NationStates Jolt Archive


[E20] Pacific Rim (2nd Darwin) Talks

Cylea
04-05-2006, 04:10
The Date is December of 1957:

Expanding from the unprecedent success of Sino-Australian dialogues in early 1956, a conference has been called in Darwin, Australia to discuss the Status Quo and Future of the Pacific Ocean. Invited are many major members of the Seoul Conference Treaty, Great Britain, Australia, and the United States. It is hoped that these discussions will usher in an era of cooperation and peace, from one side of the ocean to the other.

The Australian delegation to the Talks is lead by Jonathan Brauks, a prominent member of Parliament. He opens the discussion with a welcome to all nations and a review of the recently concluded war games between China and Australia (ooc: this would imply that at some point results are actually known :D --looking forward to it!).

But then it is down to business. Brauks spoke up again.

Gentlemen, again, thank you for coming. I have been instructed by government to put the following issue on the table, as it was left unresolved by the first Darwin talks and would be a nice warmup now.

The former Dutch East Indies and the surrounding area are the crossroads of nearly half a dozen nations, all with competing claims. The issue becomes especially important now that the energy sources that are so prevalent in the area have become an important global issue. Needless to say, we all have some interest in the area. For disputed regions like the Spratleys and border regions like the Strait of Malacca, does anybody have any proposals? There is no reason to leave any possible source of strife undiscussed--who knows what could fester into another issue like Holstien? Smoothing over bumpy spots now assures peace in the future...
Sharina
04-05-2006, 04:37
TAG for reference (I'll post IC'ly tomorrow or so)
Galveston Bay
04-05-2006, 05:19
Do to the immenent change in American Presidential Administrations, followed by the process required to man all of the senior positions (like a new Secretary of State for one thing), followed by having to deal with the situation in Portugal, the Americans don't come until May 1958
Haneastic
05-05-2006, 01:24
PM Hiroshi Aki leaned forward, I may not be the best person to look to on this issue, since Japan has no claim to the Spratley's, but I propose that whatever resources that the Spratley's may have should be divided amongst the nations claiming the islands, and have SCT and other nations provide peacekeepers to ensure that no nation takes advantage of the resources.
New Dornalia
05-05-2006, 02:24
IC Post coming.
Cylea
05-05-2006, 02:40
Brauks nodded slowly once at the Japanese PM but refrained from saying anything as the Korean delegate cleared his throat to speak...
New Dornalia
05-05-2006, 03:03
Brauks nodded slowly once at the Japanese PM but refrained from saying anything as the Korean delegate cleared his throat to speak...

Korea's delegate then said: "I propose the Spratlys be given to no one nation, but rather, they be made a neutral zone, with an international committee leasing rights as they saw fit and mediating disputes concerning the Spratlys.

Concerning my Japanese colleague's proposals, I would agree to an international peacekeeping unit there to prevent any problems.

As for the Straits of Malacca, I would propose two ideas. One is that we place the Straits under the custody of a neutral Malaysia, similar to that of Burgundy. The other is that we can agree to make it a zone free for all shipping and trade."

OOC: The second option in the Straits bit aims to try something like the proposed Free Trade Zone in the cone of South America.
Haneastic
05-05-2006, 03:08
Aki spoke, "I agree with the Korean delegate's proposal to make it a free trade zone. We can count on Malaysia being neutral now, but can we always? This obviously sounds paranoid, but one cannot be sure"
Cylea
05-05-2006, 03:23
Brauks nodded more fervently this time.

"This is indeed the point of these talks. It is impossible to predict the future, though we can hope to guide it today.

The Strait of Malaccas, as was pointed out by the honorable Song Jiaoren of China in previous discussions, is technically an international zone, with Malyasia on one side and Indonesia on the other. We would need both nations' commitment to the idea, though this should not be a problem.

As for the Spratleys, the value of the area comes from its energy resources. Would there be a similar way to divy those up?"
Galveston Bay
05-05-2006, 06:28
ooc
The Philippines would almost certainly be here, and if so, they would be making their claim on the Spratleys (since they are in real life). However, I would think they might go with the Japanese plan.

IC
The US supports the Japanese plan as an excellent compromise and is in favor of neutral Malaysia controlling and patrolling the Straits of Malacca, a vital international waterway.
Ato-Sara
05-05-2006, 07:46
Minister of State Kam Chan rises to speak.

Though there has been much debate of the ownership of Spratly Islands, we believe this is a Non- Issue. The USEA itself decades ago relinquished all claim over the island Chian to the Phillipines as part of it's deal with our American allies. We fully support the Phillipines claim and believe that no other nation except possibly China is disputing this claim.

