We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: First South Ocean Entente (FSOE)
Details
Submitted by[?]: SeeYainHell Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: August 2167
Description[?]:
| Proposed Members: Republic Of Pontesi United Federation of Malivia Democratic Republic of Barmenistan Federal Democratic Republic of Vanuku Most Serene Republic of Darnussia Selucian Empire Cildanian Republic The 'Septuple' Entente the treaty would be as follows: We, the sovereign nations of the Southern Ocean, to ensure the individual sovereignty of our respective nations, to prevent internal or external armed occupations or disruptions of our sacred democratic institutions and to ensure that any loss of life as the result of such a conflict external or internal is kept to the lowest possible minimum, have hereby begun participation in a reciprocal and binding military alliance which shall forever assist us in these goals. Article 1: Hereby, we nations of the South Ocean, in the event of an armed disruption or occupation in the democratic processes, government, or people within any of our respective nations, shall each unquestionably grant immediate, total and exhaustive military assistance to the signer who requests assistance or is in recognizable need of it. Those who trifle with any of the individual nations of the South Ocean entente will be enemies to all and can expect the combined military of each to defend its opponent. Thus for hostile revolutions, socialist, nationalist, fascist; the responsibility of the nations of the South Ocean entente guarantees their defeat. Article 2: If any nations of the Entente are to betray and attack one of the other members, their membership shall be voided and all members must treat this nation as an enemy as in Article 1, and swiftly subdue the threat It poses through methods of peace or otherwise. Article 3: If any member of the Entente wishes to withdraw from the organization and if, and only if, it is deemed through wise considerations that their withdrawal poses a significant threat to the Entente and is carried out with the intension of military agression against the Entente, there is to be a Entente-wide vote as to whether a pre-emptive action is to be undertaken. Pre-emptive action shall be decided upon by the will of 3/4 of all nations in the organization, who are to base their judgement on whether the nation in question's withdrawal is carried through to pursue military aggression. If it is voted that the withdrawing nation does pose such a threat, there are three options, the first must be approved by 2/3 of the nations once action is voted for, and is the compelling of the withdrawing nation to sign a nonaggression pact through peaceful means, the second requires unanimous consent, and is to compel the nation through any means nescessary to forgo military action, the third, if none of these measures passes on vote or is selected of itself by a majority, is the economic isolation of this nation. At any point, with a vote of 2/3, the Entente may reverse itself and allow the nation to withdraw without consequence, if it is deemed that in actuality it poses an unsubstansial threat. This policy shall not be used to discourage withdrawal from the Entente and is simply a guidline to preventing war in the result of a change in the South Ocean situation. Article 4: If a Entente nation wishes to commit war on another, nonaligned nation, a vote must be held and must have 5/6 approval of the Entente to pursue. Article 5: all articles of foreign policy of individual nations which have an significant and universally recognized impact on any of the Entente nations must be subject to a 2/3 vote by all nations as to whether it shall be approved or, if challenged, upheld. Internal affairs are independent and free from the Entente, under the Soverign jurisdiction of the national government. Article 6: a Entente leadership shall be established with the representatives of each head of state, each head of government, if there is one, the largest party, if this is a different party, and the second largest party, if this is not involved in head of government or head of state duties. In a nation where Entente headquarters shall be built they shall convene once yearly at least, and in a nation appointed by 2/3 of the nations involved. Article 7: No more than 9 nations shall be members of the Entente, including the seven proposed. Article 8: The Entente Organization with a 6/7 vote may void the membership of any member if it supplies an adequate and recognized explanation. The member may appeal to an international court. Article 9: Any treaties which follow similar courses as the FSOE or compromise a member's obligations to the FSOE must be withdrawn from by members. For the South Ocean! Written November, 2165 edited September 2166 Orfeo Larson, Tribunary Faction Signed: |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:04:24, January 03, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | Pontesi's only hope come warfare |
| Date | 22:30:49, January 03, 2006 CET | From | One Nation Conservative Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | The Southern Ocean Treaty Organisation will provide collective security from those listed nations once we've completed the ratification process. Though you include certain other additions to the treaty, if SOTO decide to take action against a nation for instance, what point would there then be to go to the entente to ask for a declaration of war? |
| Date | 22:32:25, January 03, 2006 CET | From | One Nation Conservative Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | I'm also not sure about the process of withdrawing from the entente, in my view that kind of restricts nation's sovereignty and in effect overules national legislatures even if there is a 100% vote to withdrawal. |
