The Lvov Accords

[Canaris]

Khislav has set forth an invitation to convene with the governing officials of it's neighbors:

[quote]Esteemed peers,

This is an open invitation to:[list][*]Deutschland[*]German Democratic Republic[*]Kingdom of Crimea[*]Republic of Greece[*]Slavic Federation[*]Slavic Union[*]Slavorussian Empire[/list]
We, the Republic of Khislav, invite delegates from the aforementioned sovereign nations to travel to Lvov. All expenses will be paid by Khislav during your time in our nation. Here, the delegates should meet to discuss a treaty structured to provide unity and strength to the Eastern European powers and engender harmony and respect between our German and Russian populations. If you see fit to attend these talks, please notify our embassies in your respective capitals by no later than March 7.

A first draft - titled 'Lvov Accords' - will be prepared by March 8, 2010 and ready for review by your delegates.

My thanks,

Valinkovo Somonov
President of the Armed Republic of Khislav[/quote]

Edited March 5, 2010 by Canaris

[Lynneth]

[quote]Dear President Somonov,

the GDR would gladly attend these talks.
We will be sending Foreign Minister Heinrich von Brentano.

Regards,
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v284/Lynneth_del_Serpentas/AE/CNRP/Bayern/GDR/LynnNewSig.png[/img]
Chairman of the German Democratic Republic[/quote]

[Kaiser Martens]

Colonel Lothar Erwinson Beck is sent right away.

The Government did not know what to expect - another treaty? Germany would soon have treaties enough that treaty conflicts would eventually happen. But the Chancellor wasn't simply going to turn his back to this nation, and in principle the government agreed with regional long term peace. Just for the sake of having good relations already it was worth it dropping by, with or without further achievements.

[Bacharth]

Foreign Minister Eli Archer will attend.

[comrade nikonov]

Representative Vladimir Vyalsov will attend.

[Justinian the Mighty]

Foreign Minister Lavrov will represent the Slavorussian Empire.

[Canaris]

State Minister Nikolai Malkin confirms the planned attendance of the above nations. Khislav thanks the governments involved for their seriousness and welcomes their delegates. Currently, Khislav eagerly anticipates a decision by the Slavic Federation; once they agree to attend then we can be sure that these talks will be most productive. Khislav assures it's very powerful neighbors that it demands nothing from them and expecting only great things. To those governments who have not yet responded, however few they may be: take your time. There is still one day left to secure seats for the talks, and therefore a hand in crafting the accord which is sure to benefit all signatories.

[loannes]

Secretary of the Exterior Mikhail Vasily will attend.

[Canaris]

Noting that the Republic of Greece did not RSVP, Khislav proceeds to issue the first draft of the Lvov Accords:

[quote]Eastern European powers,

In an attempt to engender lasting peace through Eastern Europe,
Recognizing the spheres of influence of the signing nations,
Venturing to protect the borders, population, and sovereignty of all involved,
Looking to the mutual defense of the interests of ourselves and our neighbors,

The Lvov Accords:

Section I. Territory
Article 1 - The powers of Eastern Europe recognize the borders of the constituent nations as they are upon signing.
Article 2 - The powers of Eastern Europe further recognize no territorial claims made upon land within their borders.
Article 3 - The powers of Eastern Europe agree to protect these borders, collectively, if the threat from outside:

-a. was instigated by a member nation unlawfully or wrongfully,
-b. proves to be a significant threat regarding the stability of the region.

Section II. Trade
Article 1 - The powers of Eastern Europe will not engage in trade with outside nations which:

-a. threaten the security or stability of the region as a whole
-b. do not adhere to the universally understood concept of human rights, such as:

--i. freedom from malicious harm,
--ii. freedom from cruel and unusual punishment,
--iii. freedom from predation for self determination,

-c. does not recognize the existence or sovereignty of a signatory nation.

Article 2 - The powers of Eastern Europe will trade with one another preferentially unless such conditions damage local economies.

