May 2011 Foreign Policy Review Senate Debate and Approval (Passed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=133144.30


Guidelines should be placed into the OSPR regarding how these are to be handled, when we take up the amendment I wrote three or four days ago regarding another matter. If a sponsor is required of this, then I assume sponsorship of it. Senators shall (Yes I am ordering you to do your jobs ) deliberate its contents for the next 72 hours.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

If the Senators have any questions, I'll happily answer them

[tmthforu94]

Posting this so people don't have to switch back and forth:

Department of External Affairs: May 2011 Foreign Policy Review

Definitions of the DoEA's Foreign Policy Review

Economic/Trade Restrictions:

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 attack the government and not the regime. 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 no 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: Normal, 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 partial 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: Full military and partial economic restrictions
Egypt: Partial military and no economic restrictions.  It is the hope of the DoEA that the spirit that overthrew Hosni Mubarak will continue, and that Egypt can transition to a democratic government.
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: Normal.  We have concerns about political freedoms, internal violence and relations with Somalia (Partial military and no economic restrictions).
Gabon: Partial military and partial economic restrictions until democratic institutions are respected and civil liberties recognized.
Gambia: Partial military and no economic restrictions. We have serious concerns about political freedoms, basic rights, and corruption.
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: Normal, though we have serious concerns about political freedoms, basic rights, and corruption.
Kenya: Normal
Lesotho: Normal
Liberia: Normal
Libya: Full military and economic restrictions.  As was noted in a previous statement, the Government of Atlasia no longer recognizes Colonel Gaddafi as the leader of Libya.
Madagascar: Normal, though we are concerned by corruption and political instability.
Malawi: Normal
Mali: Normal
Mauritania: Partial military and no economic restrictions.
Mauritius: Normal
Morocco: Normal, though we are concerned about certain political freedoms. On the matter of Western Sahara, we demand immediate negotiations concerning the status of Western Sahara, and the failure of Morocco to engage into talks will results in recognition of Sahrawi independence.
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. We strongly condemn the situation in Darfur, and would like to see an end to conflict with South Sudan.
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.
Zambia: Normal, though we are concerned by the political situation and corruption.
Zimbabwe: Full military and economic restrictions

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Here are the other two:

Department of External Affairs: May 2011 Foreign Policy Review

Definitions of the DoEA's Foreign Policy Review

Economic/Trade Restrictions:

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 attack the government and not the regime. 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: The Americas

Antigua and Barbuda: Normal
Argentina: Normal
Bahamas: Normal
Barbados: Normal
Belize: Normal
Bolivia: Normal, though we oppose any secessionist movements in Santa Cruz province and other eastern areas of the country.
Brazil: Normal
Canada: Normal
Chile: Normal.
Colombia: Normal.
Costa Rica: Normal
Cuba: Normal. Atlasian policy regarding Cuba is currently F.L. 18-6, Cuban Relations Act.
Dominica: Normal
Dominican Republic: Normal
Ecuador: Normal
El Salvador: Normal
Grenada: Normal
Guatemala: Normal
Guyana: Normal
Haiti: Normal, though we have concerns regarding corruption and political instability.
Honduras: Normal
Jamaica: Normal
Mexico: Normal, though we have serious concerns about the drug warlords conflict.
Nicaragua: Normal
Panama: Normal
Paraguay: Normal
Peru: Normal
Saint Kitts and Nevis: Normal
Saint Lucia: Normal
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines: Normal
Suriname: Normal
Trinidad and Tobago: Normal
Uruguay: Normal
Venezuela: Normal

