[ADVISORY QUESTION] Treaties

The Conclave
1

G’day,

I am coming to you, to ask you (most likely Deputy Provost or Provost, but opinion of more experienced Magisters is welcomed too) about treaties. Do we have any limitations for the treaties? Are treaties accepted in the form they are now (stating some alliance)? Or can we also submit treaties aiming for different things? I’m mostly interested if we can submit a Non-Aggresion Pact, or treaty / pact of friendliness or if we can guarantee independence of another region? And speaking of the last one - is treaty needed? Or can we have it just as the executive order of a Delegate?

Cheers,
Lib

2

Seems like questions for the Conclave to me.

3

I mean I don’t really know but hell, if a NAP can come through I’m all for one of those coming through. SoM and Conk are vague

4

— Begin quote from ____

Do we have any limitations for the treaties? Are treaties accepted in the form they are now (stating some alliance)? Or can we also submit treaties aiming for different things? I’m mostly interested if we can submit a Non-Aggresion Pact, or treaty / pact of friendliness or if we can guarantee independence of another region?

— End quote

The only rule I can find on treaties is that they require ratification by a majority vote of the Magisterium. That, and the implicit understanding that they may not violate the existing laws or treaties of The East Pacific.

— Begin quote from ____

And speaking of the last one - is treaty needed? Or can we have it just as the executive order of a Delegate?

— End quote

Presumably some degree of foreign relations could be managed without a treaty, but neither region could be held to any obligations.

5

I tend to agree with Wallenburg. However, I would go further in saying that such things as NAPs and guarantees of independence should be written in the form of a treaty, so as to give the Magisterium authority to overlook it and ensure that the citizenry is represented. As for what a “treaty” is, I would call it any formal arrangement between two or more regions which has a document of any kind detailing the terms of the arrangement.

6

Thank you for replies, Arbiters.

Also Paki - good note. Guarantee of independence would in form of treaty would make more sense - so that, if they attack our ally or anything, we can invalidate (Im not sure if that’s even a word, but I don’t have a better idea) the treaty.

7

I’m back and I’ll give my own answer to this:

— Begin quote from ____

Do we have any limitations for the treaties?

— End quote

As far as I know, not really besides Concordat requirements that Wall mentioned.

— Begin quote from ____

Are treaties accepted in the form they are now (stating some alliance)? Or can we also submit treaties aiming for different things?

— End quote

Treaties are any form of agreement between two countries I’d the definition multiple dictionaries are providing me.

Based on that, I would say we could make a lot of things a “treaty”. For example, a Non-Aggression Pact I’d a treaty.

— Begin quote from ____

I’m mostly interested if we can submit a Non-Aggresion Pact, or treaty / pact of friendliness or if we can guarantee independence of another region? And speaking of the last one - is treaty needed?

— End quote

A Non Aggression Pact or a Pact of Friendliness is a treaty and can be submitted.

However, a Guarantee of Independence is not a treaty. A GoI is one region guaranteeing protection to another, and by it’s wording alone usually means a stronger power protecting a weaker power, whether said weaker power wants it or not. A GoI is not an Agreement between two regions but rather one region declaring a certain action, therefore it is not a treaty and therefore doesn’t have to be submitted to the Magisterium.

In other words, I would say that by itself a GoI cannot be submitted as a treaty. A resolution would, in a legal manner, be better fitting.

A GoI could be written into a treaty, but again it would be a one sided thing in what should be a mutual document.

As for whether a GoI should be written as a treaty or not…

In all honesty I don’t see the point. It’s an affirmative action taken by one region so it seems weird to ask the target region for it’s approval.

I think a GoI is a perfect example of executive policy and order, and I would think it best for stand alone GoIs to remain as executive orders. However, I do think it could make sense to put in a GoI as a singular item in a multi-item treaty.