Section III. Trust
Article 1 - The powers of Eastern Europe agree to aid one another if requested and within national capacity.
Article 2 - The powers of Eastern Europe agree to honor alliances, pacts, or treaties as they are upon signing.
Article 3 - The powers of Eastern Europe agree to withhold assistance in signatory national borders without prior consent.
Article 4 - The powers of Eastern Europe agree that all signatory nations are obligated to fulfill the following responsibilities:

-a. economic stability; paramount to the growth of the nations of the region and the region itself,
-b. mutual defense; a necessity in order to establish long-term sovereignty of each signatory nation,
-c. national security; of the utmost importance as it affects the quality of living within and without each nation,
-d. territories are firm; no challenging of borders or threatening of them, by outside powers, will be acceptable at any time.

Article 5 - The powers of Eastern Europe agree to form a joint security council to address concerns of security and stability within signatory nations.[/quote]

Khislav presents this first draft for review by potential signatory nations, pending approval and/or revision by the delegates representing each.

[loannes]

"You expect us to sign a treaty of mutual defense with nations we have little to no contact with? Caucasia and Dalmatia, the predecessors of the Slavic Federation, had only just begun to better relations with two of the present nations, GDR and Slavorussia. We nearly went to war with the Slavic Union. We have had absolutely no contact with Greece and Khislav. We've had minimal contact with Deutschland.

Secondly, I don't feel it would be economically sound if a trading partner of the Slavic Federation didn't recognize, say, Khislav, and we had to cut off our trade with them. This would be especially idiotic if that partner was an MDP ally of the Federation.

Thirdly, a joint security council? The Slavic Federation is perfectly capable of maintaining stability in our nation, as was shown in the peaceful transition from Caucasia and Dalmatia into the Federation that now represents them.

Fourthly, we don't feel trade should be based on region. We base our trade relations on the relationship with the nation, and resources available for importation and exportation.

Fifthly, this treaty will obligate us to financially assist a nation that asks for it if our nation is capable. The Federation has an agenda. We don't want to support a nation if they are opposing an ally, or our own policies.

Sixthly, and this may seem redundant, we prefer to sign our treaties by relationship, not by relative location. For instance, whilst Grøenlandia is farther away than any nation in East Europe, our relationship with them is among our best.

As this treaty is, the Slavic Federation cannot sign it."

Edited March 8, 2010 by Drakedeath

[Lynneth]

"The GDR, on the other hand, has had good relations with almost all nations invited, aside from the Slavic Federation, Greece - which hasn't attended - and Crimea, who seem to be an alright bunch.
The Deferation may not feel this treaty to be signable, the GDR however, does, perhaps with some minor changes.
We'd like to hear the opinions of the other nations, though."

[Canaris]

State Minister Nikolai Malkin replied:

"Firstly, the Slavic Federation is not being asked to do anything other than maintain stability in the region. We are all brothers here and family works together. Unless of course, instability is part of this ominous 'agenda'.

Secondly, very well, if that is the position of the Slavic Federation. But take note that no nation has refuted the sovereignty of any of the proposed signatories.

Thirdly, the delegate from the Slavic Federation would do well to remember that theirs is not the only nation in the region. You cannot honestly believe there will never be a time in which it might need aid.

Fourthly, regional trade, according to the treaty, is not mandatory. Your point is moot.

Fifthly, incorrect. The language used in several places stipulates quite specifically that no signatories are obligated to anything but what they could expect to receive themselves. These are uncertain times we live in. What affects our neighbors also affects ourselves.

Sixthly, I may also seem redundant, but your neighbors are far more apt to concern themselves with your issues than nations half a world away. Assistance and relief could arrive over night as opposed to weeks.

Imagine, if you will for just a moment, that nothing could threaten your borders, your nation, and you need only look outward? Is that not valuable? Desirable? To know that your 'back door' was never without security? There would be no cause for concern all along the entire length of the borders shared by signatories of this treaty. Knowing that you have made the region wherein your country lay more stable and not less?

