Foreign Policy Review (Rejected)

[DemPGH]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote][/quote]

More coming. . .

Sponsor: Talleyrand, Gass3268

[DemPGH]

Definitions of the DoEA's Foreign Policy Review

Economic/Trade Restrictions:

Most Priority: Free exchange of intelligence and trade, as well as top priorities for military and/or economic aid if needed

Normal/None: Atlasian government and corporations are free to due business unhindered by government enforced restrictions.

Partial: Specific restrictions such as selective tariffs or partial embargoes are to be in place to pressure the government to change course, not to change the regime itself. Foreign aid can be granted if the regime shows signs of progress towards democracy.

Full: Complete embargo and trade is forbidden with the nation in question. Corporations in violation may face fines decided by the Senate.

Military Restrictions:

Normal/None: Any military hardware produced by private firms, or by the government of Atlasia may be sold to the government in question. However, nuclear material, technology and nuclear weapons may not be sold unless the Senate agrees with the sale of atomic technology to the nation in question.

Partial: Personnel weapons may be sold by private corporations or the state to the country in question. Personnel weapons are weapons, which are carried and operated by one man, i.e. assault rifles, mortars, RPGs, etc. No vehicles, armour, aircraft, or ships may be sold.

Full: No military equipment of any nature may be sold privately or by Atlasia, i.e. no uniforms, guns, vehicles, nothing.

DoEA Policy: Asia and Oceania

Afghanistan: Partial military and economic restrictions, though we are concerned about corruption, drugs, woman's rights and other issues, plus the government’s apparent hostility to Atlasian interests.
Australia: Most Priority, although we encourage the government to take a more relaxed stance on asylum seekers.
Bahrain: Full military and no economic restrictions.  The Atlasian Government strongly condemns the measures taken against protesters in Bahrain.
Bangladesh: Normal military and partial economic restrictions. We are extremely concerned about workers’ rights.
Bhutan: Normal
Brunei: Partial military and partial economic restrictions
Burma (Myanmar): Partial military and no economic restrictions.  The DoEA applauds the Government for beginning to make the transition towards democracy, and hopes to see such progress continue.
Cambodia: Normal, though we are concerned about corruption and civil liberties.
China: Partial military restrictions and no economic restrictions, though we are very concerned over human rights, and political liberties. We encourage the Chinese government to grant independence to Tibet.
East Timor: Normal
Federated States of Micronesia: Normal
Fiji: Full military and partial economic restrictions.
Gaza Strip: Full military and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned about acts of terrorism against Israel committed by the Hamas and the human rights situation.
India: Most Priority
Indonesia: Most Priority
Iran: Full military and economic restrictions will remain in place until the Iranian regime makes full, honest and lasting overtures to democracy, as well as fully renouncing any attempt at a nuclear program. We are currently in peace talks with Iran. We are pleased with the recent democratic elections held. Status pending.
Iraq: Normal, though we have major concerns about corruption and other issues.
Israel: Full military and no economic restrictions; the DoEA urges Israel to begin to negotiate in earnest with Atlasia and stop persecution of the Palestinian peoples, at which time Most Priority will be granted.
Japan: Most Priority
Jordan: Normal, though we want a full transfer to democracy.
Kazakhstan: Partial military and no economic restrictions. We want a full transfer to democracy.
Kiribati: Normal
Kuwait: Full military restrictions and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned by a lack of regard for human rights and democracy.
Kyrgyzstan: Partial military and no economic restrictions
Laos: Normal, though we have concerns about human rights and basic freedoms.
Lebanon: Full military and no economic restrictions.
Malaysia: Partial military and no economic restrictions.
Maldives: Normal
Marshall Islands: Normal
Mongolia: Normal
Nauru: Normal
Nepal: Normal
New Zealand: Most Priority
North Korea: Full military and economic restrictions
Oman: Full military and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned by a lack of regard for human rights and democracy.
Pakistan: Full military and partial economic restrictions; we are extremely concerned about the apparent role of the ISI in harboring terrorists and the corruption rampant within the Pakistani military. We are displeased with the lack of protection for religious minorities as well.
Palau: Normal
Papua New Guinea: Normal
Philippines: Normal
Qatar: Full military and partial economic restrictions. We want a full transfer to democracy, and are concerned with the human rights situation, especially trafficking.
Samoa: Normal
Saudi Arabia: Full military and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned about the human rights situation and urge the government to make major democratic reforms. If the human rights situation does not improve, more restrictions may follow.
Singapore: Normal, though we would like a true democracy.
Solomon Islands: Normal
South Korea: Normal
Sri Lanka: Normal, though we are concerned about a few issues. We urge the government to build a modern, peaceful, democratic and multi-ethnic state with peaceful ethnic relations in the wake of the end of the civil war.
Syria: Full military and economic restrictions.  The regime of Bashar al-Assad has committed significant human rights violations against its people, and it is time for Mr. Assad to accept the will of his people and resign his position and allow Syria to become a democratic state.
Tajikistan: Full military and economic restrictions
Thailand: Normal, although we are concerned about political freedoms.
Tonga: Normal
Turkmenistan: Full military and economic restrictions
Tuvalu: Normal
United Arab Emirates: Full military and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned about workers rights and political freedoms.
Uzbekistan: Full military and economic restrictions
Vanuatu: Normal
Vietnam: Normal
West Bank: Normal. We are concerned about the current political situation, support a two state solution and would, in the near future, like a democratic and independent State of Palestine. As stated above, we hope that the Palestinians will come to negotiate in earnest.
[/quote]
[/quote]