So we therefore suggest that instead of costly and unnesscarry peacekeeping forces, that if China whishes to hold onto it's claim then the Phillipines could come to some sort of deal with China, agreeing to always sell a certain amount of oil to them.

As for the Straits of Malacca we agree that such a water way should remain neutral so that trade around the world may continue unhindered.
Also to tkae pressure off the Straits of Malacca, that will one day surely become crowded by the large amounts of shipping passing through it, The Kra Canal company has been formed in the USEA and is gathering funds and support to build an ambitious canal across the Kra peninsula.
Sharina
05-05-2006, 12:30
OOC: (Song Jiaoren is here, as he was the Chinese rep at the first Darwin talks)

Song Jiaoren nodded upon hearing the other delegates talk about the Spratly Islands. He decided to add his input.

"China is willing to reach a compromise with the Philippines regarding the Spratly Islands. We would be more than happy to donate a portion of the Spratly resources towards the Philippines."

He cleared his throat before continuing.

"As for the Malacca Straits, I do strongly agree and recommend that it stay as a neutral waterway. After all, multiple nations use these straits for commerce, and to close it off would be paramount to closing off the Panama Canal which would stifle commerce in the Americas."

------------------------------

OOC:

I think Spratly Islands has 4 oil and 4 natural gas resources, correct? What I'm proposing is to give 1 oil and 1 natural gas to the Philippines (should be able to cover all the Philippines needs on top of the resources they already have) and the other 3 of each goes to China (as China's economy is vastly bigger than Philippines and needs these resources more).
Cylea
05-05-2006, 17:10
ooc
The Philippines would almost certainly be here, and if so, they would be making their claim on the Spratleys (since they are in real life). However, I would think they might go with the Japanese plan.

IC
The US supports the Japanese plan as an excellent compromise and is in favor of neutral Malaysia controlling and patrolling the Straits of Malacca, a vital international waterway.

ooc: as an SCT member touching the pacific, the Philippines were indeed invited. How to RP their decisions is another issue, but this seems reasonable so far.

IC: The Australian frowns ever so slightly at Song Jiaoren's words, but simply voices his agreement with the plan for the Strait of Malacca.
Ato-Sara
05-05-2006, 17:48
OOC:

I think Spratly Islands has 4 oil and 4 natural gas resources, correct? What I'm proposing is to give 1 oil and 1 natural gas to the Philippines (should be able to cover all the Philippines needs on top of the resources they already have) and the other 3 of each goes to China (as China's economy is vastly bigger than Philippines and needs these resources more).

OOC: Sorry the wording I used their was wrong. I meant it the other way around.

IC: The USEA supports The Phillipines claim to the Spratly Islands and suggests that the Spratly Islands are given to Fillipino control. While a fixed portion of the oil is always sold to China.

This most makes sense as currently China has no Navy to even defend it's own coastline and could not possibly hope to protect a distant territory such as the Spratly islands. The Philipines however can and it is well within their sphere of influence.
It is of great importance that such a valuble Asian resource is well protected.
Sharina
05-05-2006, 18:09
ooc: as an SCT member touching the pacific, the Philippines were indeed invited. How to RP their decisions is another issue, but this seems reasonable so far.

IC: The Australian frowns ever so slightly at Song Jiaoren's words, but simply voices his agreement with the plan for the Strait of Malacca.

Song Jiaoren notes the Australian's frown and decides to respond before matters got sticky.

"The USEA has apparently given up claims on the Spratly Islands, and therefore the only issue would be Philippines and China.

We are more than willing to share the resources of the Spratly Islands with the Philippines. However, China's economy is far larger than the Philippines, therefore it needs more oil and natural gas. China is perfectly willing to sell sufficient oil and natural gas to meet the needs of the Philippines."

----------------------------

OOC:

Basically, China is willing to sell roughly 1/4 of the resources of the Spratly Islands to the Philippines, which should be more than enough to meet the Philippines energy and domestic needs.

Besides, China agreed to recongize Australian interests in Indonesia and to the south and east of it, while the Spratly Islands are halfway between Malaysia and China (north of the majority of Indonesia, therefore not interfering with Australia).
Cylea
05-05-2006, 18:36
Song Jiaoren notes the Australian's frown and decides to respond before matters got sticky.

"The USEA has apparently given up claims on the Spratly Islands, and therefore the only issue would be Philippines and China.

We are more than willing to share the resources of the Spratly Islands with the Philippines. However, China's economy is far larger than the Philippines, therefore it needs more oil and natural gas. China is perfectly willing to sell sufficient oil and natural gas to meet the needs of the Philippines."