DoEA Policy: Europe

Albania: Normal
Andorra: Normal
Armenia: Normal
Austria: Normal
Azerbaijan: Full military and economic restrictions until free elections are held, civil liberties respected and transparency is restored.
Belarus: Full military and economic restrictions until free elections are held and civil liberties respected.
Belgium: Normal
Bosnia & Herzegovina: Normal. Atlasia welcomes the apparent political stability and peaceful ethnic relations.
Bulgaria: Normal
Croatia: Normal
Czech Republic: Normal
Denmark: Normal
Estonia: Normal
Finland: Normal
France: Normal
Georgia: Normal, though we have concerns over civil liberties and notably about the status of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The DoEA reserves the right to military restrictions if we feel that it is needed in view of current events in the country or the Caucasus.
Germany: Normal
Greece: Normal
Hungary: Normal
Iceland: Normal
Ireland: Normal
Italy: Normal, though we have concerns about corruption.
Kosovo: Normal
Latvia: Normal
Liechtenstein: Normal although we call for a complete transition to democracy and full transparency in banking.
Lithuania: Normal
Luxembourg: Normal
Macedonia: Normal, although we have concerns about corruption, ethnic minorities and relations with Greece.
Moldova: Normal. Atlasia is pleased overall with democratic evolution in Moldova, though we have serious concerns about corruption, political instability, drug trafficking and the Transnistria issue.
Monaco: Normal
Montenegro: Normal
Netherlands: Normal
Norway: Normal
Poland: Normal
Portugal: Normal
Romania: Normal
Russia: Partial military and economic restrictions. We have serious concerns about democracy, civil liberties, press freedom and the situation in Chechnya and the Russian Caucasus.
San Marino: Normal
Serbia: Normal, though we should warn Serbia against any attempt to go against the recent UN ruling on Kosovo.
Slovakia: Normal, though we have some concerns about worrying nationalist trends in the country and their negative effect on internal and external ethnic relations.
Slovenia: Normal
Sweden: Normal
Switzerland: Normal
Turkey: Normal, although concerns remain about treatment of Kurds, and increasing trend away from secularism.
Ukraine: Normal, but we have concerns regarding current political stability, corruption, and various other problems
United Kingdom: Normal
Vatican City: Normal

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Department of External Affairs: May 2011 Foreign Policy Review

Definitions of the DoEA's Foreign Policy Review

Economic/Trade Restrictions:

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 attack the government and not the regime. 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: Normal, though we are concerned about corruption, drugs, woman's rights and other issues.
Australia: Normal
Bahrain: Partial military restrictions.  The Atlasian Government strongly condemns the recent measures taken against protesters in Bahrain.
Bangladesh: Normal
Bhutan: Normal
Brunei: Partial military and partial economic restrictions
Burma (Myanmar) Full military and economic restrictions. We urge for a full transfer to democracy, and the respect for civil liberties and basic political freedoms.
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 realize that China is a major economic partner and full economic restrictions would be counter-productive to the Atlasian and global economy.
East Timor: Normal
Federated States of Micronesia: Normal
Fiji: Full military and partial economic restrictions.
India: Normal
Indonesia: Normal
Iran: Full military and economic restrictions will remain in place until the Iranian regime makes full, honest and lasting overtures to democracy.
Iraq: Normal, though we have major concerns about corruption and other issues.
Israel: Normal
Japan: Normal
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: Normal.
Kyrgyzstan: Partial military and no economic restrictions
Laos: Normal, though we have concerns about human rights and basic freedoms.
Lebanon: Partial 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: Normal
North Korea: Full military and economic restrictions
Oman: Partial military and no economic restrictions
Pakistan: Normal, though we are extremely concerned about the apparent role of the ISI in harboring terrorists.
Palau: Normal
Palestine: Normal, though we are gravely concerned by the current political situation. Atlasia supports a two-state solution and would like a democratic and independent state of Palestine in the near future.
Papua New Guinea: Normal
Philippines: Normal
Qatar: Normal, though we want a full transfer to democracy.
Samoa: Normal
Saudi Arabia: Partial military and no economic restrictions. We are concerned about the human rights situation and urge the government to make major democratic reforms.
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, though we are keeping a close eye on the political situation and we will re-evalute the Free Trade Act with Thailand if need be.
Tonga: Normal
Turkmenistan: Full military and economic restrictions
Tuvalu: Normal
United Arab Emirates: Partial military and no economic restrictions. We are concerned about workers rights and political freedoms.
Uzbekistan: Full military and economic restrictions
Vanuatu: Normal
Vietnam: Normal
Yemen: Normal

I present the full FPR to the Senate and ask a Senator to assume sponsorship of this bill and urge the Senate to approve it, as per the terms of F.L. 32-18: Amendment to the SoEA Role Codification Act.

x Ben, Secretary of External Affairs

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

is Ethiopia the only change?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I didn't mark changes this time; Ethiopia is left over from the FPR I did as SoEA back in July.  Hashemite never completed the December review, so I didn't denote any changes.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I didn't mark changes this time; Ethiopia is left over from the FPR I did as SoEA back in July.  Hashemite never completed the December review, so I didn't denote any changes.

then why is it red?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I didn't mark changes this time; Ethiopia is left over from the FPR I did as SoEA back in July.  Hashemite never completed the December review, so I didn't denote any changes.

then why is it red?