[DemPGH]

Department of External Affairs: July 2013 Foreign Policy Review

Definitions of the DoEA's Foreign Policy Review

Economic/Trade Restrictions:

Most Priority: Free exchange of intelligence and trade, as well as top priorities for military and/or economic aid if needed

Normal/None: Atlasian government and corporations are free to due business unhindered by government enforced restrictions.

Partial: Specific restrictions such as selective tariffs or partial embargoes are to be in place to pressure the government to change course, not to change the regime itself. Foreign aid can be granted if the regime shows signs of progress towards democracy.

Full: Complete embargo and trade is forbidden with the nation in question. Corporations in violation may face fines decided by the Senate.

Military Restrictions:

Normal/None: Any military hardware produced by private firms, or by the government of Atlasia may be sold to the government in question. However, nuclear material, technology and nuclear weapons may not be sold unless the Senate agrees with the sale of atomic technology to the nation in question.

Partial: Personnel weapons may be sold by private corporations or the state to the country in question. Personnel weapons are weapons, which are carried and operated by one man, i.e. assault rifles, mortars, RPGs, etc. No vehicles, armour, aircraft, or ships may be sold.

Full: No military equipment of any nature may be sold privately or by Atlasia, i.e. no uniforms, guns, vehicles, nothing.


DoEA Policy: Africa

Algeria: Partial military and partial economic restrictions.  We have serious concerns about political freedoms, basic rights, and corruption.
Angola: Normal
Benin: Normal
Botswana: Normal
Burkina Faso: Normal, though we are concerned about corruption and certain political freedoms.
Burundi: Partial military and no economic restrictions, though we are still concerned about ethnic violence, corruption and certain political freedoms.
Cameroon: Normal, though we are concerned by the political situation and corruption.
Cape Verde: Normal
Central African Republic: Partial military and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned by the lack of political freedoms and certain civil liberties.
Chad: Full military and economic restrictions. We are concerned by the lack of political freedoms, certain civil liberties and the political situation.
Comoros: Normal, though we are concerned by the current political situation
Congo: Full military and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned by the massive corruption and lack of political freedoms.
Cote d’Ivoire: Normal
Democratic Republic of the Congo: Full military and economic restrictions because of serious concerns about the political situation, continued violence, basic rights, corruption and treatment of women.
Djibouti: Partial military and no economic restrictions
Egypt: Partial military and no economic restrictions.  We are very concerned about government instability and political freedoms. The DoEA is currently conducting talks with the Egyptian government as soon as possible regarding this matter.
Equatorial Guinea: Full military and economic restrictions
Eritrea: Full military and economic restrictions. We have strong concerns about the current situation, civil liberties and illegal weapons trading with Somalia.
Ethiopia: No military and economic restrictions. We have concerns about political freedoms, internal violence and relations with Somalia.
Gabon: Partial military and partial economic restrictions.
Gambia: Partial military and no economic restrictions.
Ghana: Normal
Guinea: Partial military and no economic restrictions. We have serious concerns about political freedoms, basic rights, and corruptions. We support a return to civilian government.
Guinea-Bissau: Partial military and no economic restrictions
Kenya: Normal
Lesotho: Normal
Liberia: Normal
Libya: Normal. The DoEA is pleased with the transition that the Libyans are taking towards Democracy.
Madagascar: Normal, though we are concerned by corruption and political instability.
Malawi: Normal
Mali: Partial economic and no military restrictions.  We are very concerned about government instability.