----------------------------

OOC:

Basically, China is willing to sell roughly 1/4 of the resources of the Spratly Islands to the Philippines, which should be more than enough to meet the Philippines energy and domestic needs.

Besides, China agreed to recongize Australian interests in Indonesia and to the south and east of it, while the Spratly Islands are halfway between Malaysia and China (north of the majority of Indonesia, therefore not interfering with Australia).

ooc: thus why the Australian didnt actually say anything. Your argument I believe may be with the USEA, who is supporting Fillipino ownership of the Spratleys.
Ato-Sara
05-05-2006, 18:37
OOC:
Basically, China is willing to sell roughly 1/4 of the resources of the Spratly Islands to the Philippines, which should be more than enough to meet the Philippines energy and domestic needs.

Besides, China agreed to recongize Australian interests in Indonesia and to the south and east of it, while the Spratly Islands are halfway between Malaysia and China (north of the majority of Indonesia, therefore not interfering with Australia).

OOC: Spratlys are much closer to Malyasia and the Phillipines than to China:

http://www.chinapage.com/map/south-china-sea.gif

And seeing that China has no Navy whatsoever these islands are well out of your sphere of control and very much within mine and the Phillipines' control spheres.


(In hindsight I probably should have kept the Spratlys and let the Fillipinos have the Paracels but hindsight is always 20/20...)
Galveston Bay
05-05-2006, 18:51
ooc
now you guys know why this is still an international dispute in real life.. chuckle

IC
The Philippine delegation stalls to figure out what to do
Sharina
05-05-2006, 19:35
OOC: Spratlys are much closer to Malyasia and the Phillipines than to China:

http://www.chinapage.com/map/south-china-sea.gif

And seeing that China has no Navy whatsoever these islands are well out of your sphere of control and very much within mine and the Phillipines' control spheres.


(In hindsight I probably should have kept the Spratlys and let the Fillipinos have the Paracels but hindsight is always 20/20...)

OOC:

Heh. Maybe so, but my Air Force has a long arm, indeed. ;)

Besides, if the USEA needs the oil from the Spratly's, they can request some of it from China. The same goes for the Philippines- if they need more than 1 point of oil *and* natural gas out of the 4 points at the Spratly's, then China would be willing to sell it to either USEA or Philippines.
Galveston Bay
05-05-2006, 19:36
a major development

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=10901449#post10901449
Ato-Sara
05-05-2006, 19:46
OOC:

Heh. Maybe so, but my Air Force has a long arm, indeed. ;)

Besides, if the USEA needs the oil from the Spratly's, they can request some of it from China. The same goes for the Philippines- if they need more than 1 point of oil *and* natural gas out of the 4 points at the Spratly's, then China would be willing to sell it to either USEA or Philippines.

OOC:
Strategic bombers are porr replacement for ships when guarding an island chain.

The USEA does need more oil but is confident it can get it from other sources (E.g. special project #1, AKA Operation Winter Wonderland).

IC:
Kam Chan rises and speaks again.

We recognize that China's economy is a hungry dragon thats survival is linked to that of Asia, however China must understand that other Asian counties too need oil to fuel their growth.

China could not be so lacking in goodwill to not allow the Phillipines to keep the Spratly Islands and use the oil there to cover their own needs and then China could buy what is left off them off, thereby helping our less fortunate neighbours improve themselves?
Cylea
05-05-2006, 19:46
OOC:

Heh. Maybe so, but my Air Force has a long arm, indeed. ;)

Besides, if the USEA needs the oil from the Spratly's, they can request some of it from China. The same goes for the Philippines- if they need more than 1 point of oil *and* natural gas out of the 4 points at the Spratly's, then China would be willing to sell it to either USEA or Philippines.

ooc: that was a good point IC but if you would rather it wasnt said, ignore this

IC: Australia points out that a similar situation could work for any nation owning the Spratleys, selling oil to any nation that wanted it.
Sharina
05-05-2006, 19:48
According to the energy chart in the economic thread...

USAE

Hydroelectric 2, natural gas 1

Spratley Islands

At tech level 7.5 Oil 4, Natural Gas 4

Parisal Islands (Owned by Philippines)

Oil 2, Natural Gas 2

Philippines

Natural Gas 1, hydroelectric 1


So you can see, the Philippines has 2 oil, 3 natural gas, and 1 hydro (the oil from the Parisals), which is enough to sustain maximum industry in Philippines (120 points worth or so). So if for some reason, the Philippines needs more oil, China can sell them 1 unit of oil and 1 unit of natural gas from the Spratly Islands.

