Foreign Office

[Donerail]

Foreign Office

This thread will serve as the official home of the Foreign Office, discussing the proposals and actions of the Government regarding foreign and defense policy, and serving as a location for any public questions or comments.

I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Cabinet and in the Parliament as a whole to shape South America's foreign policy through the next term. In particular, I hope that we will be able to work with our counterparts to the north to establish full diplomatic relations with the Republic of Atlasia. There are great challenges before us, but I am confident we will be able to meet them.

[Classic Conservative]

Is South America going to set up relations with The Republic of China ie: Taiwan?

[Donerail]

Is South America going to set up relations with The Republic of China ie: Taiwan?

South American acknowledges the One-China policy and maintains formal diplomatic relations only with the People's Republic of China. The South American Economic and Cultural Office in Taipei serves to promote South American interests among the people on Taiwan, as well as processing visas and providing other consular services.

[Donerail]

What is the view of this state on the Palestinian crisis?

We seek a just peace between Israelis and Palestinians that will create two states for two peoples - are there any specific details on the crisis that you would like me to address?

[Classic Conservative]

What countries will you be establsihing diplomatic relations with?

[Donerail]

What countries will you be establsihing diplomatic relations with?

At this time, unless instructed otherwise, I will be opening diplomatic relations with all member states of the United Nations, as well as the State of Palestine and the Republic of Kosovo. The Parliament may at any time pass legislation to recognize currently unrecognized nations (such as the Republic of China, the Sahwari Arab Democratic Republic, etc).

[Lincoln Republican]

Foreign Minister SJoyce, as you are also responsible for defense, and inasmuch an army has now been instituted and installed, it would appear, by Mr. afleitch, the nation requires an answer from you regarding the validity of this army, and as to whether this army is in fact legal, or if it requires the sanctioning of Parliament, or if it requires your approval as the responsible minister in cabinet?

Please reply as people in this new republic need to know the answer to this question. 

[Donerail]

Foreign Minister SJoyce, as you are also responsible for defense, and inasmuch an army has now been instituted and installed, it would appear, by Mr. afleitch, the nation requires an answer from you regarding the validity of this army, and as to whether this army is in fact legal, or if it requires the sanctioning of Parliament, or if it requires your approval as the responsible minister in cabinet?

Please reply as people in this new republic need to know the answer to this question. 

Mr. afleitch's militia is performing what we believe to be a publicity stunt in protest of the notion that Parliament should be elected before various legal tasks are undertaken. However, he does have a point in that a lot of the current "legalism bad" current is more an expression of a reaction to failing experiments in other parts of the world than of a legitimate concern. Speaking personally, I stand in support of cementing some basic roles and powers (of the Parliament, of the head of state, of the judiciary, etc) and providing some legal framework through a constitution, and I believe the Government is presently working to draft a mechanism to establish just that. Simple, of course, to avoid the tinkering that bogged down other nations. Harmonizing various elements that currently make up the governmental system of the nations we represent a union of is a top priority of this Government. His idea that this Parliament should be universal is, while a more radical break with the past, certainly also one that merits consideration.

To address your question more directly, Mr. afleitch's army is legal until and unless Parliament establishes a legal body that decides otherwise. It is not my position as Foreign Minister to forbid the formation of militias unless Parliament passes a law to that effect. This militia as a law enforcement body, however, is unsanctioned, and has no more authority to enforce the laws of this nation (such as they are) than any other individual.

[Lincoln Republican]

Thank you Mr. Minister.

That brings some clarification to this matter.