It's a clerical error.  The red has no official standing; it was meant as an aid to Senators.  Ignore it.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I say we should be hard on Liechtenstein regime!

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Why full economic restrictions on the Congo DRC , but none at all on Rwanda and Burundi, which along with Uganda, support rebel armies in the Congo, and extract minerals from Congo in order to fund them?   Certainly Kinsasha is not blameless, but the last thing we want to do is put them at a disadvantage against the rebels.  Targeted restrictions would be better.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I demand sanctions against evil Liechtenstein regime.

[Hash]

Full sanctions on Canada please.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

It's funny to see Atlasian policy abroad hypocrisy at it's finest. Full restrictions on Belarus, for example, but just partial military on Bahrain, that crushed Democratic protest with a help of Saudi tanks

I'll vote against this garbage review.

[Napoleon]

It's funny to see Atlasian policy abroad hypocrisy at it's finest. Full restrictions on Belarus, for example, but just partial military on Bahrain, that crushed Democratic protest with a help of Saudi tanks

I'll vote against this garbage review.

I share your concerns. The Secretary should also come in and make his case though. If we want more tangible foreign policy in this game, this is step one.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Last thing we should do it "here: policy review, please vote quickly to approve this". We never have real debate over relations with specific countries. That's, plus hipocrisy of many points here, why I'll vote to reject this in protest.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Last thing we should do it "here: policy review, please vote quickly to approve this". We never have real debate over relations with specific countries. That's, plus hipocrisy of many points here, why I'll vote to reject this in protest.

I invited Senators to contact me about the review.  None did - and that includes you, Senator Kal.  If you want to have a debate, have a debate.  I would love to have a give and take with Senators over this, but none of you has stepped forward.

So let's do this.  Let's have a discussion, rather than hurling out insults and emoticons.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Why full economic restrictions on the Congo DRC , but none at all on Rwanda and Burundi, which along with Uganda, support rebel armies in the Congo, and extract minerals from Congo in order to fund them?   Certainly Kinsasha is not blameless, but the last thing we want to do is put them at a disadvantage against the rebels.  Targeted restrictions would be better.

I would like to see an answer on this, Ben.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I would like to see an answer on this, Ben.

Sorry; I thought I'd already done so.  My bad
In that region, it is difficult to truly assess where blame lies.  Rwanda has full sanctions placed on it, as does Uganda.  The literature I have read (and I admit it is not extensive) does not place as much culpability on Burundi as one the others, and so I have not placed restrictions on Burundi.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I would like to see an answer on this, Ben.

Sorry; I thought I'd already done so.  My bad
In that region, it is difficult to truly assess where blame lies.  Rwanda has full sanctions placed on it, as does Uganda.  The literature I have read (and I admit it is not extensive) does not place as much culpability on Burundi as one the others, and so I have not placed restrictions on Burundi.

Actually, it says this:

Department of External Affairs: May 2011 Foreign Policy Review

Definitions of the DoEA's Foreign Policy Review


Burundi: Normal, though we are still concerned about ethnic violence, corruption and certain political freedoms.

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.

Rwanda: Partial military and no economic restrictions, though we have concerns pertaining to freedom of the press and politics.

Uganda: Full military and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned by the political situation, human rights and corruption.

My reading of the situation is this - there ought to be the same partial economic restrictions on all these countries, related to the trade of conflict minerals, and targeted sanctions on corrupt individuals and organizations.

My general opinion is that we should not place full economic restrictions on any nation except in extraordinary circumstances.  We should be encouraging through trade those industries which promote the well being and sufficiency of people in other countries even when we do not approve of the government.

a couple procedural questions: Is the Senate able to amend this directly? And if this were to fail is the previous policy review retained?

