The Great Western Alliance

The Great Western Alliance

Article I - Sovereignty
All signatories shall retain their sovereignty and shall not take any action, directly or indirectly, that would threaten the sovereignty of any of the other signatories.

Article II - Non-aggression
All signatories pledge to refrain from any attacks upon the others, be it directly or indirectly. All signatories shall not condone any acts of aggression toward the others, nor shall they implement sanctions upon the others. All signatories furthermore pledge that diplomacy shall be the first action taken in any incident.

Article III - Mutual Defense
An act of war upon one signatory is to be considered an act of war upon all of the others and will be responded to with all available force.

Article IV - Optional Aggression
If a signatory wishes to pursue an offensive war and a request for assistance has been sent to the other signatories, then the respective signatories are encouraged but not required to provide assistance in any way they can, be it militarily or financially.

Article V - Civility
All signatories and their respective members shall remain civil to the others in any public area, and any disagreements shall be solved through private channels.

Article VI - Humanitarian Aid
In the event of a natural disaster or other event that results in the declaration of a State of Emergency, all signatories agree to aid the others in any and all capacities.

Article VII - Espionage
No signatories shall engage in any acts of espionage or conduct malicious in nature toward the other signatories, including but not limited to condoning acts of aggression upon the other and aiding an enemy. If any information is found that concerns any signatories, the other signatories shall provide said information immediately and without delays.

Article VIII - Termination
If any signatory wishes to withdraw from this alliance for any reason, said signatory must inform the others 72 hours in advance. This alliance shall remain active until the closure of the aforementioned period.

Supreme Holy Technocrat Roberto VI, Edo Edi Essum
Master Minister Marcus Albinoni- Foreign Relations, Edo Edi Essum

[KingIsaac, Hijjma, Oscalantine, Serliaq, Isis Rakael, and NX401 are encouraged to join.]

hmm the goverment will discuss it

TO. Advocates of Western Alliance
FROM. Oscalantine CEO, Executor Nathanial N. Kwon
SUBJECT. Concerning Western Alliance

Good day, advocates of Western Alliance. As you can tell from who this has been sent from, I am CEO of Oscalantine, Executor Nathanial N. Kwon. Please, for the sake of shorter title, call me Nate.

I am sending you this message with heavy heart and sadness in my mind, because the Oscalantine Board Council has decided against joining the Great Western Alliance. Therefore, I have been entrusted with this awfully distaste job of relaying the news to you.

The reason for our refusal is as follows:

1. The article III states the fact of mutual defense. While this does not inherently sound bad, we, the Incorporated States of Oscalantine, do not have neither the manpower or willingness to fight other's battles. In our core principle of government, Efficiency, we can only wage wars when the benefit outweighs cost. However, given the article III, we cannot choose which wars we should enter, and we are bonded with other nations in wars that we might not reap benefit from. I know that the chances of this occurring is slim, but our government principle refrains from us even approaching such a binding contract where even a slightest chance of inefficiency exists.

2. The article VII's section 2 is especially disturbing. As our nation is pro-business and pro-corporation, our government mustn't allow corporations within our country to be harmed due to our government's decisions. Article VII section 2 states that our country cannot aid the enemy. While this section is understandable, this section also includes Oscalantine not being able to sell weapon systems to the enemy countries of Western Alliance, if they are to exist. Such a binding cannot exist in a country whose primary objective is to be a spear and a shield for corporations.


I hope you have found these reasons reasonable and I hope that your alliance may prevail.

the king states that hijjma will follow:

Article I - Sovereignty
All signatories shall retain their sovereignty and shall not take any action, directly or indirectly, that would threaten the sovereignty of any of the other signatories.

Article II - Non-aggression
All signatories pledge to refrain from any attacks upon the others, be it directly or indirectly. All signatories shall not condone any acts of aggression toward the others, nor shall they implement sanctions upon the others. All signatories furthermore pledge that diplomacy shall be the first action taken in any incident.

Article V - Civility
All signatories and their respective members shall remain civil to the others in any public area, and any disagreements shall be solved through private channels.

Article VI - Humanitarian Aid
In the event of a natural disaster or other event that results in the declaration of a State of Emergency, all signatories agree to aid the others in any and all capacities.

Article VII - Espionage
No signatories shall engage in any acts of espionage or conduct malicious in nature toward the other signatories, including but not limited to condoning acts of aggression upon the other and aiding an enemy. If any information is found that concerns any signatories, the other signatories shall provide said information immediately and without delays.
the one and only reason for not agreeing to the otheer is that hijjma will not be draged into a war that has to do in no part with her government
:King Tony of the Kingdom of Hijjma

"Your Majesty, here is the new treaty that the nation of EEE is proposing" the Secretary of Foreign Affairs said.

