TSP and the FRA

[Belschaft]

Ok, feedback from my discussion with CoCo;Cocodian and the FRA are very interested in building a working relationship with TSP, particularly considering the new government. However, they don't want to enter into a formal treaty right now for two reasons;1. They think (rightly I suspect) that doing so would make us raider number one target, and they're concerned that the region isn't secure enough yet after the coup and change of delegate to risk it.2. In the aftermath of the TSP coup and everything that has happened since, doing it would cause a shit storm inside the FRA.However, they are interested in building a working relationship with us and providing assistance on an unofficial basis, in preparation for a formal treaty once we're securer and the fallout from the coup has quietened down. As such NuCa has been/will be given instructions to serve as an unofficial FRA/TSP liaison, and we have been promised they will give us any assistance we require that they can.Something we were both interested in was running joint Op's, which would most likely consist of me bringing a couple of TSP'ers into a low profile FRA mission (ie; a de-tag). I'm keen on the idea as it will provide great experience for people new to military gameplay, though obviously if we found ourselves doing it regularly we may get labelled as a defender region, which we are not.While it's a tad disappointing that he doesn't want a formal treaty right now, the plan is to discuss it in a few weeks (I'd say a month after getting the SPA (South Pacific Army) active would be about right) we've been promised more or less what we wanted from the FRA without one.Without a treaty any aid would still have to be RA approved due to our feeder status, and it may be hard to get depending on what happens with the existing feeder policy (a repeal or amendment was being discussed when I lost RA access, and I'm not willing to spy on them to get more details) but I believe we should get warning if they come across intelligence about a planned attack, though NuCa probably know better than me on that one.NuCa, as someone in the FRA cabinet I'd appreciate commentary on my summary, and corrections if you feel I've misinterpreted CoCo's answer.

[HEM]

*<strong class='bbc'>HEM</strong> grits teeth.



Forming a friendship with the FRA is certainly part of my long term FA strategy, but I cannot say that forming any sort of <em class='bbc'>alliance</em> with them is. We can hold a very unique position in the middle without tying ourselves to <em class='bbc'>any</em> groups of dubious intent.

[Belschaft]

*<strong class='bbc'>Bel</strong> looks at <strong class='bbc'>HEM's</strong> grit teeth*



I figured you might have a few issues with this, considering you do come from the other side of that divide.



Needless to say, moving away from the middle of that conflict is not something I want to see us doing. I stated in my manifesto and campaign that I wanted to keep TSP neutral, but get it militarily active. That is still the plan as far as I am concerned.



However, it's important to remember who came to our aid when we needed it. The FRA is willing to give us a lot of help, and I think we should take it. I've TG'd a few other regions, and am going to be sending out more, and the FRA has been most positive so far. The current delegate of Europeia didn't even respond to me when I asked him who I should talk to about co-operation on security issues.



However, if you can think of other regions you believe I should talk to please suggest them.



Also, I'd hardly call the FRA a group with 'dubious intent'.

[Hammer]

1. They think (rightly I suspect) that doing so would make us raider number one target, and they're concerned that the region isn't secure enough yet after the coup and change of delegate to risk it.

He's probably right about that, at least for now. A MLP (military liaison pact) may be more practical.

2. In the aftermath of the TSP coup and everything that has happened since, doing it would cause a shit storm inside the FRA.

There's a strong 'The FRA should stay out of the feeders' sentiment with the RA. The member regions of the alliance widely agree on their userite (and lone sinker member) policy, but have very different views of the feeders. Some view taking action in the feeders as propping up and/or defending old guard regimes. The last thing the FRA wants is to be working against the will of the feeders natives to keep an unpopular delegate in power. How do you define 'feeder native' in a game created region, and how do you poll them and decide who the 'correct' delegate is? It gets into a grey area quickly, while defending userites is generally a straight forward good guy vs bad guy question.

Without a treaty any aid would still have to be RA approved due to our feeder status, and it may be hard to get depending on what happens with the existing feeder policy (a repeal or amendment was being discussed when I lost RA access, and I'm not willing to spy on them to get more details) but I believe we should get warning if they come across intelligence about a planned attack, though NuCa probably know better than me on that one.

A new policy hasn't been voted on yet, so the old policy is still technically in place. Under the proposed policy though, you'd be right. The RA would have to vote on a deployment, which would add at least 72 hours before the FRA would take any action. As I understand it, member regions of the FRA could deploy to the feeders before hand, but not under the FRA banner, and no organization of such action could take place on their forums before a RA vote goes through.

[Belschaft]

Good to know. I really need to pick up citizenship of a FRA member region to get RA access back.