The same goes for the USEA. Unlike the Philippines, the USEA supposedly has several nuclear power plants (I think?) and again, China can "sell" or donate the oil and natural gas from the Spratly's to the USEA.

China will put the rest of the resources into supporting China's economy which by now (1958 supposedly) is the world's largest, having passed the USA.
Ato-Sara
05-05-2006, 19:54
According to the energy chart in the economic thread...




So you can see, the Philippines has 2 oil, 3 natural gas, and 1 hydro (the oil from the Parisals), which is enough to sustain maximum industry in Philippines (120 points worth or so). So if for some reason, the Philippines needs more oil, China can sell them 1 unit of oil and 1 unit of natural gas from the Spratly Islands.

The same goes for the USEA. Unlike the Philippines, the USEA supposedly has several nuclear power plants (I think?) and again, China can "sell" or donate the oil and natural gas from the Spratly's to the USEA.

China will put the rest of the resources into supporting China's economy which by now (1958 supposedly) is the world's largest, having passed the USA.

Kam Chan coughs slightly before answering

The Phillipines do not own the Paracel islands the USEA (More presicely Vietnam) does, this ownership was decided during the Anglo-American-Indochinese treaty formed before the great third war.
The Phillipines have I belive administrated the Spatlys for quite a while now and it is currently their only oil resource.
Would it therefore not be more sensible for the Phillipines to continue their current mandate and sell a fixed amount of oil to China each year?
Sharina
05-05-2006, 19:58
OOC:

Now I'm confused. I thought the USEA gave up the Parisals as a part of the treaty for US aid?

Ato, check your TG's.
New Dornalia
05-05-2006, 20:25
ooc: that was a good point IC but if you would rather it wasnt said, ignore this


OOC:

Heh. Maybe so, but my Air Force has a long arm, indeed.

Besides, if the USEA needs the oil from the Spratly's, they can request some of it from China. The same goes for the Philippines- if they need more than 1 point of oil *and* natural gas out of the 4 points at the Spratly's, then China would be willing to sell it to either USEA or Philippines.

IC: Australia points out that a similar situation could work for any nation owning the Spratleys, selling oil to any nation that wanted it.

The Korean delegate then said, "We endorse this. After all, it's how the market works (well sort of). As for the Straits, we endorse the idea of making them a neutral free trade zone, with a Kra Canal to supplement trade."
Ato-Sara
05-05-2006, 21:04
OOC:

Now I'm confused. I thought the USEA gave up the Parisals as a part of the treaty for US aid?

Ato, check your TG's.

OOC:
No we gave up the Spratlys for US aid and kept the Paracels.
They originally wanted us to give up both but we refused and they said we could keep the Paracels but consequently gave less less aid. I fair trade off I think.

Reply sent.
Sharina
05-05-2006, 21:38
Song Jiaoren ran multiple possibilities through his mind before deciding upon a new course of action. He then spoke calmly, without any sign of the escalating tension within the previous several minutes.

"China is prepared to relinquish its claims on the Spratly Islands in exchange for a guanatreed amount of oil and natural gas points annually."

--------------------------------

(OOC: 2 points of oil and 2 points of natural gas)
New Dornalia
05-05-2006, 21:44
Song Jiaoren ran multiple possibilities through his mind before deciding upon a new course of action. He then spoke calmly, without any sign of the escalating tension within the previous several minutes.

"China is prepared to relinquish its claims on the Spratly Islands in exchange for a guanatreed amount of oil and natural gas points annually."

--------------------------------

(OOC: 2 points of oil and 2 points of natural gas)

The Korean delegate was stunned (he hadn't quite expected this), but simply said, "That works too."
Cylea
05-05-2006, 22:36
ooc: ok, I'm confused. Who owned what, and who owns what?
Ato-Sara
06-05-2006, 01:23
ooc: ok, I'm confused. Who owned what, and who owns what?

OOC:
The USEA owns the Paracel islands and always has.

China has relinquished it's claim to the Spratly Island to the Phillipines (which has really owned them all along) in return for a guaranteed supply of 2 oil points per year which China will pay for at a fixed rate of 1 point per oil point.

We are awaiting the Phillipines reply from either Parthini or GB.


So if the Phillipines agrees to this offer all disputes over South China sea islands will be settled.
Galveston Bay
06-05-2006, 07:43
OOC:
The USEA owns the Paracel islands and always has.

China has relinquished it's claim to the Spratly Island to the Phillipines (which has really owned them all along) in return for a guaranteed supply of 2 oil points per year which China will pay for at a fixed rate of 1 point per oil point.

We are awaiting the Phillipines reply from either Parthini or GB.


