I am concerned you don't seem to have a solid plan for Foreign Affairs. Your entire FA section consists solely of updating the WF (which is something that has been worked on over the past term but could use more attention to it) and there is no elaboration on your plans for FA in subsequent posts so there's not really any information offered in terms of what you're looking to do more substantively (or if I have missed it, please feel free to point it out).
I refer you to the "Frequently Asked Questions" spoiler in the OP of this thread where I say: "I could definitely see us getting closer to regions such as the UDS, Forest, and Spiritus. Now, what exactly those "closer relationships" would look like is up for speculation, but generally speaking, I wouldn't mind branching out and getting in contact with other regions for the purposes of the Communications Frenzy event (Think TRR, Lazarus, etc.) and the outsourcing of TNL articles that I mentioned earlier."
"Otherwise, we could always get closer to our partners in WALL (Europe, Europeia, etc.) through the initiative that I proposed at the beginning of my campaign's section on WA Affairs. But beyond those regions, I'd have to see about how things line up once I'm in the chair."
FA will work to service our agenda in WA Affairs, Communications, and in Cards. In addition to being responsible for the updating of the WF project and educating new ambassadors through the Diplomatic Training Manual that was written this term.
There's also what I said in
this post that talks about my approach to interregional diplomacy.
I am rather confused here, I think there has only been one high stake mission this past term (the quorum raiding of the fascist resolution) and thus I am extremely bewildered as to how you believe there is not a balance between high stake missions and low stake operations. I notice that you have not participated in a
NPA Mission since last year and while you were WA locked, that does not prevent you from participating in an operation (eg. triggering) and as a General, you would certainly know how to do so!
I think that you misinterpret what I mean by "low-stakes" operations. See these two posts (
here and
here) where I talk about that along with other things that Defense will be doing.
When I was Minister of Defense, I led with the intangibles I had to great success. It can be difficult to plan things for Defense since we don't yet know where the chips will fall or what events in gameplay will transpire. A lot of it falls into the category of "spontaneous activity."
Why does the RA need to hold the IRC Representative in check and not the WALL Ambassador?
If people would like for our WALL ambassador to be held in check by the RA as well then that's certainly a possibility that can be explored.
I know that there are many who would be wary of Delegate empowerment and the expansion of executive authority, so this would just establish a formal procedure for which the Delegate and their chosen appointees can be better held to account by our legislative branch.
I am glad you recognize an issue in the FA department but do you have any plan as to how to address rather than waiting for someone to come along and solve it for you?
Please reference my already-elaborated upon plans for increased recruitment and a focus on developing talent internally within the Executive Staff as mentioned earlier in
this post for an answer to your question here.
Additionally, also see
this post where I respond to Fregerson's follow-ups.