You offer naught but criticisms. The purpose of a drafting process is to revise the document. What corrections would you make? Or am I correct in believing that you would sign no treaty which called for such harmony in the first place? Place a version of the treaty as you would have it upon the table and these talks can move forward constructively."

[loannes]

[quote name='Canaris' date='08 March 2010 - 06:49 AM' timestamp='1268031225' post='2217766']
State Minister Nikolai Malkin replied:

"Firstly, the Slavic Federation is not being asked to do anything other than maintain stability in the region. We are all brothers here and family works together. Unless of course, instability is part of this ominous 'agenda'.

Secondly, very well, if that is the position of the Slavic Federation. But take note that no nation has refuted the sovereignty of any of the proposed signatories.

Thirdly, the delegate from the Slavic Federation would do well to remember that theirs is not the only nation in the region. You cannot honestly believe there will never be a time in which it might need aid.

Fourthly, regional trade, according to the treaty, is not mandatory. Your point is moot.

Fifthly, incorrect. The language used in several places stipulates quite specifically that no signatories are obligated to anything but what they could expect to receive themselves. These are uncertain times we live in. What affects our neighbors also affects ourselves.

Sixthly, I may also seem redundant, but your neighbors are far more apt to concern themselves with your issues than nations half a world away. Assistance and relief could arrive over night as opposed to weeks.

Imagine, if you will for just a moment, that nothing could threaten your borders, your nation, and you need only look outward? Is that not valuable? Desirable? To know that your 'back door' was never without security? There would be no cause for concern all along the entire length of the borders shared by signatories of this treaty. Knowing that you have made the region wherein your country lay more stable and not less?

You offer naught but criticisms. The purpose of a drafting process is to revise the document. What corrections would you make? Or am I correct in believing that you would sign no treaty which called for such harmony in the first place? Place a version of the treaty as you would have it upon the table and these talks can move forward constructively."
[/quote]

"I would word it more clearly and write it in a more simplified format to prevent misunderstanding."

[Subtleknifewielder]

OOC: As a note, Greece was Zarfef...and he's retired from CNRP for the time being.

[loannes]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='08 March 2010 - 09:49 PM' timestamp='1268085256' post='2218328']
OOC: As a note, Greece was Zarfef...and he's retired from CNRP for the time being.
[/quote]

OOC: Zarfef was the Soviet something of Greece. I believe this is a new person.

[Bacharth]

After a phone call with King Vincent, Eli was able to respond to the treaty.

"Considering we're a small nation, trade isn't too important to us, aside from small imports here and there, and we've opened our ports to any nation to trade with us openly. Defense is also of little concern, considering we not only have an MADP with our only neighbor, but during the first Crimean-Varangian war, we were able to hold the lines with a fraction of as many troops as we have now, and even still, we had no Air Force or Navy. The Kingdom thanks you for inviting us, but we must decline the treaty signing."

[comrade nikonov]

We find this treaty redundant. The Federal Union of Slavic Republics already holds significant treaties (MDoAPs and MDP) with its regional allies, including the GDR, Deutschland, and the Slavorussian Empire. On the other hand, relations with the Slavic Federation was tenuous at best, while we have no significant vested interested in relations with the relatively smaller states of Greece and Crimea. The FUtSR will not be signing this treaty.

[Kaiser Martens]

Let us see,

I think that this would be likely to be approved by the Althing if presented there, especially taking into consideration that we are already allied to several of these nations. There are parts which are under german law redundant, for we already do recognize the current countries and territories, and will never have any new claims on the east as we would not want to encroach slavic territory. Trading would work as recent reforms have been trying to open up the markets, and a regional integration scheme overall may be interesting. The only part which is shaky is the one regarding human rights, as then we would need to define what is and isn't a human right or if there's rights which can be considered human at all - this is too complicated and it would be simply easier to say that we will not trade with outside nations when doing so may harm a member of these accords. With that out of the way, this may work well. There should also be a provision for land exchanges between member states or joint protectorateship of the land if a country may become anarchy. (ooc, if somebody leaves)

We do not care about not having strong relations to certain proposed signatories because then this is a chance to create relations.