"I see, but, is our first treaty with them terminated? Was it terminated?" the Queen replied.

"I think so, Your Majesty"

"OK then, I am signing it. Send it back to them but keep a copy" the Queen said.

______________________________________________________________________________

The Great Western Alliance

Article I - Sovereignty
All signatories shall retain their sovereignty and shall not take any action, directly or indirectly, that would threaten the sovereignty of any of the other signatories.

Article II - Non-aggression
All signatories pledge to refrain from any attacks upon the others, be it directly or indirectly. All signatories shall not condone any acts of aggression toward the others, nor shall they implement sanctions upon the others. All signatories furthermore pledge that diplomacy shall be the first action taken in any incident.

Article III - Mutual Defense
An act of war upon one signatory is to be considered an act of war upon all of the others and will be responded to with all available force.

Article IV - Optional Aggression
If a signatory wishes to pursue an offensive war and a request for assistance has been sent to the other signatories, then the respective signatories are encouraged but not required to provide assistance in any way they can, be it militarily or financially.

Article V - Civility
All signatories and their respective members shall remain civil to the others in any public area, and any disagreements shall be solved through private channels.

Article VI - Humanitarian Aid
In the event of a natural disaster or other event that results in the declaration of a State of Emergency, all signatories agree to aid the others in any and all capacities.

Article VII - Espionage
No signatories shall engage in any acts of espionage or conduct malicious in nature toward the other signatories, including but not limited to condoning acts of aggression upon the other and aiding an enemy. If any information is found that concerns any signatories, the other signatories shall provide said information immediately and without delays.

Article VIII - Termination
If any signatory wishes to withdraw from this alliance for any reason, said signatory must inform the others 72 hours in advance. This alliance shall remain active until the closure of the aforementioned period.

Signed by:

Queen Jeny
Queen of the Royal Nation of KingIsaac

hijjma is wishing to renew the treaty with KI please send a copy to queen jeny as fast as u can

hijjma wrote:

hijjma is wishing to renew the treaty with KI please send a copy to queen jeny as fast as u can

Consider it sign, my friend

so i guess EEE,KI and hijjma are the alliance
but hijjma will not be in a war if one is to happen after recent events hijjma is trying to stay out of most international affairs

king tony states this a words of advise to all nations"do any of u relize this is the route that led to WWI and WWII being world wars neither would have been a WORLD war if alliances were not made. this is also what led to the semi-regional war that wouldnt have happend if allies were not involed in other words hijjma has stated that her armed forces will not be used in a war caused by herslelf or by her allies"
just remeber that only in caae of invasion will i assit u

hijjma wrote:

king tony states this a words of advise to all nations"do any of u relize this is the route that led to WWI and WWII being world wars neither would have been a WORLD war if alliances were not made. this is also what led to the semi-regional war that wouldnt have happend if allies were not involed in other words hijjma has stated that her armed forces will not be used in a war caused by herslelf or by her allies"
just remeber that only in caae of invasion will i assit u

[That's completely fine.]

as i find it importent i will post this here [mabey occ but going to anyway]
hijjma is cutting off most forms of communication between ISIS and hijjma

[well i guess it is time to prepare the bunkers and evac the coastal areas and move the cilivans to Idris] the king reminded his highest generals in the throne room.the king states to general jeyy "the navy needs to be ready to defend our waters and keep others at bay"
"well sire the hijjma navy is the strongest of the western powers ans many of the eastern navies will aviod war ;if the need be we will be ready waiting for your command sire"the general bows and leaves thinking *the king has ordered me to prepare an def on mutiple fronts the biggest challenge so far.....* the king thinks that *well even Isis has no main navy bases in the west so we are safe for now...

Spoiler:

For the record, the first treaty was not terminated. This treaty merely allies yourself also with Hijjma and anyone else who joins.

Oscalantine wrote:

TO. Advocates of Western Alliance
FROM. Oscalantine CEO, Executor Nathanial N. Kwon
SUBJECT. Concerning Western Alliance

Good day, advocates of Western Alliance. As you can tell from who this has been sent from, I am CEO of Oscalantine, Executor Nathanial N. Kwon. Please, for the sake of shorter title, call me Nate.