Mauritania: Partial military and no economic restrictions.
Mauritius: Normal
Morocco: Normal, though we are concerned about certain political freedoms.
Mozambique: Normal
Namibia: Normal
Niger: Normal, though we have serious concerns about political freedoms and basic rights.
Nigeria: Normal.  There needs to be serious political reform and we are also worried about violence in the Niger Delta and the situation in the north.
Rwanda: Partial military and no economic restrictions, though we have concerns pertaining to freedom of the press and politics.
Sao Tome and Principe: Normal
Senegal: Normal
Seychelles: Normal
Sierra Leone: Normal
Somalia: Full military and economic restrictions. We have strong concerns regarding piracy and continued violence.
Somaliland: Normal.
South Africa: Normal, though we have concerns over corruption and their response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
Sudan: Full military and economic restrictions.
South Sudan: Normal.
Swaziland: Full military and economic restrictions
Tanzania: Normal
Togo: Partial military and no economic restrictions.
Tunisia: Partial military and no economic restrictions.
Uganda: Full military and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned by the political situation, human rights and corruption.
Western Sahara: Normal, though we are concerned about certain political freedoms.
Zambia: Normal/ though we are concerned by the political situation and corruption.
Zimbabwe: Full military and economic restrictions
[/quote]
[/quote]

[DemPGH]

Okay, we're voting on amendment 56:30 by Napoleon, which establishes relations with the Swiss as "Normal."

MaxQue's is withdrawn.

You know the drill, Sens! Go.

[DemPGH]

We're at 5-4 on the Swiss amendment, I PMed Hagrid. Then hopefully it can be wrapped up.

This would be a tough call - both sides make good points.

[DemPGH]

The amendment is accepted, 6-4! Proceed to the next level.

[DemPGH]

Okay, amendment 56:44 is up for vote, senators. Go.

[DemPGH]

With four affirmatives, five negatives, and an abstention, the amendment is defeated. Debate may continue.

[DemPGH]

FWIW, I think the left and right are largely both half right and half wrong on Israel. The right generally has a whacked view of Israel, but the left seeing Israel as a kind of aggressor is something I don't always agree with. I mean, I think Islam sometimes gets a free pass from the left when it should not, and the Palestinians are seen as victims when it should not always be seen that way.

Israel is in some ways more secular than we are, and they are dealing with people in the Palestinians who, were the situation reversed, the USA would have just wiped out. So we need to look at both sides in that situation. That's a war. Israel took that territory after a battle that lasted six days, so are they entitled to it? Well, I don't know. If it were the USA, we would feel entitled to it, yes. That's all I'm prepared to say. Because it's a touchy issue.

In the final analysis, there is unnecessary violence on both sides, but Israel is an actual ally in that volatile, fanatic-laden region. And we can only blame Western capitalism and the Western hegemony so much. Should Israel have a rubber stamp from us? Certainly no. But are they the bad guys? Certainly no.

[DemPGH]

FWIW, I think the left and right are largely both half right and half wrong on Israel. The right generally has a whacked view of Israel, but the left seeing Israel as a kind of aggressor is something I don't always agree with. I mean, I think Islam sometimes gets a free pass from the left when it should not, and the Palestinians are seen as victims when it should not always be seen that way.

Israel is in some ways more secular than we are, and they are dealing with people in the Palestinians who, were the situation reversed, the USA would have just wiped out. So we need to look at both sides in that situation. That's a war. Israel took that territory after a battle that lasted six days, so are they entitled to it? Well, I don't know. If it were the USA, we would feel entitled to it, yes. That's all I'm prepared to say. Because it's a touchy issue.

