NationStates Jolt Archive


The First EC Voting Session (ATTN: ES EC Members)

Honako
26-07-2007, 00:14
The First European Community Voting Session On Pressing Issues

The European Community (EC)
- A New Organization Built For Mantaining The Sovreignity And Prosperous Economies, Militarys and Powers of Europe

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/2834/3deuroflagql5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Written by Miguel Perez, Interim President of the European Community

SIC Content:

This is designed in order for the EC members to get a say in the way the European Community operates and the decisions it makes. Sometimes we will meet if you all want too, but mostly this is a simplier way of letting everyone have a say. It has it's flaws, the biggest because I've wrote all this, so sorry for not asking you all before hand, but some of these issues need to be dealt with quickly. This first meeting will help establish the basic things we need to clear up about the EC – where the HQ is, the President of the EC, who is allowed to enter etc. Most of the time when other meetings are called it will be due to a serious situation, and we have a couple of those on our hands currently.

Each member nation receives one vote, either of yes or no, or for one option. They may suggest another option in some cases and vote for that. For this voting session Associate Members will not be allowed to vote pending the vote on proposition number #6. IF a member nation has another proposal they wish to put forward that is urgent, please say. Sorry for taking charge and not giving people more of a chance, however if it’s a small issue and can wait, leave it, though if you want to bring something up I’ll end it to the list of EC proposals. This is only the first meeting, and you’ll all get chances to forward proposals.

EC Proposal List:

#1) Recently The Union of Greater Europe, a non-European Community member, has launched an unprecedented and unwarranted attack on a fellow European nation, and non-EC member, the Czech Republic. The EC is a free and equal organization, so could all vote for one of the following suggestions:

a) launch defensive campaign in the Czech Republic to help defend it from the invasion (EC member nations will have to donate a strong force, weapons or money to the Czech’s)
b) place economic stations on the Union of Greater Europe and use soft powers heavily in order to pressure it into ceasing attacks, such as the halting of trade and closing of waters
c) recognize The Union of Greater Europe as the rightful rulers of the Czech Republic
d) take other course of action (please suggest)

#2) Three new members have desired to join, they are The Kingdom of Donaghadee, New Brittonia and Waldenburg 2. One objection has been made to New Brittonia joining due to the impending war he faces in the North American land of Greenland. Please cast your vote yes or no to each member joining. You may abstain if you wish, though it’s not so helpful. If it is a draw, and no objections are made, the person will enter.

#3) Two cities so far have been put forward for the HQ of the European Community. One is Brussels, the other Luxembourg. However, for a further few days you can put forward cities for the vote, which will be by poll.

#4) Currently no candidates for President of the European Community have been put forward. If you wish to put a candidate forward, follow these simply steps:

Name:
Age:
Previous Important Roles:
Brief Bio:

Each President will serve a one year term before he is replaced. The President must not be affiliated at the time of employment with an EC nation’s government. His jobs will include administering the laws, meetings and foreign policy of the EC, and assisting in deciding on the final outcome of resolutions which are passed by the EC members. (OOC: The President must be strictly neutral really. However, the person who puts forward that character will RP the President, and therefore much of the meetings, if they win.)

#5) The European Community is not a governing body. All member nations operate their own foreign policies. However, at times the EC will have to work as a united powerful bloc in order to be heard. This is a general question – generally speaking, which way you would prefer the EC foreign policy, when in these situations when it must act as a united bloc, to favour:

a) Isolationism – to concentrate on Europe’s affairs mostly, which will make sure that the alliance we have is mostly defensive in nation, and keeps to the primary goal of protecting Europe from outside attacks, whilst remaining quiet but sometimes forceful on the international stage. Pursue relations with non-Euro states, but will leave it mostly up to the member states to do so for themselves. Soft powers (diplomacy) used mostly.
b) Accessibility – this will likely increase the power projection of the EC, making it a more feared group of nations. However, it will also likely make the world more unstable, particular with other alliances vying for power. By going down this route the threat of military intervention may be used regularly in order to “get our own way” and hard powers used (invasions for land expansion, defending nations from others etc.). We will also try and create stronger relations with nations outside of Europe. Some of the core values of the EC may have to be changed. A mixture of hard (military intervention) and soft powers used, but far more willing to be aggressive.

#6) Should Associate Members, currently just observers to meetings, who only receive some of the benefits of the EC for some of the commitment (they sign an NAP instead of a MDP), be allowed to vote on all proposals, just ones that effect them directly if that occurs, or none? Vote yes for which of the three options you prefer, or suggestion another.

Yes:
For Proposals That Effect Them Directly:
Not At All:
Drunken Pagan Weirdos
26-07-2007, 05:11
SIC response
Written in cooperation by Drunken Pagan Weirdos' representatives to the European Community

#1) While it displeases us to say this, neither of the nations in question are EC members; thus, the EC should not directly intervene as an organized unit. The EC does not claim "sovereignty" over all of Europe, only over fellow EC members, and so we do not feel that a military solution is right. It is perfectly acceptable, however, to place heavy economic sanctions upon the aggressor nation, and that is what DPW votes for.