I am sending you this message with heavy heart and sadness in my mind, because the Oscalantine Board Council has decided against joining the Great Western Alliance. Therefore, I have been entrusted with this awfully distaste job of relaying the news to you.

The reason for our refusal is as follows:

1. The article III states the fact of mutual defense. While this does not inherently sound bad, we, the Incorporated States of Oscalantine, do not have neither the manpower or willingness to fight other's battles. In our core principle of government, Efficiency, we can only wage wars when the benefit outweighs cost. However, given the article III, we cannot choose which wars we should enter, and we are bonded with other nations in wars that we might not reap benefit from. I know that the chances of this occurring is slim, but our government principle refrains from us even approaching such a binding contract where even a slightest chance of inefficiency exists.

2. The article VII's section 2 is especially disturbing. As our nation is pro-business and pro-corporation, our government mustn't allow corporations within our country to be harmed due to our government's decisions. Article VII section 2 states that our country cannot aid the enemy. While this section is understandable, this section also includes Oscalantine not being able to sell weapon systems to the enemy countries of Western Alliance, if they are to exist. Such a binding cannot exist in a country whose primary objective is to be a spear and a shield for corporations.


I hope you have found these reasons reasonable and I hope that your alliance may prevail.

For the Corporation!
~Nate~

[OCC]anyway OCSA I have refused to put my army on the line here just in case that some one here is invaded or u could do the same as hijjma wishes to keeps close ties with her neighbor. [OCC]

[[OOC - btw, EEE... I find contradiction in your alliance name. Shouldn't it be "Central Alliance," since you guys are (esp. hijima) are on the center of the region? I just thought that Central Alliance sound more epic than Great Western Alliance.

Also... EEE, is there a way for me to join the alliance but shift the mandate of mutual defense?

I was wondering if you can change a few things... like article III, where it states mandated mutual defense. But can you change it as mandated mutual support in case of war? So in a war, you don't need to declare war, but rather a loose confederacy where you can simply give financial, military, or civilian support instead. I think that sounds better than everyone declaring war on everyone. And if every Eastern nations declare war, then we would be threatened to join anyways.

Also... can you encourage free trade instead of discourage it? I really don't like Article VII. I was wondering if you can add another article that states that free trades are not discouraged by Western Alliance, that even in the case of war, free trade will be acceptable method of earning capital to support the alliance's finances.


I want to say this because I kind of want to join Western (or Central... lol... I love the name Central Alliance...) Alliance, but I find declaring war and discouraged free trade too binding. If we can work that out... I think I will be more accepting to join the alliance and help out against the eastern powers. Any takes?]]

Oscalantine wrote:

[[OOC - btw, EEE... I find contradiction in your alliance name. Shouldn't it be "Central Alliance," since you guys are (esp. hijima) are on the center of the region? I just thought that Central Alliance sound more epic than Great Western Alliance. Also... EEE, is there a way for me to join the alliance but shift the mandate of mutual defense? I was wondering if you can change a few things...like article III, where it states mandated mutual defense. But can you change it as mandated mutual support in case of war? So in a war, you don't need to declare war, but rather a loose confederacy where you can simply give financial, military, or civilian support instead. I think that sounds better than everyone declaring war on everyone. And if every Eastern nations declare war, then we would be threatened to join anyways. Also... can you encourage free trade instead of discourage it? I really don't like Article VII. I was wondering if you can add another article that states that free trades are not discouraged by Western Alliance, that even in the case of war, free trade will be acceptable method of earning capital to support the alliance's finances. I want to say this because I kind of want to join Western (or Central... lol... I love the name Central Alliance...) Alliance, but I find declaring war and discouraged free trade too binding. If we can work that out... I think I will be more accepting to join the alliance and help out against the eastern powers. Any takes?]]

[OCC] Yes Oscalantine you can as I have only agreed to assist in case of an invasion.[OCC]

Oscalantine wrote:

[[OOC - btw, EEE... I find contradiction in your alliance name. Shouldn't it be "Central Alliance," since you guys are (esp. hijima) are on the center of the region? I just thought that Central Alliance sound more epic than Great Western Alliance.

Also... EEE, is there a way for me to join the alliance but shift the mandate of mutual defense?

I was wondering if you can change a few things... like article III, where it states mandated mutual defense. But can you change it as mandated mutual support in case of war? So in a war, you don't need to declare war, but rather a loose confederacy where you can simply give financial, military, or civilian support instead. I think that sounds better than everyone declaring war on everyone. And if every Eastern nations declare war, then we would be threatened to join anyways.

