Shareholders of Lazarus,
I would like your opinion on two diplomatic affairs, since I want to make sure I represent the wishes of the Assembly and the region in my actions. I would like to hear your ideas and comments on these situations, related to our ongoing war with the Pacific and the recent events surrounding it. Therefore I propose two things:
An armistice with the NPO
First of all, this. PR Director Ryccia came up with this idea: it was determined a while ago that keeping the war with the NPO ongoing was the preferred method, even if it was more symbolic than it was out of practical reasons. The war has stalled, and no military action has been taken in months. Our ally Osiris has withdrawn from the war effort. Therefore, the armistice was proposed. It would do the following:
1. It would ensure the NPO can not take military or intelligence action against us. This would ensure that we are safe from their manipulation, at least for the duration of the armistice.
2. It signifies we didn't forgive the NPO. While the armistice prevents open hostilities, it would not be a peace treaty or signify we trust the NPO once more. The proscription would remain in place.
3. It gives us diplomatic room. As recent events with TWP show, the NPO is being accepted again by the Feeders, and we run the risk of becoming isolated from potential allies due to the war. The armistice would allow us to operate a bit more freely, since open hostilities wouldn't be a concern for the duration of the armistice.
This is, of course, subject to the approval of the Assembly. I'd like to know what you all think of the idea, whether we should attempt to negotiate an armistice or we should continue as is.
Actions towards the West Pacific
This will take some explaining. As you might already know, the West Pacific signed a treaty with the NPO. We did not know this beforehand: in fact, we were only approached when the treaty was signed and ready to be published, and the treaty was published before I was available to express any concerns on behalf of the region. The West Pacific's foreign minister did not ask if we had any concerns or comments on the treaty, simply stating this "doesn't change our relationship with [Laz] at all". Apparently our war with the NPO did not mean anything to them and our opinion didn't matter enough to inform us earlier on.
This signifies that the West Pacific did not care for our opinion, and indeed, did not bother to ask for it beforehand. This presents a problem, as we are currently allied with the West Pacific through the Treaty of Fuhuo. We can choose not to do anything, or we can act in the following ways:
1. We chuck the treaty out the window. This is the agressive route we can take, and it would involve releasing a public statement and withdrawing from the treaty. It would signal we do not simply accept the way we were treated and that we expect better from our allies, but it is the more extreme option.
2. We renegotiate the treaty. Less extreme action can be taken by renegotiating our alliance to a non-agression pact. It would ensure the West Pacific can not support the NPO in offensive military actions against Lazarus. Furthermore, it would signal that we think the way this was conducted is unacceptable between close allies and that we expect better, while also not completely closing out closer ties in the future. A statement would be drafted up expressing our regret but that we do not think the treaty as it stands suits our interests.
3. We withdraw from the treaty while emphasizing that we not hold grudges. We would dissolve the treaty, but make a statement saying that we do not harbour ill will towards the West.
I would also like your opinion on this. We find ourselves in a complicated situation, and I want to ensure mine and Ryccia's actions have the support of the region. Please let us know what you think in this thread. Depending on the answers, we will deliberate a course of action.
I would like your opinion on two diplomatic affairs, since I want to make sure I represent the wishes of the Assembly and the region in my actions. I would like to hear your ideas and comments on these situations, related to our ongoing war with the Pacific and the recent events surrounding it. Therefore I propose two things:
An armistice with the NPO
First of all, this. PR Director Ryccia came up with this idea: it was determined a while ago that keeping the war with the NPO ongoing was the preferred method, even if it was more symbolic than it was out of practical reasons. The war has stalled, and no military action has been taken in months. Our ally Osiris has withdrawn from the war effort. Therefore, the armistice was proposed. It would do the following:
1. It would ensure the NPO can not take military or intelligence action against us. This would ensure that we are safe from their manipulation, at least for the duration of the armistice.
2. It signifies we didn't forgive the NPO. While the armistice prevents open hostilities, it would not be a peace treaty or signify we trust the NPO once more. The proscription would remain in place.
3. It gives us diplomatic room. As recent events with TWP show, the NPO is being accepted again by the Feeders, and we run the risk of becoming isolated from potential allies due to the war. The armistice would allow us to operate a bit more freely, since open hostilities wouldn't be a concern for the duration of the armistice.
This is, of course, subject to the approval of the Assembly. I'd like to know what you all think of the idea, whether we should attempt to negotiate an armistice or we should continue as is.
Actions towards the West Pacific
This will take some explaining. As you might already know, the West Pacific signed a treaty with the NPO. We did not know this beforehand: in fact, we were only approached when the treaty was signed and ready to be published, and the treaty was published before I was available to express any concerns on behalf of the region. The West Pacific's foreign minister did not ask if we had any concerns or comments on the treaty, simply stating this "doesn't change our relationship with [Laz] at all". Apparently our war with the NPO did not mean anything to them and our opinion didn't matter enough to inform us earlier on.
This signifies that the West Pacific did not care for our opinion, and indeed, did not bother to ask for it beforehand. This presents a problem, as we are currently allied with the West Pacific through the Treaty of Fuhuo. We can choose not to do anything, or we can act in the following ways:
1. We chuck the treaty out the window. This is the agressive route we can take, and it would involve releasing a public statement and withdrawing from the treaty. It would signal we do not simply accept the way we were treated and that we expect better from our allies, but it is the more extreme option.
2. We renegotiate the treaty. Less extreme action can be taken by renegotiating our alliance to a non-agression pact. It would ensure the West Pacific can not support the NPO in offensive military actions against Lazarus. Furthermore, it would signal that we think the way this was conducted is unacceptable between close allies and that we expect better, while also not completely closing out closer ties in the future. A statement would be drafted up expressing our regret but that we do not think the treaty as it stands suits our interests.
3. We withdraw from the treaty while emphasizing that we not hold grudges. We would dissolve the treaty, but make a statement saying that we do not harbour ill will towards the West.
I would also like your opinion on this. We find ourselves in a complicated situation, and I want to ensure mine and Ryccia's actions have the support of the region. Please let us know what you think in this thread. Depending on the answers, we will deliberate a course of action.