[Donerail]

Foreign Office

Statement on South American Compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention

It is the formal legal opinion of the Foreign Office that the actions to recover Daniel Rojas from his captivity do not constitute a violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention. The use of incapacitating chemicals, such as fentanyl, is covered under Article II 9(d) of the CWC, which specifically exempts “law enforcement including domestic riot control purposes” from the CWC.
The FARC kidnappings were conducted in violation of the laws of Colombia, and law enforcement agencies with jurisdiction to enforce that law, qualifying an antiterrorism hostage recovery operation such as was conducted as a form of domestic law enforcement.
The convention defines a riot control agent (Article II 7) as “any chemical not listed in a Schedule which can produce … disabling physical effects which disappear within a short time.” Fentanyl gas is not listed in any of the Schedules and has relatively short-lasting effects.
Given these circumstances, it is the opinion of the Government that no international treaty was violated in the conduct of this operation.

[Donerail]

Foreign Office

Statement on Atlasian Imperialism

The Foreign Office is deeply disturbed that a major candidate for the Atlasian Presidency has proposed the annexation of multiple nations of Central America that are presently free and independent. South America stands with her Central American allies in firmly resisting Yankee imperialism.

[Donerail]

I would simply like to bring the nation's attention to the fact that certain Atlasians continue to cite 'anti-Atlasian sentiment' here as a chief reason for failing to establish diplomatic relations, yet the Speaker of the Pacific Legislature can make statements actively calling for the destruction of our nation with nary a whimper of protest.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Let's be honest. There are, of course, individuals, both in South America, as well as in Atlasia, that are unreasonably hostile toward each another, which isn't good, but can we please avoid exploiting one person's silliness in order to escalate feelings of mutual distrust? It's just like with your statement on the so-called "Atlasian imperialism". One person proposed something, but you used it to attack Atlasia in general for "imperialism".

Frankly, I smell a lot of hypocrisy here. Just look at some very hostile toward us statements, like by your own Prime Minister. How can you be surprised that we are at least little sceptical toward having relations? First there are attacks and jabs, and then complaining of being victimized by that bad Atlasians

I propose we all, on both sides, just chill and give each other a time to think reasonably about our common future, instead of continuing this? I'm very open to coexist with South America and I'm certainly not only one. We're not your enemies, man.

[Senator Cris]

I think that the title of your statement is wrong.
It's not right speaking of "Atlasian imperialism" when it's a simple proposal of a candidate for the presidency. It was only a proposal, there is nothing done.

If we want to speak about the merit of the proposal, I can tell you that I'm opposed to annexation of Central America from both nations.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I think that the title of your statement is wrong.
It's not right speaking of "Atlasian imperialism" when it's a simple proposal of a candidate for the presidency. It was only a proposal, there is nothing done.

If we want to speak about the merit of the proposal, I can tell you that I'm opposed to annexation of Central America from both nations.

As am I and I've already said so on the Atlasian board.

Also, in response to the statement by Mr. Classic Conservative SJoyce brought up, I've introduced this legislation: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=39557.msg4722096#msg4722096

[Donerail]

Let's be honest. There are, of course, individuals, both in South America, as well as in Atlasia, that are unreasonably hostile toward each another, which isn't good, but can we please avoid exploiting one person's silliness in order to escalate feelings of mutual distrust? It's just like with your statement on the so-called "Atlasian imperialism". One person proposed something, but you used it to attack Atlasia in general for "imperialism".

Nothing in my statement condemns "Atlasia in general" - I condemn the elements of the Atlasian political system that support imperialism, including, in this case, a major-party presidential candidate. "Atlasian imperialism" refers not to a political proposal, not the nation's current policy.

Frankly, I smell a lot of hypocrisy here. Just look at some very hostile toward us statements, like by your own Prime Minister. How can you be surprised that we are at least little sceptical toward having relations? First there are attacks and jabs, and then complaining of being victimized by that bad Atlasians

The political rhetoric of the Prime Minister is the business of other parties and ministers. A threat to annex all our neighbors is, by any measure, much more of a threat than some of the Prime Minister's rhetoric - it is at that point that rhetoric rises to the level where it merits the attention of the Foreign Office.


South America thanks you for your swift opposition to Mr. Griffin's proposal, and your reasonable response to Mr. Classic Conservative's rhetoric. I wish you the best of luck.