Also... can you encourage free trade instead of discourage it? I really don't like Article VII. I was wondering if you can add another article that states that free trades are not discouraged by Western Alliance, that even in the case of war, free trade will be acceptable method of earning capital to support the alliance's finances.


I want to say this because I kind of want to join Western (or Central... lol... I love the name Central Alliance...) Alliance, but I find declaring war and discouraged free trade too binding. If we can work that out... I think I will be more accepting to join the alliance and help out against the eastern powers. Any takes?]]

I'm sorry, Osc, but articles III and VII can not be amended to be weaker. That would be a threat to international security.
However, you can certainly be sympathetic to us three. Then you could assist us, mildly, and still make boatloads off of hypothetical war.
Or another treaty could be established for GWA observers, which would have less binding obligations.
You really want us to rename ourselves the Central Powers, don't you, Osc?
As for why we are the Great Western Alliance, on the older map we were as far West as one could go. Yeah.

Ironic due to the fact that I am now the farthest west that you can go. I assume that makes me General-Secretary of the GWA? Just a joke, I assure you. Since I wasn't invited to take part in the "Great Western Alliance", I'll take my leave. Good luck.

MFA of Edo Edi Essum wrote:

Oscalantine wrote:

[[OOC - btw, EEE... I find contradiction in your alliance name. Shouldn't it be "Central Alliance," since you guys are (esp. hijima) are on the center of the region? I just thought that Central Alliance sound more epic than Great Western Alliance.

Also... EEE, is there a way for me to join the alliance but shift the mandate of mutual defense?

I was wondering if you can change a few things... like article III, where it states mandated mutual defense. But can you change it as mandated mutual support in case of war? So in a war, you don't need to declare war, but rather a loose confederacy where you can simply give financial, military, or civilian support instead. I think that sounds better than everyone declaring war on everyone. And if every Eastern nations declare war, then we would be threatened to join anyways.

Also... can you encourage free trade instead of discourage it? I really don't like Article VII. I was wondering if you can add another article that states that free trades are not discouraged by Western Alliance, that even in the case of war, free trade will be acceptable method of earning capital to support the alliance's finances.
of Hijj

I want to say this because I kind of want to join Western (or Central... lol... I love the name Central Alliance...) Alliance, but I find declaring war and discouraged free trade too binding. If we can work that out... I think I will be more accepting to join the alliance and help out against the eastern powers. Any takes?]]

I'm sorry, Osc, but articles III and VII can not be amended to be weaker. That would be a threat to international security.
However, you can certainly be sympathetic to us three. Then you could assist us, mildly, and still make boatloads off of hypothetical war.
Or another treaty could be established for GWA observers, which would have less binding obligations.
You really want us to rename ourselves the Central Powers, don't you, Osc?
As for why we are the Great Western Alliance, on the older map we were as far West as one could go. Yeah.

[Occ] Well Edo I am overriding that with a few ideas I could work on a treaty for Ocsa.
And Civa well of course you are invited in fact....[Occ]
"King Tony of Hijjma formaly invites Civa to the GWA"
[Occ] Hows is that civa?[Occ]

Civa-Orchestra wrote:

Ironic due to the fact that I am now the farthest west that you can go. I assume that makes me General-Secretary of the GWA? Just a joke, I assure you. Since I wasn't invited to take part in the "Great Western Alliance", I'll take my leave. Good luck.

[Of course you are invited! We would love for you to join.]

To: The Member Nations of the GWA
From: Lord-Protector Rico d'Avrès of Civa-Orchestra
Subject: Refusal of Alliance

When I received word of your invitation, I became excited. The Protectorate rarely engages in international affairs. We have become known to be an avid practicer of isolationism. I have plans to change this, which is the reason why I bothered to write you at all. As for the alliance, Civa-Orchestra will not partake in it. Only a short while ago, I received word from the Governor-Generals, who had just voted whether or not to admit the Protectorate into the GWA. They voted unanimously to not join. I agree with them, and I will give you the reasons why.

Neutrality

At the moment, along with isolationism, the Protectorate is neutral to all political and military affairs. To join an alliance means that the Protectorate would favor the nation-states within, and thus alienate the ones outside. This, indirectly, results in tensions in the future. Furthermore, the treaty speaks of giving military aid, which makes this a military alliance/treaty. The Protectorate has no need for military aid.

Of course, this is just a minor reason. There are governments within this alliance that the Protectorate refuses to associate itself with.