| Date | 22:38:11, January 03, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | No, no, no, they can withdraw, but if this is interpreted as an aggressive action, like in an unaligned nation, the Entente can act as if they were always unaligned by taking precautions, though in fact these are tightened to help the country withdraw, because since they are so rough, the nation has almost no chance of provoking such suspicion and should get off easy unless they truly are trying to start war, where they will be hastily dealt with within the parameters |
| Date | 22:45:43, January 03, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | SOTO does not help nations fight off foregin invaders, just to help them make sure those invaders aren't from the South Ocean. But that doesn't even mean much at all, because if someone breaks the rule, no one steps in. It's the same as ever. If the goal is war, warriors just withdraw and war. Very simple. The FSOE would end that. No one would dare wage war against such a monolith. Our Monolith. If they did, they'd be crushed before they could organize. FSOE would be the end of feeling boxed in. FSOE would end the threat of Terran War II in the South Ocean. This is what the people want. Guarrented peace backed by consequences. Pontesi should lead this initiative by example. |
| Date | 23:48:59, January 03, 2006 CET | From | Friedrich Hayek Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | I express reservations at the withdrawel process |
| Date | 00:36:00, January 04, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | I just knocked down the entire withdrawral process for you guys, thanks. Now it is a 2/3 majority approval to withdraw without precaution, even if posing a threat. This makes the biggest threat to Our Monolith withdrawing nations- but you can't always win so whatever I'll take the diluted Article 3. But truly who thinks that without being in some sort of entente, if not this entente, that Pontesi will last one minute in warfare? who really wants to find out? Peace now with Monolith now. Hitting your head against a pontesi squashes the pontesi, hitting your head against a giant rock obelisk makes you not do it again. |
| Date | 15:32:32, January 05, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | changes to article 3 and added article 9 |
| Date | 19:04:31, January 05, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | 1NCON can you make this a treaty in my name (whether you approve or have reservations, I want to see of international reaction)? Just copy the title, the description and make the 7 nations I begin the description with candidates for ratification. Republic Of Pontesi United Federation of Malivia Democratic Republic of Barmenistan Federal Democratic Republic of Vanuku Most Serene Republic of Darnussia Selucian Empire Cildanian Republic I don't understand why I can't do it, but thats the game for you. |
| Date | 19:06:00, January 05, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | Oh yeah, if you see this FHP can you do it? Just write [Put Foward On Tribunary Party's Request] at the top. |
| Date | 00:53:36, January 06, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | tehehehehe Putting this up for voting may get a second look at it from you guys, you haven't been paying attention :( |
| Date | 14:50:22, January 06, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | Phalanx, Pontesi isn't the United States, I'm affraid, its more of a belgium in the wwII era, it really cannot afford to be subdued by the utter stupidity of its own nationalism. It must enter into productive Alliances to protect itself. |
| Date | 21:09:10, January 06, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | Nice! the first step toward resisting occupation before it happens. |
| Date | 23:37:06, January 06, 2006 CET | From | Pontesi Imperial Alliance | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | The Pontesi Imperial Alliance supports this alliance in principle, though we must wonder why membership is limited to 9 members and how a 6/7 vote would work with nine members (6/7 of 9 is 7.71). We also feel it is a bit too restrictive on our national soverginty, namely in the limitations on future treaties and the difficulty of withdrawl. |
| Date | 02:13:17, January 07, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | I really clearly wrote out the withdrawal to stress that withdrawing nations should be treated with caution (because this is often a sign of agression) but ONLY if there is a complete consensus that this is the case. Parameters must be drawn to work within if nation pulls something but this is carefully democracised and stressed so that only true abusers of withdrawal will be debated. |
| Date | 15:21:58, January 07, 2006 CET | From | SeeYainHell Party | To | Debating the First South Ocean Entente (FSOE) |
| Message | Nice! we should probably start getting other nations to consider ratifying FSOE before the Trade and Defence Entente becomes too widespread |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 61 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 23 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: There are two countries based on Egypt in the game. Cobura is based on modern Egypt with a retro twist, while Hawu Mumenhes is based on Ancient Egypt with a modernist twist. |
| Random quote: "Public schools are government-established, politician- and bureaucrat-controlled, fully politicized, taxpayer-supported, authoritarian socialist institutions. In fact, the public-school system is one of the purest examples of socialism existing in America." - Thomas L. Johnson |