Regarding Lazarus

[Southern Bellz]

But still, we have had a few self imposed blunders. We need to think about how we distance ourselves from regions without a diplomatic mess. Especially because it's avoidable.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[Sandaoguo]

What are the costs of maintaining relations with Lazarus, aside from personal distaste. I'm just not seeing what they've done to warrant dissolving our treaty. You keep saying that they're violating it and ignoring it. But we can't tell them it's okay to do something and then get mad when they do it!

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk 2

[Belschaft]

You seem to the be under the impression we told them it was okay to break our treaty; we did no such. During the Milograd coup it was made clear to us that Lazarus would not be willing to honor the treaty in regards to Article 3. We were then faced with the choice of either ignoring that fact or having the treaty broken whilst in the midst of a GCR war. Obviously we did not feel that the second would be a good idea, and as such had no choice but to ignore Lazarus' failure to comply with our alliance. I am aware of no communication to Lazarus that would lead them to believe we were okay with their actions - to the contrary, I believe it was made clear to them numerous times we were not happy with it. This is not a situation were Lazarus sought our permission to break the treaty and we approved of it, rather Lazarus informed us that they would not be obeying it and we were not in a situation to press the issue; since then we have been ignoring this issue to maintain the alliance. I am simply no longer willing to ignore their actions.

[Unibot]

You seem to the be under the impression we told them it was okay to break our treaty; we did no such. During the Milograd coup it was made clear to us that Lazarus would not be willing to honor the treaty in regards to Article 3. We were then faced with the choice of either ignoring that fact or having the treaty broken whilst in the midst of a GCR war. Obviously we did not feel that the second would be a good idea, and as such had no choice but to ignore Lazarus' failure to comply with our alliance. I am aware of no communication to Lazarus that would lead them to believe we were okay with their actions - to the contrary, I believe it was made clear to them numerous times we were not happy with it. This is not a situation were Lazarus sought our permission to break the treaty and we approved of it, rather Lazarus informed us that they would not be obeying it and we were not in a situation to press the issue; since then we have been ignoring this issue to maintain the alliance. I am simply no longer willing to ignore their actions.

 

You've explained why TSP didn't end the treaty during the Milograd coup, you haven't explained why TSP didn't end the treaty between then and now. 

[Belschaft]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Belschaft" data-cid="107011" data-time="1382739249">
<div>
You seem to the be under the impression we told them it was okay to break our treaty; we did no such. During the Milograd coup it was made clear to us that Lazarus would not be willing to honor the treaty in regards to Article 3. We were then faced with the choice of either ignoring that fact or having the treaty broken whilst in the midst of a GCR war. Obviously we did not feel that the second would be a good idea, and as such had no choice but to ignore Lazarus' failure to comply with our alliance. I am aware of no communication to Lazarus that would lead them to believe we were okay with their actions - to the contrary, I believe it was made clear to them numerous times we were not happy with it. This is not a situation were Lazarus sought our permission to break the treaty and we approved of it, rather Lazarus informed us that they would not be obeying it and we were not in a situation to press the issue; since then we have been ignoring this issue to maintain the alliance. I am simply no longer willing to ignore their actions.

 

You've explained why TSP didn't end the treaty during the Milograd coup, you haven't explained why TSP didn't end the treaty between then and now. 

 

</div>
</blockquote>
One part inertia, one part a desire to try and make it work, I guess. I had a lengthy discussion with Feux when Milograd was first made a cabinet member in Lazarus, and expressed my concerns. The answer was essentially that we would have to deal with it. Since then I've had similar conversations with Harmie at numerous points, such as when Lazarus was purged, Milograd made vice-delegate, even when they adopted the SPSR style of regime. Every single time it has gone more or less the same way; I make clear my concerns, remind them that they are in breach of the treaty, and they say tough shit, we can either take it as is or leave it. I've got tired of taking it as it is. It's not a healthy or productive relationship, nor one that resembles an alliance.

[Drugged Monkeys]

Where are these communications taking place?

Why hasn't anyone but you been involved?

I guess these are my concerns.

[Unibot]

 

One part a desire to try and make it work, I guess. 

 

 

I'm not trying to "grill" you too much here, Bel, but if you at least partly desired to make it work, that may have sent some signal to Lazarus that TSP was alright with ignoring the fact a part of TSP-Lazarus's treaty was being violated. 

 

A more public declaration after their first refusal may have given Lazarus more notice that TSP's concerns would have to be addressed. 

[Sandaoguo]

Look, Bel-- The point is, you guys never pressed for treaty compliance when it was relevant. Whether you guys did this because you didn't care very much about the violation, or because you thought there were important political barriers, TSP consented to allow Milograd to be in Lazarus. It's okay to think they should kick Milograd out, but we cannot fault them for doing what we allowed, and since we consented, they weren't in violation then and aren't in violation now. I know that gameplay treaty law is incredibly unsophisticated, but in the real world, when two states agree that part of a bilateral treaty doesn't have to be upheld, either for a specific situation or in general, then that part of the treaty isn't legally binding. That's basically what happened here, even if we we were begrudgingly allowing Lazarus to violate the provision. It's hypocritical to turn around and decide to make a big deal out of this, after months of willingly and purposefully not pressing the issue.

 

That's all I really have to say about that. We're talking about a single violation of one provision in a treaty with many parts. I don't think that's enough to break down relations. From where I'm standing, this seems like a typical situation where two people don't get along, and that's emanating outwards and threatening relations. Perhaps in the future we should utilize each other's foreign ministers, instead of engaging in direct delegate-to-delegate talks.

[Hileville]

This situation has now changed a bit.  Harm resigned and Milograd is her successor.

[Awesomiasa]

What worries me here is that Lazarus will become the next SPSR, legitimately.

[Awesomiasa]

From what I can see on the Laz WFE, it appears that Laz is going the way Osiris went. Its constitution has been dissolved, and the election for a 'People's Congress' is ongoing. Quite typical of Communist/dictatorship fashion I must say. This situation ought to be closely monitored.

[Sandaoguo]

I'm not sure where you're getting your information when you say that the Lazarus constitution has been dissolved. As far as I'm aware, the current constitution was legally passed into law. The latest event out of Lazarus is that Milograd was appointed Chairman after Harmie resigned. According to their constitution, the outgoing Chairman appoints his or her replacement, so that's all fine and legal, too. Is it up to TSP's standard of democracy? No. But I wouldn't equate it with what Asta did in Osiris.

[Awesomiasa]

From the Lazarus WFE

 

Emerald Council dissolves Lazarene constitution. The People's Republic of Lazarus is founded on October 21, 2013.
Elections for the People's Congress is on-going!

[Hileville]

 

From the Lazarus WFE

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
 

Emerald Council dissolves Lazarene constitution. The People's Republic of Lazarus is founded on October 21, 2013.
Elections for the People's Congress is on-going!

 


</blockquote>
 

They followed their laws to implement this system.

 

I was just referring to the fact our treaty ally now has a WA Delegate that has been banned from this region for couping us.  I have an issue with this.

[Awesomiasa]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Awe" data-cid="107986" data-time="1384239518">
<div>
 

From the Lazarus WFE

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
 

Emerald Council dissolves Lazarene constitution. The People's Republic of Lazarus is founded on October 21, 2013.
Elections for the People's Congress is on-going!

 


</blockquote>
 

They followed their laws to implement this system.

 

I was just referring to the fact our treaty ally now has a WA Delegate that has been banned from this region for couping us.  I have an issue with this.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
Oh, I must have misinterpreted it then. Having Milograd hold the top job is indeed a concern, and I do propose we hold rational, level talks with the Lazarane government, especially Milograd himself to see where the future of our bilateral relations will go

[Hileville]

I'm rather annoyed by this as well http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic....#p17362398.

[Kris Kringle]

That article is one of the biggest piles of nonsense I have ever read. I don't even need to explain how I reach that conclusion...

[Kris Kringle]

-

[Sandaoguo]

I was just referring to the fact our treaty ally now has a WA Delegate that has been banned from this region for couping us.  I have an issue with this.

 

Belschaft was banned from Balder when he was elected. I know I'm not going to gain any points by saying this, but you guys needs to get over Milograd. He's not in TSP anymore. He served his sentence, both the one we handed down and the one the NPO gave him. We cannot keep punishing people and whole regions for his actions. It's not fair to expect Milograd to basically leave the game, which is the only choice you're giving all other regions by having a problem with them for letting him in their community.

 

If anything, Milograd being a delegate of another region is the best option for us, considering he can't exactly pose a threat to TSP while he's tied up in governing another region!

[HEM]

Why is this even a debate? End the alliance.

[Sandaoguo]

Why is this even a debate? End the alliance.

 

Because Lazarus has done nothing against TSP's core interest except offend the sensibilities of a few of you. Unlike Osiris, nobody has done anything illegally in the region, so calls for dissolving the treaty a la Osiris-TSP are pretty hollow.

[Kris Kringle]

To be honest I don't oppose Milograd getting to lead Lazarus. Sure, I don't like the fact that the one who couped and purged the region is now leading another one, but I can live with that, and having (or building) a strong or at least decent relationship with Lazarus is more important than protesting over something that in all fairness just won't happen. I don't like it, but Milograd just isn't going anywhere.

[QuietDad]

Personally, we should have strong relations with ALL the GCR's. It's the core of the game and we should all have someway of working together. This is destined to go the route of our non-existent relationship with The West Pacific due to issues at the time with Punk Daddy. Those issues have LONNNNG passed and by severing ties the way we did, re-establishing communications never happened. Let Lazerus do what Lazerus wants to do. It's not our issue. We have plenty to focus on in our own region.

[Unibot]

I agree with G-R. Osiris was a lot different as a case than Lazarus -- in Osiris, the constitution was voided illegally, the regime that replaced it lacked a lot of structure (its basically a fluffy anarchic placeholder for Asta's dictatorship) and the endorsements on Astarial were dropping like flies. Lazarus changed its constitution legally,  it has a defined structure and the endorsements on Milograd are fairly strong. 

 

We have to choose who we're going to bite more wisely or else we're going to continue to gain a reputation for dropping treaties and embassies at the drop of a hat. 

 

I think we would be better off maintaining the Lazarus-The South Pacific treaty as both a security mechanism and a line of communication with the Lazarus administration. 

[Belschaft]

I'm tempted to say 'I told you so'. If people want to keep pretending we're allied with Lazarus then I'm fine with that, but don't delude yourselves into thinking it is anything more than a scrap of paper.