Proposed TNP/TWP treaty

Flemingovia

Flemingovia

TNPer
-
-
Dear All,

Here is a proposed treaty between our region and The West Pacific. For those of you with long memories, it is based on the old treaty for the United Democratic Pacifics, to which TWP and ourselves were signatories long ago.

It needs, Eli and I feel, a snazzier title, but mainly it is the substance that we would welcome comment on.

Democratic Union

The Parties to this Treaty reaffirm their faith in the purposes and principles of the NationStates and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all governments. They are determined to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilization of their peoples, founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law. They seek to promote stability and well-being in their respective regions. They are resolved to unite their efforts for collective defense and for the preservation of peace and security. They therefore agree to this Treaty of the United Democratic Pacifics:

Article 1
The Parties undertake to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the ideals of liberty.

Article 2
The Parties will contribute toward the further development of peaceful and friendly international relations by strengthening their free institutions, by bringing about a better understanding of the principles upon which these institutions are founded, and by promoting conditions of stability and well-being.

Article 3
In order more effectively to achieve the objectives of this Treaty, the Parties, separately and jointly, by means of continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid, will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.

Article 4
The Parties will consult together whenever, in the opinion of any of them, the territorial integrity, political independence or security of any of the Parties is threatened.

Article 5
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of the member regions shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the member regions.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the heads of state of the member regions. Such measures shall be terminated when the heads of state have taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.

Article 6
Each Party declares that none of the international engagements now in force between it and any other of the Parties or any third State is in conflict with the provisions of this Treaty, and undertakes not to enter into any international engagement in conflict with this Treaty.

Article 7
The Parties hereby establish a Council, on which each of them shall be represented, to consider matters concerning the implementation of this Treaty. The Council shall be so organized as to be able to meet promptly at any time. The Council shall set up such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary; in particular it shall establish immediately a defense committee which shall recommend measures for the implementation of Articles 3 and 5.

Article 8
The parties shall recognize the democratically elected government of an allied region, as determined by that region's Constitution or Charter.

Article 9
This Treaty shall be ratified and its provisions carried out by the Parties in accordance with their respective constitutional processes. The instruments of ratification shall be deposited as soon as possible with the Government of each member region. The Treaty shall enter into force between the regions, which have ratified it as soon as the ratification process is complete. For the purposes of this agreement, the parties shall be limited to the North Pacific and the West Pacific. Additional parties may be added to this agreement but shall need approval from both of the original signatories to achieve membership in the pact.

Article 10
All affirmed signatories hereby agree to uphold this treaty for the duration of three months, after which member-regions may opt to revoke said treaty through the appropriate channels within their region or choose to reaffirm the treaty for another three months.
Click to expand...
 
What is the significance of the three months?! You can sign a treaty that is open ended and withdraw from the treaty at anytime!! The three month renewal thing is just a needless obstacle, as history suggests these three monthly affirmations my slip someone's mind and then it is left in limbo!!

If you want a three month cooling off period where a signatory can withdraw at the end of the three months but if they wish to continue then they should sign on indefinitely rather than renew every three months!!
 
As an RA member here and a Senator in TWP (though non-voting since I am a minister where I have a vote in the Council of Ministers), I would vote for a clause that would say something like:

article 10
All affirmed signatories hereby agree to uphold this treaty in perpetuity, after which member-regions may opt to revoke said treaty through the appropriate channels within their region.
Click to expand...

I also feel it necessary to mention who exactly comprises this council

How about...

Article 7
The Parties hereby establish a Council, on which each of them shall be represented, to consider matters concerning the implementation of this Treaty. The Council shall be so organized as to be able to meet promptly at any time. The Council shall set up such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary; in particular it shall establish immediately a defense committee which shall recommend measures for the implementation of Articles 3 and 5. Its composition shall of the highest constitutional officer of each member region, along with the officers in charge of foreign affairs and  military operations.
Click to expand...
 
Poltsamaa:
What is the significance of the three months?! You can sign a treaty that is open ended and withdraw from the treaty at anytime!! The three month renewal thing is just a needless obstacle, as history suggests these three monthly affirmations my slip someone's mind and then it is left in limbo!!

If you want a three month cooling off period where a signatory can withdraw at the end of the three months but if they wish to continue then they should sign on indefinitely rather than renew every three months!!
Click to expand...
I agree, a tree month interval is just another item on a long 'to-do' list that might get over-looked.

Article ten should look more like:

Article 10
All affirmed signatories signatory regions who voluntarily acceed to this treaty hereby  agree to uphold this treaty for the duration of three months, after which in perpetuity for the mutual benefit of all signatory regions. Being a voluntary treaty acceded to by the signatory regions, member-regions may opt to revoke said treaty through the appropriate channels within their region or choose to reaffirm the treaty for another three months should the treaty prove detrimental to their respective region or regions. .
Click to expand...
 
Roman, I love you but no. It is WAAAy too much fluff. That is the standard here, but a treaty with too much fluff will get hammered in the CoM and especially realm of the realm in the Senate. I see your wording as the same effectivity as my rewording.

Any comments on spelling out the council composition?
 
F&P, I'm going to assume that your TWP puppet has informed your TNP puppet of the situation in the TWP.

I had assumed that fhe three month process in the draft was something that was being required by TWP, and not because of anything in TNP law. I think the system we have set up here makes plenty of sense. I would much prefer a system of ratify once; but that to withdraw requires a three month "cooling off" period before withdrawal can be effective. For us, that means an election would have to intervene. The "cooling off" period would provide sufficient time to have a negotiation to resolve an issue that might cause withdrawal.

If TWP limits treaties to three months, then let them have the right to do that. But I would prefer that we be entitled to our system which does not require renewal like clockwork every three months,
 
You know my position on duality. I am who I am and I believe in what I believe. I am the same in both regions, but I never do anything that I feel is in violation of the region's major interest.

I agree that three months is bad. The concern some have issued is that three months ensures that both regions know it is there and you can't just abandon your treaty obligations, which I think is a foolish arguement and offensive to TNP as it says y'all cannot be trusted.

Three month cooling off sounds good. I do not like re ratification. All it does is give the parliaments something to do. I like your system and my TNP puppet will inform my TWP puppet. ;) These forums are open to public view, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top