#2) Yes to all. In the case of New Brittonia, he applied to join the EC before the Kampferian act of aggression; thus, we see no reason not to let him in. This is one of the reasons that the EC was formed, is it not? To provide for a common military defense for all EC members against any external threat? If we allow New Brittonia to be assaulted without a reaction on our part, we've basically been, if you will excuse our crude language, talking out of our asses. If any nation is not ready to go to war for a fellow EC member's defense, they should leave this organization immediately.

#3) Luxembourg, of course. How could we vote otherwise, seeing as how it is our nation's choice?

#4) We have no wish to put forward a candidate at this moment; that may change at any time.

#5) While the doctrine of "Accessibility" seems somewhat tempting, we feel that it is not the answer. If the EC is to assert our power in such a way, even for so-called "defensive" means, then we are just as any other imperialist. The world is unstable enough as it is. For that reason DPW is leaning towards Isolationism, but we have no strong opinion either way.

#6) The right to vote on all issues should, at this time, be limited to European members exclusively. We see no reason why associate members cannot vote on issues directly related to them, but this is a "European Community", not an international community. Until this organization becomes the latter, only full EC members should be allowed to vote on all issues.
Kampfers
26-07-2007, 05:28
OOC: dont want to be rude, but Brittonia applied for membership AFTER i claimed greenland and started that thread. And there really isnt
much left there anyways after my bombing run and coastal bombardment.
Drunken Pagan Weirdos
26-07-2007, 06:25
OOC: dont want to be rude, but Brittonia applied for membership AFTER i claimed greenland and started that thread. And there really isnt
much left there anyways after my bombing run and coastal bombardment.

OOC: Oh? Hmmm, I remembered otherwise... ahhhh, well, disregard that part of what I said, then, but the point remains: let 'im in. Just my opinion.

And, dude, it doesn't matter how ruined Greenland is by now - it's the principle of the matter, you know? ;)
Honako
26-07-2007, 10:48
OOC: DPW, with the aggressor now applying to be an EC member, this basically means Europe claims "sovereignty" (well, it's members claim sovereignty) on all but Granates land.

The Franco Confederations votes are as this:

#1) Already it seems that many a nation have made moves in this problematic affair to defend the Czech Republic. Whilst one of the primary goals of the EC is to let EC members have their own foreign policy, it was also one of their goals that desirable in situations like this we act as a united bloc. In an attempt to make a united EC we will not recognize the Czech Republic as the invading nations. But, for now, we will just place economic sanctions and use diplomacy to end this. (OOC: By the end of the day all that have voted for this, even if it's just us two, will be featured in an EC post in the invading thread basically saying that the following nations have imposed sanctions in response to the attack).

#2) A firm yes to all. Greenland is lost, but one of the core values of the EC is to keep aggressors out of Europe - we feel the only way NB will be spared an internal and external war is if he has EC backing. The rest are fine.

#3) Having already but Brussels up, we have no further cities we desire to go up for the polling vote.

#4) Miguel Perez, current Interim President is our candidate. (More info latter)

#5) Isolationism for the European Community we believe is the best goal. However, we also feel that in some cases military intervention outside Europe should be considered, though Europe should be of our primary concern. We would prefer to pick our bits from each option, so for now we abstain.

#6) We concur with DPW statements. As a European alliance the ones who are prepared and can fully join should reap the most benefits. However, we feel in time they should have there say in issues that directly effect them, though these will be rare. We go with the second option.
Brydog
26-07-2007, 18:29
SIC:
Baltic Federation Votes

1. We believe in using diplomacy and sanctions on Greater Europe.

2. Yes on all nations for the reason proposed by the Franco Confederation.

3. We wish to add Warsaw

4. None as if now

5. Isolationism is the best because a agressive stance would cause more problems international.

6. We agree with FC and also take the second option.
Jaredcohenia
26-07-2007, 19:13
1: Pending answers from the Czech Republic, should any of the Czech Republic's JAS Gripen 39 aircraft (which are on loan from Scandinavia) be shot down, war will be declared.

2: We object to the motion of New Brittonia being placed into the European Community as we feel it is senseless to drag all of the community into a war. The rest are all fine.

3: We would like to place Oslo, Scandinavia up to vote.

4: Fredrik Reinfeldt of Scandinavia.

5: Isolationism for the time being, but the right to defend European sovereignity is a must.

6: We feel like associate members should get no say in European votes. If they're not in Europe, why should they vote as if they are?
Carloginias
27-07-2007, 23:11
1. The Carloginian Kingdom votes to recognize the Czech Republic apart of the Union of Greater Europe. If we are to combat forces inside or outside of Europe then we must have unity on the continent.

2. We vote to let New Brittonia in.

3. We have no other options as the capital of the EC

4. We have no candidate

5. The Carloginian Kingdom of Great Britian and Ireland votes for an aggressive output on foreign policy.

6. We believe those who wish to associate themselves with Europe should be allowed to reap the benefits of both a Non Agression Pact and of the Mutual Defense Pact in order for them not to be threatened by any other nations.