@NAME@@’s problem

How is this beneficial for @@NAME@@? Perhaps you should mention taxing goods that come through the port/railway or something along those lines.

EDIT: you may also want to take a look at #1103

1. I do want to emphasise how large the amount is. I'll consider the development angle and re-work this draft
2. 20,000 people isn't really that many in the grand scheme of things. Some IRL suburbs of Sydney have nearly that population. Sparsly populated=/=empty
3. "Lamnentations" is a play on the word "lamentations"
4. Good point. I'll suggest that they pay 1/8 of their GDP, rather than 1/4

If they're landlocked by @@NAME@@, how would they access this sparse strip of coastal land without crossing your nation? I'm not sure the topology of this premise makes sense, unless we assume that @@NAME@@ currently landlocks them by owning a sparse strip of coastal land between them and the sea.

Overall, the whole thing doesn't seem to make much sense. Is there a RL case you're basing this off?

Kaliningrad would be one example, but yes. I see your point. I specified that it stretches from the border to the coast

[Westinor]

Why not? Are you suggesting that Lamnent would pose some kind of threat?

No, not necessarily (at least in terms of national security). I suppose it's more of the player's choice to take this into consideration, but giving this neighboring nation access to deep-sea ports could be a potential economic threat, or something to take advantage of. Nonetheless, I just thought I'd make the point that this is a potential conflict that could be interesting. (chain issue? )

[Trotterdam]

Overall, the whole thing doesn't seem to make much sense. Is there a RL case you're basing this off?

Kaliningrad would be one example, but yes. I see your point. I specified that it stretches from the border to the coast

Kaliningrad is hardly Russia's only coast. It's not even the only coast in the Baltic sea, since St. Petersburg also has multiple major ports there.

[Australian rePublic]

Kaliningrad would be one example, but yes. I see your point. I specified that it stretches from the border to the coast

Kaliningrad is hardly Russia's only coast. It's not even the only coast in the Baltic sea, since St. Petersburg also has multiple major ports there.

Kaliningrad is the only Russian port that doesn't freeze in winter. That's what "warm water" means

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Sevastopol too now, hence the Crimean annexation. Also Vladivostok, but the use of that port is denied by control of the seas beyond it. But that's not the point.

You're not talking about an active port city that is used by a nation as its warmwater port, you're talking about an uninhabited strip of land in your territory that a foreign power wants to purchase in order to access the sea. That's not the same sort of premise, and it just doesn't ring true.

I mean, if we think about it topologically, then a landlocked nation wanting to access the sea through @@NAME@@ is either going to bisect our nation, or occupy land that borders between us and another third nation. The geopolitics of that sort of move would be insanely complex, and no government is likely to just sell its territory in that way.

[Australian rePublic]

Sevastopol too now, hence the Crimean annexation. Also Vladivostok, but the use of that port is denied by control of the seas beyond it. But that's not the point.

You're not talking about an active port city that is used by a nation as its warmwater port, you're talking about an uninhabited strip of land in your territory that a foreign power wants to purchase in order to access the sea. That's not the same sort of premise, and it just doesn't ring true.

I mean, if we think about it topologically, then a landlocked nation wanting to access the sea through @@NAME@@ is either going to bisect our nation, or occupy land that borders between us and another third nation. The geopolitics of that sort of move would be insanely complex, and no government is likely to just sell its territory in that way.

I see. Thanks