[Topid]

Heh, the other feeders wouldn't like any formal alliance much at all. I'll never understand why the FRA is SO unpopular... Strong friendship is definitely a good idea! A formal alliance is something to propose I suppose (ew rhyme). With those my logic always seems to be putting them to vote never hurts, and if the nations of TSP vote for it then it is good.

[Hammer]

Good to know. I really need to pick up citizenship of a FRA member region to get RA access back.

You really should, the RA could still use your input on a couple topics.

You're welcome to join my (and Halc's), and you can get in to the RA because the liberalia defenders club is a member of the FRA.

[Belschaft]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote' > Good to know. I really need to pick up citizenship of a FRA member region to get RA access back.

You really should, the RA could still use your input on a couple topics.

You're welcome to join my (and Halc's), and you can get in to the RA because the liberalia defenders club is a member of the FRA.
</blockquote> I might just do that.

I have a nation in Atlantis, and was planning to declare nativity there in a few days.

[HEM]

Heh, the other feeders wouldn't like any formal alliance much at all. I'll never understand why the FRA is SO unpopular...



Strong friendship is definitely a good idea! A formal alliance is something to propose I suppose (ew rhyme). With those my logic always seems to be putting them to vote never hurts, and if the nations of TSP vote for it then it is good.

Because they are a walking paradox organization that exist only to fulfill their own interests and not the true advancement of any pure ideological cause?



I'm not going to pursue any course that involves an alliance with the Founderless Region Alliance. The South Pacific is not going to be drug onto any side of the invader/defender war because that gives us true opportunity to work with both sides.



By forming an alliance with the FRA, we cut ourselves off from a fraction of the game. No responsible Foreign Affairs Minister who is concerned about expanding our FA horizons would advocate such a course. Especially since we are still trying to define who we are and what we stand for.



It is the responsibility of <em class='bbc'>this</em> ministry to form treaties, conduct negotiations, and handle the Foreign Affairs of this region.



I respect the input of everyone, and will listen to all opinions, and thank you all for getting involved. However, I resent any attempts (by anyone) to circumvent my office in the conducting of foreign affairs.

Needless to say, moving away from the middle of that conflict is not something I want to see us doing. I stated in my manifesto and campaign that I wanted to keep TSP neutral, but get it militarily active. That is still the plan as far as I am concerned.

I have nothing against working with the FRA. Nothing at all. Joint Operations -- absolutely fine. I have a problem with a full flung alliance that could possibly border near membership. I have a problem with isolating ourselves to the defender spectrum.

However, it's important to remember who came to our aid when we needed it. The FRA is willing to give us a lot of help, and I think we should take it. I've TG'd a few other regions, and am going to be sending out more, and the FRA has been most positive so far. The current delegate of Europeia didn't even respond to me when I asked him who I should talk to about co-operation on security issues.

But this help, what is it going to cost? Promises to never invade? Guarantees to help them on certain occasions? Before too long, merely looking after our own interests <em class='bbc'>will</em> have a price to pay to any group that we align ourselves with.



They are the most positive because they see potential in the energy here, and they want to direct it to their cause. Other regions will never see us that way, because they are regions -- not organizations.



And...in terms of Europeia, they are in midst an election. Probably why the Delegate is waiting to tell you know to talk to (because nobody knows atm).

[Daytime to Night]

Speaking of paradoxes, working with the FRA in any way beneficial to us may be made impossible because the FRA is being forced to change its policy on feeders to complete non-intervention because people like HEM claim that any intervention the FRA makes in the feeders is purely self-serving... Topid, the FRA gets hostility from people because they feed off their own bullshit. The sort of people who don't bother to say thank you when we defend their colonies and then moan forever and a day if we don't. How can you oppose an organisation and then complain when you don't get the 'service' you expect from it?Regardless, my 'liaison' status is barely worthwhile as I am leaving the FRA once my term ends in a fortnight or so.

[Belschaft]

It is the responsibility of <em class='bbc'>this</em> ministry to form treaties, conduct negotiations, and handle the Foreign Affairs of this region.



I respect the input of everyone, and will listen to all opinions, and thank you all for getting involved. However, I resent any attempts (by anyone) to circumvent my office in the conducting of foreign affairs.

Not my intent. But I was given permission to discuss mutual security, including agreements, with active gameplay regions.

I have nothing against working with the FRA. Nothing at all. Joint Operations -- absolutely fine. I have a problem with a full flung alliance that could possibly border near membership. I have a problem with isolating ourselves to the defender spectrum.

Agreed. Needless to say, defenders have not been the only people I've been talking too. The most interesting conversation I've had on this subject has been with Krulltopia.

Regardless, my 'liaison' status is barely worthwhile as I am leaving the FRA once my term ends in a fortnight or so.

I had no idea. Have you told CoCo?

[Daytime to Night]

Come to think of it, I havent... :unsure: