International Forums.   Posted by Referee.Group: 0
Saudi Arabia
 player, 41 posts
Tue 13 Feb 2018
at 09:35
Re: Ships to Order
UK:
In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 93):

The UK would like to open a dialogue on the efficacy of the United Nations. The division of Iraq as a sovereign power by its neighbors shows a total and complete lack of power by the UN in its current charter.
The UK sees the dissolution of Iraq as a blatant land grab, one which the UN was clearly incapable of calling a halt to in its current charter. Ergo, The UK proposed that the United Nations Charter be rewritten to give it more policing power OR that it be dissolved; either give it the power to do its job, or eliminate it as a useless rubber stamp for whatever power is manipulating it.


Thats one way to see it (we'd call it the Western one, no offense intended). From the Arabian point of view, things are different...

Iraq is an artificial country created after WW1 in the Sykes-Picot agreement, but never fully accepted by its own population. Tensions created for this were spiking to civil war, and Saudi Arabia intervened to avoid it (something we could have achieved if not for Canadian meddling) and to stop the abuses on Sunni population by a sectarian government.

Now, after Canadian meddling has provoked a unwanted (from Saudi side) war (BTW, helping the caliphate with it), we don’t see reunification as a possibility, as it would lead to revenges and wanton destruction. Saudi Arabia will keep its protection on Western Iraq as the only way to avoid it, and as the best way to finish IC once and forever.

Arabian people must have a saying in their borders, instead of just abiding to Sykes-Picot old agreement, whoese basis, while might have even been good intended, are no longer applicable.

USA:
In reply to UK (msg # 118):

Reform of the Security Council has been previously discussed, it was unfortunately derailed by a nuclear strike. A situation that the UN Security council managed to resolve without the world degenerating into a general exchange of Nuclear weapons.

In addition to reaching a, if not adequate, then acceptable settlement regarding the second Korean war and the Chinese Strike, the united nations has overseen the peacekeeping mission in the Kurdish regions, in securing peace and assuring the withdrawal of Chinese troops from Iran following the Gulf Incident. That being said the UN relies upon consensus, and that is important for its stability and its authority.

On the current matter of Iraq, no motion has yet been brought before the UN Security council, though there has been conversations about the current situation between members of the P5.

The United Nations offers a means for the world to ensure that pacific settlements can be reached through consensus.

Whilst we agree, in principle, that the United Nations requires strengthening, such action requires the support of all members of the security council, and to date no such agreement has been able to be reached - maybe the time is now.

We welcome the UK's statement, and would support them taking the lead in trying to reach some consensus on a reformation of the security council in particular.

The US would be particularly keen on resurrecting some form of the plan proposed by the UK in 2040, removing the veto, expanding the number of permanent members and imposing a 2/3rds majority of permanent members to agree for a resolution to be binding

Do any other members of the P5 have any thoughts on this?


When UN becomes the neutral arbiter of international affairs, treating everyone (even Israel) with the same rules when it comes to obey its resolutions and not allowing the big ones to act freely while forcing the not so big ones to abide, then we will begin to believe it might be useful.

If you want to reinforce UN role in international affairs, begin by forcing Israel to give up the non-recognized occupied territories and to compensate for the mistreatment of Palestinian population. Force them to give up their nukes, or don't complain when others want them too.

Then, and only then, the Muslim world will be able to see UN as anything else than a power tool for the big ones to impose their will on the weaker ones.

Saudi Arabia is not doing anything that Israel has not done with UN acquiescence, just with differnet intent. While Israel is occupying Palestine with hostile intent, Saudi Arabia is protecting the Iraqi sunnis from a sectarian government, while Israel is ruining the Palestinians and keeping their boot over them, Saudi Arabia wants the development of the whole zone and the wellfaring of the population. While Israel is destroying any semblance to Palestinian infrastructures to avoid them to develop, Saudi Arabia is building them to allow development, that hopefully will bring peace, to grow.
Saudi Arabia
 player, 42 posts
Thu 15 Feb 2018
at 12:39
Re: Ships to Order
Saudi Arabia has some oil SRUs to sell. Contact us if you're interesed.

OOC:

I'm still waiting for some answers from Kelvin about its exact effects, and if they can be used this turn or will be reserves to avoid shortfalls next turns.
Nigeria
 player, 8 posts
Sat 17 Feb 2018
at 14:11
Re: Ships to Order
In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 121):

Nigeria also has Oil SRU unit spare to sell.

Contact me in private for detail.
Nordic Federation
 player, 16 posts
Sun 18 Feb 2018
at 16:07
Re: Ships to Order
In reply to Saudi Arabia (msg # 120):

While the Nordic Federation is not a member of the P-5, we support the American proposal.
Nordic Federation
 player, 17 posts
Sun 18 Feb 2018
at 16:31
Re: Ships to Order
In reply to Nordic Federation (msg # 123):

Following the ESA assets splitting among its members, the Nordic Federation is offering the launcher services of two (2) of its rockets, Hamingja 1.2 (TL8.8, 1800t each) based at Andoya and Esrange space center.

The Nordic Federation also has Oil SRU unit to sell.

For any of these matter, contact me in private.
Brazil
 player, 11 posts
Tue 20 Feb 2018
at 20:25
Re: Ships to Order
In reply to Nordic Federation (msg # 124):

Greetings, gentlemen.

Brazil is interested in buying OIL, please contact me if you have amounts you willing to sell.
Please provide your proposal with terms and conditions.

Regards,
Mr. Presidente
Russia
 player, 37 posts
Fri 30 Mar 2018
at 11:59
Re: Ships to Order
Gentlemen,

Russian goverment consideres that soon interplanetary voyages will became mundane, so it is time to arrange an international Orbital Quarantine Command (OQC).

quote:
The Orbital Quarantine Command is a quasi-military police force
charged with protecting Earth from biological contamination. Any
Human-compatible biosystem carries with it the risk of infection.
OQC is organised to stop that, with a network of ships and
boarding cutters, along with staff on every port-of-call station in
Earth orbit.


So far we face not a big threat and not a big traffic from colonies on Mars and Ceres. But since liquid water on Mars is confirmed, then there is a chance for microscopic life forms on Mars, with all the consequences for earthlings. Space traffic will grow, risks will grow, so it is better to be on a safe side from the very beginning. I am sure that all space-faring nations have proper quarantine procedures but Russia will feel safer if a special international force will provide proper administration of all the cargoes going down to Earth.

Also combined efforts for orbital space control will be reasonable. We already had a close call, back in 2035:

quote:
UN Space Agency Warns Space Risk: “Now that we’re launching so many orbital platforms and zero-gee hotels up there, there is just too much junk just floating about. Just yesterday we noticed five identical class IV objects in crowded orbits that suddenly appeared out of nowhere and won’t answer hails...who was crazy enough to put up something that massive without bothering to telling us! They won’t even answer any of our hails and we have had to route traffic around them… Sooner or later if we don’t clean up low earth orbit the consequences will be horrific”


Probably those five unidentified objects were responsible for communication jam right before Korean war. I suppose this is exactly job for OQC to keep Earth orbit clear from such kind of threats, too. If these objects were intercepted by OQC instead of being ignored by UN Space Agency, we could have avoided many troubles.

This message was last edited by the player at 12:02, Fri 30 Mar.

Germany
 player, 385 posts
Fri 30 Mar 2018
at 12:18
Re: Ships to Order
Russia:
Gentlemen,

Also combined efforts for orbital space control will be reasonable. We already had a close call, back in 2035:

quote:
UN Space Agency Warns Space Risk: “Now that we’re launching so many orbital platforms and zero-gee hotels up there, there is just too much junk just floating about. Just yesterday we noticed five identical class IV objects in crowded orbits that suddenly appeared out of nowhere and won’t answer hails...who was crazy enough to put up something that massive without bothering to telling us! They won’t even answer any of our hails and we have had to route traffic around them… Sooner or later if we don’t clean up low earth orbit the consequences will be horrific”


Probably those five unidentified objects were responsible for communication jam right before Korean war. I suppose this is exactly job for OQC to keep Earth orbit clear from such kind of threats, too. If these objects were intercepted by OQC instead of being ignored by UN Space Agency, we could have avoided many troubles.


THis is quite close to the former German suggestion:

Germany:
In view of the recent events and the chaos produced by the unknown origin  jammers in orbit, Germany believes some control must be exercited to orbital objects.

In this goal, Germany proposes the creation of a UN agency dedicated to the control of orbital objects and to mediate any issues they may produce (let’s call it UNOCA, UN Orbital Control Agency).

The main goal of this agency should be a census of orbital objects and whom do they belong (to avoid opposition, its exact nature and mission would not necessarily be stated), to avoid the appearance of more unidentified objects (that should since now be considered hostile).

The secondary mission would be to mediate any dispute orbits could produce, and any accident this might produce.

The tertiary goal would be to help the withdrawal of any objects not in use, to help avoiding clogging orbit or accidents with them.

Any comments, supports oppositions or suggerences?

OOC:

Needless to say, it’s not my intent to begin bickering about those details in the game, just to assume they mediate them and, most important, to warn all players should more such unidentified objects appear in orbit (or identify the owner of any object acting suspiciously or hostile).


So, of course, Germany supports you proposal.
Russia
 player, 38 posts
Fri 30 Mar 2018
at 13:16
Re: Ships to Order
In reply to Germany (msg # 127):

OOC:
In game terms, how much Orbital Quarantine Command would cost us? Or currently it is such small organisation that only a mutual declaration would be enough?
USA
 NPC, 79 posts
Fri 30 Mar 2018
at 14:09
Re: Ships to Order
In reply to Germany (msg # 127):

This idea has definite merits, how do you intend to form such a force of customs vessels though?

The US did recently construct the Hornet class, a fast cutter style class, given the current small number of ships one such vessel seems to fit the needs you currently have - the US would be willing to detach the Hornet to cover such a duty for the UN, assuming the Security Council can formulate rules of engagement that we can agree to.

This may, again, be a time to suggest we engage in a discussion about UNSC reform.
Co-GM
 GM, 187 posts
Fri 30 Mar 2018
at 14:26
Re: Ships to Order
Russia:
In reply to Germany (msg # 127):

OOC:
In game terms, how much Orbital Quarantine Command would cost us? Or currently it is such small organisation that only a mutual declaration would be enough?


In game terms agreement between you will allow your skilled bureaucracy, or in this case the UN's bureaucracy, to formulate the best plans they can with the resources they have available - agreement between players sets the tone for the world and expresses the general opinion of all nations. Just getting agreement to this will factor into the GMs decisions about what is happening, and how. It will be noted that you are 'making an effort'

If you wish for this to have significant and/or specific effects, you need to state exactly what you are attempting to achieve in terms of game mechanics and spend PAs or other resources to make that happen

Alternatively, the GM is always prepared to hear other suggestions (per 1.4 Q9) - if you have an idea for how this could work in game then suggest it and the GM can either agree or shoot it down (make it simple and easy to administer and that will be a lot less likely)
Russia
 player, 39 posts
Fri 30 Mar 2018
at 18:33
Re: Ships to Order
Co-GM:
In game terms agreement between you will allow your skilled bureaucracy, or in this case the UN's bureaucracy, to formulate the best plans they can with the resources they have available - agreement between players sets the tone for the world and expresses the general opinion of all nations. Just getting agreement to this will factor into the GMs decisions about what is happening, and how. It will be noted that you are 'making an effort'


OOC:
I think, for simplicity, such statement will be enough currently: "nations arranged a reasonable shield against avoidable threats in the form of international OQC". When time will come and GM decides that OQC starts drawing noticeable resources, then GM informs us about that and players arrange a pool of resources. I think we can trust GM what "reasonable" is. Mostly... :)

OQC currently should be a simple procedure "before going down, all cargoes must be inspected by OQC examination party; OQC inspectors must be kept aboard at least one OT in Earth orbit; anything in orbit or entering atmosphere without OQC green light is subject to missile target practice".

This message was lightly edited by the player at 18:34, Fri 30 Mar.

Nordic Federation
 player, 19 posts
Fri 30 Mar 2018
at 21:31
Re: Ships to Order
In reply to Russia (msg # 131):

THe Nordic Federation support the russian proposal.  However, enforcing a quarantine upon all arriving ships involve one or several ship with UNO mandate, and possibly a resting place where ship and crew can disembark, rest and resupply.

We speak of a dedicated orbital outpost, and one or two armed ship with military grade drive, and all associated supply and support.  That several hundred billions dollars to create and several a year to support, including launching capability.

Nordic Federation believe in the treat and the need to manage it, but wonder how to keep the cost down.

Nordic Federation doesn't have space asset for these, but agree to support such an endeavor.

FInally, since it may involve the inbounding of a ship owned by a sovereign entity, which is akin to a declaration of war, we need a strong UNO mandate for this project.
Nigeria
 player, 9 posts
Fri 30 Mar 2018
at 21:34
Re: Ships to Order
In reply to Nordic Federation (msg # 132):

Nigeria support the idea and will help however possible despite our limited capability.
Co-GM
 GM, 188 posts
Fri 30 Mar 2018
at 21:51
Re: Ships to Order
Russia:
When time will come and GM decides that OQC starts drawing noticeable resources, then GM informs us about that and players arrange a pool of resources. I think we can trust GM what "reasonable" is.

Nope. The GM will make no comment, recommendation or judgement on when you should do something. If the world comes to an agreement all well and good. Anything more you need to drive forwards.
Any other way madness lies
Russia
 player, 40 posts
Fri 4 May 2018
at 07:40
Re: Ships to Order
Russia informes, that Russia moved its Solar Array from Luna orbit to Earth orbit, so if you need additional power in Earth orbit, talk to Russia.
USA
 NPC, 80 posts
Sat 5 May 2018
at 09:39
Turkish/Armenian border clashes
In reply to Russia (msg # 135):

Circumstances have prompted us to issue the following statement:

In light of the prevailing circumstances between Turkey and Armenia we wish to remind the international community that the United States takes it's commitment as a member of NATO incredibly seriously, and that NATO's commitment to mutual defence to counter any aggression from external threat remains strong and unwavering.

An attack against one is an attack against all.

We will act to counter any attack against any member

we will not permit aggression against any member to go unanswered

We hope for a peaceful resolution and call for calm, and the immediate cessation of clashes along the Turkish/Armenian border.
Nigeria
 player, 10 posts
Sat 5 May 2018
at 12:33
Turkish/Armenian border clashes
In reply to USA (msg # 136):

Nigeria renew its request to the United Nations Organisations, and to the security council to force a cessation of hostility between the belligerent, and to send a neutral peacekeeping mission in Armenia to enforce the cease fire.

Nigeria has already pledged support to this peacekeeping mission and is ready to send security troop in Armenia.
Germany
 player, 386 posts
Sat 5 May 2018
at 12:58
Re: Turkish/Armenian border clashes
USA:
In reply to Russia (msg # 135):

Circumstances have prompted us to issue the following statement:

In light of the prevailing circumstances between Turkey and Armenia we wish to remind the international community that the United States takes it's commitment as a member of NATO incredibly seriously, and that NATO's commitment to mutual defence to counter any aggression from external threat remains strong and unwavering.

An attack against one is an attack against all.

We will act to counter any attack against any member

we will not permit aggression against any member to go unanswered

We hope for a peaceful resolution and call for calm, and the immediate cessation of clashes along the Turkish/Armenian border.


Germany supports this statement
Saudi Arabia
 player, 44 posts
Sat 5 May 2018
at 13:45
Re: Turkish/Armenian border clashes
Since 2040, in order to protect the Iraqi Sunni population and to avoid the Iraqi sectarian government (which, BTW, did not move a finger to fight IC when occupied part of its own territory) to perform what appeared to be the beginning of a genocide against them, Saudi troops occupied western Iraq and are now administrating it on the basis of their people’s will.

Saudi troops and government have begun reconstruction operations there, with the goal to stabilize the zone and allow the many refugees in Saudi Arabia to return home, but Canada involvement has prompted the sectarian Iraqi government to attack us and to hinder our reconstruction of the zone.

The same Canada that blessed the Sykes-Picot agreement that established unstable borders in the zone…

The same Canada that blesses the Israeli occupation of Palestine, with the lasting destruction of its infrastructures and mistreatment of its population…

The same Canada that did not help us in the fight against IC…

So, as much as we hate to take this move, we have no option left but to see Canada as hostile. In consequence:
  1. Saudi embassy in Ottawa is closed. Saudi personnel will leave Canada ASAP.
  2. Canadian embassy in Riyadh is also closed. Canadian personnel has 48 hours to leave Saudi Arabia. The building itself will be sealed or (at Canada option) be left under care of any other country we both can agree (US or UK would be acceptable for us).
  3. All Canadian companies’ assets are seized by the Saudi government. We hope they will be returned when Canada comes to its senses.
  4. All Canadian nationals in Saudi Arabia are given 7 days to leave it or be taken interned in champs to avoid spies (exception: Canadian personnel belonging to humanitarian NGOs will just be expelled to a neutral country). Their personal belongings they have no time to recover will be sent where they ask them to.
  5. No Canadian national will be allowed into Saudi Arabia for the duration of the crisis (some exceptions may be given to Canadian Muslims performing their pilgrimage to Mecca, if they can show they cannot postpone it. This will be seen in a case-by-case basis. To this end we ask Canadian government to allow the consulates in Ottawa, Montreal and Vancouver to remain open. If not, we’ll see to take care of those cases thorough any other GCC country consulates).
  6. Saudi airspace is closed to Canadian airplanes, be them civilian or military.
  7. Any Canadian ship in the Gulf of Arabia has 5 days to leave it. Any such ship seen on it not heading for the Ormuz straits will be seized. Any resistance will be met by lethal force by Saudi fleet and air forces.
  8. Saudi Arabia warns Canada against allowing the Iraqis to use their satellites for military use. If we have any proof they are using them, they will be seen as legitimate targets.


In the Iraqi front:
  1. The port of Basra is blockaded for the duration of the crisis. Any freighter trying to enter or leave it will be searched by the Saudi Navy. Humanitarian help will be allowed, but if they carry any military or double use cargo they will be seized. No exports will be allowed when leaving Basra. Resistance will be met with lethal force. No tanker will be allowed into it.
  2. Saudi Arabia asks for a 10 km truce area around Najaf to allow the Shiite Muslims pilgrimage to it from any side of the border. If this is abused by Iraqi forces, this will be no longer.
  3. Saudi Arabia pledges not to cross the current border with Iraq unless forced to. No offensive actions will be taken, but the border will be defended to allow reconstruction and keep its people safe.


To other countries:
  1. We ask ACNUR help to care the many refugees this crisis (and Yemeni one) are creating, as our efforts to allow them to return home need some more time and are hindered by this crisis.
  2. We ask our common allies with Canada to mediate in this crisis, as we believe a full war can still be avoided.
  3. Saudi Arabia restates its intent to stabilize the zone and keep it peaceful, and denounces Canadian interference as the cause of more suffering and instability.
  4. Saudi Arabia restates we have no quarrel with Iraqi or Canadian people, but their governments seem to be willing to avoid stability in the zone.
  5. Saudi Arabia apologizes any inconvenience all this measures (taken against our own will)  produce on uninvolved parties.


OOC: I know this will have little to none efecto in the game (aside from some obvious ones and a probable relations change), being mostly color. Any such effect is left to the referee.
Russia
 player, 41 posts
Mon 7 May 2018
at 08:28
Turkish/Armenian border clashes
In reply to USA (msg # 136):

Russia declares, that since Armenia is a member of ODKB, any hostile military units attempting to cross Armenian border will be considered as agression against ODKB and will be pushed back by Russian forces.

Being said that, Russia discourages any offensive actions of both Turkish and Armenian forces. Russia insists on peaceful resolution of the conflict.

Being said that, Russia demands that NATO does not turn a blind eye to evidence of atrocities against ethnic Armenians within Turkish borders. Russia demands that international peacekeepers and observers were allowed into uprising areas in Turkey. Russia demands that NATO will not be used as a smoke screen for ethnical cleansing in Turkey.
Germany
 player, 387 posts
Mon 7 May 2018
at 18:22
Re: Turkish/Armenian border clashes
Russia:
In reply to USA (msg # 136):

Russia declares, that since Armenia is a member of ODKB, any hostile military units attempting to cross Armenian border will be considered as agression against ODKB and will be pushed back by Russian forces.


Any NATO support is defensive. Ofensive wars are outside NATO treaty.

We suggest to complete the deployment of Australian and Nigerian peacekeepers that Armenia refused and you so kindly lodged for now.

Russia:
Being said that, Russia discourages any offensive actions of both Turkish and Armenian forces. Russia insists on peaceful resolution of the conflict.


Germany fully support this Russian statement

Russia:
Being said that, Russia demands that NATO does not turn a blind eye to evidence of atrocities against ethnic Armenians within Turkish borders. Russia demands that international peacekeepers and observers were allowed into uprising areas in Turkey. Russia demands that NATO will not be used as a smoke screen for ethnical cleansing in Turkey.


Germany suggest to créate an international commission on this under the command of the International Penal Court. We discard ourselves (or any NATO members as Turkish allies) for this, and we ask you (or any ODKB memeger, as Armenian allies) to also discard yourselves for this.

China, Brazil, Indonesia or BRazil would be aceptable for Germany, but others may also be if you so suggest.
Nordic Federation
 player, 20 posts
Mon 7 May 2018
at 23:10
Re: Turkish/Armenian border clashes
In reply to Germany (msg # 141):

The Nordic Federation support the German proposal.

As a member of Nato, any and all support to Turkey is strictly of defensive nature, would be limited to Turkey territory.

Nordic Federation support the deployment of Blue Helmet peacekeeper to Armenia, Australian and Nigerian, under the United Nations Organisation (UNO) umbrella.
Nigeria
 player, 11 posts
Mon 7 May 2018
at 23:13
Re: Turkish/Armenian border clashes
In reply to Germany (msg # 141):

Nigeria is ready to deploy a Motorized Rifles brigade to Armenia, barring the UNO and Armenia support the deployment of said brigade.

Our brigade are already in Russian territory, waiting only for the approval.

Nigeria ask for a vote of UNO.
Germany
 player, 390 posts
Sun 13 May 2018
at 18:20
Re: Turkish/Armenian border clashes
Viweing current situation, Germany guesses is time to bump this old dicussion:

Russia:
Russia calls United Nations Security Council*, and offers to vote on following topics:

1) Nigeria, China and Australia receive mandate of UN peacekeepers in the area of Armenians’ uprising in Turkey. They are allowed to use force as necessary to ensure truce and enhance peaceful resolution. (Turkey and Armenia are invited as additional non-permanent members of UNSC for this vote).
OOC:
* The real rules of UNSC non-permanent membership are complicated, and Council is capped at 15 members. For the sake of The Game, if other Players do not object, I would offer that in-game UNSC consists of Player Countries, and is not capped at 15, and veto rule of 5 permanent members still remains.


As already said then, Germany is favorable to the deploying of UN peacekeepers in the borders and observers (or a UN Human Rights Comitee investigation) in the affected zones.