In the final analysis, there is unnecessary violence on both sides, but Israel is an actual ally in that volatile, fanatic-laden region. And we can only blame Western capitalism and the Western hegemony so much. Should Israel have a rubber stamp from us? Certainly no. But are they the bad guys? Certainly no.

Yes, the United States did take a lot of land and committed genocide. But would you support that currently?

Well no. But I think we sometimes don't truly appreciate Israel's position. That is, to be a somewhat smallish country surrounded by others who deplore its existence, are technologically backward, and often choose an extremely poor interpretation of an already oppressive religion, one that calls them to fight to the death against that which offends their holy book. It would be pretty harrowing to have neighbors like that who support people taking potshots at you and throwing bombs.

I actually wrestle with the issue, but for purely secular reasons am usually supportive of and sympathetic toward Israel. Yes, they as well are responsible for unnecessary violence, so I agree with you that there is no clear "good guy."

I think the solution is generational, as in a new generation of people saying, "Enough's enough." Then we could work with them, but as it stands the Palestinians don't want peace and Israel is more than happy to bully them when they step out of line, so. The mutual hatred is too ingrained in those committed to carrying it on to reason them out of it. Forcing them to have meetings and discussions will ease it somewhat, but I don't know if it's much ado about nothing or not.

[DemPGH]

This certainly appears to have run out of steam. If we're ready for a final vote, we'll move it to a final vote; if we need a break, we'll take a break, but only for so long, then we'll have to vote on it (if that's what we do with this sort of thing).

[DemPGH]

Prof. Yankee, there is no question that whatever amount of money you are paid here, it is too little. I would vote you a raise.

Final vote, senators, so you know what to do! Go.

[DemPGH]

I have 3-4 as well.

When time is up, if we do not have the requisite six up or down I'll do the vote change extension where we can hopefully get six.

I don't see a reason why we couldn't bring up amendments to this FPR, after it is passed through the regular legislative process.

Yes, and I think the FPR is close enough to do that - plus, as comprehensive as the thing is and as much work that went into it from nearly everyone and as much conversation as there's been, it's just so close that not only would this be the thing to do, we would be amenable to it! I think we're talking about a couple lines here.

[DemPGH]

It's rejected, 5-3, after lying dormant for a lengthy period of time. If we re-introduce it hopefully we can get it ironed out this time.

[DemPGH]

Prof. Yankee, there is no question that whatever amount of money you are paid here, it is too little. I would vote you a raise.

Final vote, senators, so you know what to do! Go.

Did the definition of seven days change or something?

Though I should not I am horrible with month transitions, I think seven days is tomorrow night.

I thought it was five days! Look, we're waiting on Max and Polnut, I don't know what the hold up is. If I ended it early and they're waiting till the last second to vote, then let's get them in here and vote on it! Do they know what's going on? I should damn well #@^*g think so.

[DemPGH]

It's rejected, 5-3, after lying dormant for a lengthy period of time. If we re-introduce it hopefully we can get it ironed out this time.

The vote was illegally declared ended and is hereby still ongoing.

There are actually a number of ways that votes can end early, a couple of them are incredibly odd, and after checking the rule book again, I see that I had gotten this vote confused with one of those scenarios, so I thought five days applied here. But that is not the case since the --- situation at hand is not one of those scenarios. This is a different scenario. My apologies.

WE'LL CONTINUE WAITING. Thank you for your attention.

[DemPGH]

This is admittedly going to be tough, but I hope we can try again once this one is finally down for the count. I can't end it yet - if I'm reading the rules right, we're technically in a vote change period now (6th vote occurring on the 6th or 7th day day) until time runs out, and I don't want to add 24 hrs. anyway since this is a done deal. I'll be out this evening, so someone let me know when this thing is cooked.

As to Israel, they are an intel partner, and a needed one!!

[DemPGH]

Okay, it's officially rejected.

I'd like to get another one up ASAP that incorporates the suggestions that everyone will be amenable to. Plus, there's got to be a compromise on the Israeli situation, which is the direction we should be headed on that. Too many people see us as simply assisting an aggressor, so there's got to be a softer or compromised way to maintain our relationship with Israel. I don't think either side is going to convince the other regarding Israel; rather, we should try to come up with something that a majority of the Senate can live with, which may not be ideal but may be satisfactory. Ideas?