So if the Phillipines agrees to this offer all disputes over South China sea islands will be settled.

The Phillipines will accept that (as its better then they expected to get out of this)
Cylea
08-05-2006, 17:01
OOC:
The USEA owns the Paracel islands and always has.

China has relinquished it's claim to the Spratly Island to the Phillipines (which has really owned them all along) in return for a guaranteed supply of 2 oil points per year which China will pay for at a fixed rate of 1 point per oil point.

We are awaiting the Phillipines reply from either Parthini or GB.


So if the Phillipines agrees to this offer all disputes over South China sea islands will be settled.

ooc:well, glad that is all worked out. Speaking of energy points...

ic:The Australian ambassador politely wonders where the nations represented here are getting their energy resources. Declaring out loud could prevent overlap that could lead to stresses like that just avoided over the Spratleys.

(Australia needs 2 foriegn oil and gets one each from Indonesia and Malyasia)
Sharina
08-05-2006, 18:13
ooc:well, glad that is all worked out. Speaking of energy points...

ic:The Australian ambassador politely wonders where the nations represented here are getting their energy resources. Declaring out loud could prevent overlap that could lead to stresses like that just avoided over the Spratleys.

(Australia needs 2 foriegn oil and gets one each from Indonesia and Malyasia)

China points out that the only non-native oil it needs is the Spratly Islands oil, and that is pretty much about it.

------------------------

OOC:

2 points of oil and 2 points of natural gas from the Spratly Islands should cover China's oil and gas needs along with its [China's] native production of 7 oil and 7 natural gas deposits.
New Dornalia
08-05-2006, 22:26
Korea's deleagate points out that Korea must import oil from the Central Asian Republic and the United Islamic Republic.

OOC: 2 points from CAR, 1 point from UIR
Haneastic
08-05-2006, 23:31
4 from UIR
Ato-Sara
08-05-2006, 23:42
The USEA requires a substantial amount of Oil (4 points) to supply its economy and military, but has yet to secure it from any definate source.
Cylea
09-05-2006, 01:13
The USEA requires a substantial amount of Oil (4 points) to supply its economy and military, but has yet to secure it from any definate source.

At this Jonathan Brauks raised an eyebrow. "I expect friend," he began "that there is enough oil in Indonesia and Malyasia to go around. The area is already of mutual interest for our two nations and it seems only logical that it should continue that way. Our oil needs are not expected to grow too substantially in the future so for now there is plenty for both of us."
Ato-Sara
09-05-2006, 07:37
At this Jonathan Brauks raised an eyebrow. "I expect friend," he began "that there is enough oil in Indonesia and Malyasia to go around. The area is already of mutual interest for our two nations and it seems only logical that it should continue that way. Our oil needs are not expected to grow too substantially in the future so for now there is plenty for both of us."

Kam Chan Smiles appreciatively.

'Such a sharing of resources would be wonderful and the USEA thanks Austrialia for such an offer.
We will contact our southeren neighbours with proposals soon.
We hope this sense of co-operation can continue between our two natons.'
Cylea
11-05-2006, 14:36
OOC: soooooo....anything else to discuss guys, or was this one a success? If anybody was interested in more universal wargames (though now they cost money :( ) now would be the time to speak up. If not, thanks for coming!
New Dornalia
11-05-2006, 20:30
OOC: soooooo....anything else to discuss guys, or was this one a success? If anybody was interested in more universal wargames (though now they cost money :( ) now would be the time to speak up. If not, thanks for coming!

Korea's delegate asks, "Perhaps we can hold wargames involving Korea? I know for a fact our army, besides the recent Indian War and the Civil War, has not seen much action, and could use some practice."
Cylea
12-05-2006, 13:59
Australia would not be adverse to some small scale exercises. If we could find a potential third party things could become much more interesting.
New Dornalia
12-05-2006, 20:47
Australia would not be adverse to some small scale exercises. If we could find a potential third party things could become much more interesting.

Korea's delegate concurs.
Ato-Sara
12-05-2006, 21:38
Korea's delegate concurs.

The USEA would also like to join such wargames if possible. We offer the use of the Spratly Islands for naval and amphibious assault exercises.
The South China Sea fleet and 2nd Marine Response Unit would be particicpating in such an exercise.
New Dornalia
12-05-2006, 21:42
The USEA would also like to join such wargames if possible. We offer the use of the Spratly Islands for naval and amphibious assault exercises.
The South China Sea fleet and 2nd Marine Response Unit would be particicpating in such an exercise.

Korea's delegate then proposes that wargames be of an Invasion nature-perhaps a simulated invasion of Korea near Inchon and Pusan, plus a simulated air attack.