[Ban my account ffs!]

I would like to see an answer on this, Ben.

Sorry; I thought I'd already done so.  My bad
In that region, it is difficult to truly assess where blame lies.  Rwanda has full sanctions placed on it, as does Uganda.  The literature I have read (and I admit it is not extensive) does not place as much culpability on Burundi as one the others, and so I have not placed restrictions on Burundi.

Actually, it says this:

Department of External Affairs: May 2011 Foreign Policy Review

Definitions of the DoEA's Foreign Policy Review


Burundi: Normal, though we are still concerned about ethnic violence, corruption and certain political freedoms.

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.

Rwanda: Partial military and no economic restrictions, though we have concerns pertaining to freedom of the press and politics.

Uganda: Full military and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned by the political situation, human rights and corruption.

My reading of the situation is this - there ought to be the same partial economic restrictions on all these countries, related to the trade of conflict minerals, and targeted sanctions on corrupt individuals and organizations.

My general opinion is that we should not place full economic restrictions on any nation except in extraordinary circumstances.  We should be encouraging through trade those industries which promote the well being and sufficiency of people in other countries even when we do not approve of the government.

a couple procedural questions: Is the Senate able to amend this directly? And if this were to fail is the previous policy review retained?

I have to agree with what my colleague is saying.  While full economic sanctions can be a tool in helping affect democratic change in some cases, such sanctions often come at a significant loss of human life among the people while the ruling class simply substitute traded goods for the best domestic goods they can get... further depriving the people.  Purposely depriving people of basic necessities in order to rile them up and affect change in their government is not much less cruel than the atrocities many of these despots are responsible for in the first place.

As Shua said, we should have targeted sanctions that hurt the government most while still allowing trade that is beneficial to the people (like food, building material, components for internet access, computers, etc.  Nothing brings democracy better than modern day instant, universal communication).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There some very important points and ideas coming forward here, and I would like to see the SoEA's feedback on what the gentleman from MN has said.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would like to see an answer on this, Ben.

Sorry; I thought I'd already done so.  My bad
In that region, it is difficult to truly assess where blame lies.  Rwanda has full sanctions placed on it, as does Uganda.  The literature I have read (and I admit it is not extensive) does not place as much culpability on Burundi as one the others, and so I have not placed restrictions on Burundi.

Actually, it says this:

Department of External Affairs: May 2011 Foreign Policy Review

Definitions of the DoEA's Foreign Policy Review


Burundi: Normal, though we are still concerned about ethnic violence, corruption and certain political freedoms.

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.

Rwanda: Partial military and no economic restrictions, though we have concerns pertaining to freedom of the press and politics.

Uganda: Full military and partial economic restrictions. We are concerned by the political situation, human rights and corruption.

My reading of the situation is this - there ought to be the same partial economic restrictions on all these countries, related to the trade of conflict minerals, and targeted sanctions on corrupt individuals and organizations.

My general opinion is that we should not place full economic restrictions on any nation except in extraordinary circumstances.  We should be encouraging through trade those industries which promote the well being and sufficiency of people in other countries even when we do not approve of the government.

a couple procedural questions: Is the Senate able to amend this directly? And if this were to fail is the previous policy review retained?

I think that if it was failed that the SoEA would have to revise and resubmit it but I don't know if that is actually required in the act that set this up. As for amendments no procedures were given or listed for how they should be dealt with so I guess normal rules regarding legislation applies.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

There some very important points and ideas coming forward here, and I would like to see the SoEA's feedback on what the gentleman from MN has said.

I have no objections to the Senator's sentiments.  When choosing between partial and full restrictions, I generally look at the situation, evaluate all the information available to me, and then decide which is more likely to be effective.  In a nation where resources tend to overwhelmingly go into the pockets of the Dictator/Dictator's Cronies, I am far more willing to place full sanctions.  When there is a chance resources get to the people, Partial sanctions are more likely.  Additionally, I always lean towards more military than economic sanctions.

I would welcome amendments being proposed, and I am pleased that there is at least some Senatorial discussion on the topic.  Excelsior!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Shall we vote, then?