Absolutist States

They are merely an ugly blemish on the face of Tiberiam. They smother Tiberiam's beauty by their needless militarism and tyranny. Their rulers set up puppet parliaments who have no real power. Having one leader with unlimited powers ensures the oppression of their people. Perhaps I cannot stress this enough, but the Protectorate and her people will have no dealings with these false regimes. The Protectorate is based on democratic values, and will never coexist peacefully with any anti-democratic nations.

Civa-Orchestra will not recognize them. However, as a neutral state, we will never pressure them, or ask them to discontinue their way of government. We will let their citizens do that for us.

Theocratic Governments

The Protectorate has no qualms against religion. It is practiced by millions of her citizens daily. However, when it interferes with the government, that is when it becomes a nuisance. A religious government is corrupted and inefficient. With inquisitions, and intolerance of other religions, it is no better than an absolutist state. Both populaces are oppressed, and neither have true freedoms that are present within a democratic state.

I would like to mention that the Protectorate does not condemn any non-democratic nations. However, while they exist, they threaten the liberties of the Protectorate's people. I am sure a mutual agreement can be made between Civa-Orchestra and any other nation that fits that role.

The Protectorate wishes to be a friend to all, if possible.

Civa-Orchestra wrote:

To: The Member Nations of the GWA
From: Lord-Protector Rico d'Avrès of Civa-Orchestra
Subject: Refusal of Alliance

When I received word of your invitation, I became excited. The Protectorate rarely engages in international affairs. We have become known to be an avid practicer of isolationism. I have plans to change this, which is the reason why I bothered to write you at all. As for the alliance, Civa-Orchestra will not partake in it. Only a short while ago, I received word from the Governor-Generals, who had just voted whether or not to admit the Protectorate into the GWA. They voted unanimously to not join. I agree with them, and I will give you the reasons why.

Neutrality

At the moment, along with isolationism, the Protectorate is neutral to all political and military affairs. To join an alliance means that the Protectorate would favor the nation-states within, and thus alienate the ones outside. This, indirectly, results in tensions in the future. Furthermore, the treaty speaks of giving military aid, which makes this a military alliance/treaty. The Protectorate has no need for military aid.

Of course, this is just a minor reason. There are governments within this alliance that the Protectorate refuses to associate itself with.

Absolutist States

They are merely an ugly blemish on the face of Tiberiam. They smother Tiberiam's beauty by their needless militarism and tyranny. Their rulers set up puppet parliaments who have no real power. Having one leader with unlimited powers ensures the oppression of their people. Perhaps I cannot stress this enough, but the Protectorate and her people will have no dealings with these false regimes. The Protectorate is based on democratic values, and will never coexist peacefully with any anti-democratic nations.

Civa-Orchestra will not recognize them. However, as a neutral state, we will never pressure them, nor will we ask them to discontinue their way of government. We will let their citizens do that for us.

Theocratic Governments

The Protectorate has no qualms against religion. It is practiced by millions of her citizens daily. However, when it interferes with the government, that is where it becomes a nuisance. A religious government is a corrupted and inefficient government. With inquisitions, and intolerance of other religions, it is no better than an absolutist state. Both populaces are oppressed, and neither have true freedoms that are present within a democratic state.

I wish to stress the fact that the Protectorate does not condemn any non-democratic nations. However, while they exist, they threaten the liberties of the Protectorate's people. I am sure a mutual agreement can be made between Civa-Orchestra and any other nation that fits that role.

Peace over War. Victory over Defeat. Death over Dishonor.

[Occ] Ok I am fine with that. And not all dictatorships are not bad. Haha [Occ]

Spoiler:

[If you want to be a friend to all governments, it helps not to condemn their basic philosophies. ]

[As for dictatorships, is a democracy actually inherently superior or more efficient than an autocratic government? I would say no.]

[Nonetheless, EEE is not autocratic. The Supreme Holy Technocrat controls only the executive branch. The legislative and judicial branches are fully independent. Senators are popularly elected; voting is mandatory. I will someday post a full explanation of my government for anyone to read.]

((I like to point out bull shit.

As for a democracy being superior and more efficient, I'll have to say yes. Having one person control the entire government (or part of the government in your case) is idiotic. Maybe, you are right. After all, the majority of the countries in the real world aren't democracies. Oh wait, they are. I wonder why that is.

Of course, I can give my reasons, and you could give me yours. I'd rather not waste my time or yours. Neither of us are correct, blah blah.

Nice to know that you will release a full explanation of your country. Seeing that you haven't gotten around to it yet, really shows your priorities. Then again, people do have real lives.))