United Nations of Kerbin meeting invitation

Hello, fellow members of the UNK. If you are receiving this, then congratulations! You've been invited to the first annual meeting of the UNK. We will be discussing important matters such as -

Portera-CICS tensions
Increased nuclear activity
Increased space activity

The following nations' leaders are invited:

CICS
Portera
Gladia
Narcona
Aquitus
New Arova
Osonia
Republic of the Islands of Kaeprus
Campojna

A representative of the Republic of the Islands of Kaeprus will be in attendance.

We will send a representative.

The senate shall send two of its foreign ministers.

New Arova will send our Prime Minister Mikaere Moana.

The Porteran president will attend, of course, as well as another representative.

Aquitae wishes to discuss the terms of our treaty with the WPRP to the UN.

Narcona will attend

Kabundakan wishes to attend this meeting in an observation capacity.

Rikuto would like to request the same as our Kabundakan friends.

Rikuto and Kabundakan, sure.

Aquitae, we will discuss this.

Delegations from all the 7 People's Constituent Republics will attend the meeting.

I also want to strongly object the inclusion of the WPRP-Aquitan armistice in the planned discussions. The treaty was freely signed between two plenipotentiary delegations on behalf of their respective governments, each one of the terms has been jointly agreed and the Aquitan government freely committed itself to respect those terms.
If you accept this instance, then every nation that finds itself dissatisfied with a treaty they freely committed themselves to honour will come here to ask for mercy, claiming they're oppressed by the other contracting party. This is a very dangerous precedent, that will turn a noble organization as the UNK into a way for short sighted governments to escape from committement they freely took.

Also, we remind the Chair that we are not speaking of a nation unjustly aggressed by an offensive foe, but of an imperialist nation that wished to exploit the momentarly esitation of a newborn People's Government to annex it in spite of the People's Freedoms. I see no reason for this topic to be brought up in such an occasion.

Your 'treaty' is a naked violation of Aquitan sovereignty and cannot be defended.

Please, refrain from unfounded moral judgements. The Aquitan government found the terms acceptable, and so I see no reason for you to discuss them.

They found them 'acceptable' in preference to an invasion of their nation-and inevitable annexation, given the WPRP record in the past. It's the exact kind of intimidatory tactics that this organisation is intended to prevent.

None of the terms on the treaty state that we cannot request that a UN peacekeeping force may be stationed in the Imperium in the event that your military may attempt overthrowing the senate, and claiming Aquitae as your own. We would also like to thank Kabundaka for acknowledging our current position.

Yes, they chickened out when the foe they believed an easy prey turned out to be backed by the Internationalist Friendship of the WPRP.

Anyway, our point stands as it was presented.

Please, please! Save your contributions for the meeting.

They found them 'acceptable' in preference to an invasion of their nation-and inevitable annexation, given the WPRP record in the past. It's the exact kind of intimidatory tactics that this organisation is intended to prevent.

May we ask to what "record" your are referring?

We would also like to add that we also believe the United Nations of Kerbin was intended to prevent intimidation and unjust acts of aggression between nations--exactly the kind of unjust, unwarranted aggression displayed by the Aquitan Imperium, when, un-looked for and unprovoked, they invaded Iyartae without any purpose but the expansion of their empire and the subjugation of the Iyartaen people. The WPRP, meanwhile, is guilty of none of the "intimidation tactics" to which you refer--we were merely defending our sworn allies from foreign aggression. All the WPRP is guilty of is honouring our sworn alliances and defending the liberty of those who could not defend themselves. The very fact that the WPRP allowed this dangerous, irresponsible, un-democratic and imperialist government to remain in power testifies to our commitment to international peace and stability, and we believe that even if this government cannot be trusted in international affairs, at least it may be able to care for its own people. WPRP forces stationed in the Imperium are indeed peacekeepers--they are there to prevent any other nation from falling victim to Aquitan aggression, and, in turn, to protect the people of the Imperium from harm, whether it is by another nation or their own government. We have done nothing to suggest that we would ever stoop to the level of the Imperium and attempt an annexation of their country, nor is there any further peacekeeping which must be achieved--there is no conflict in Aquita, and, so far as we know, the people of the Imperium are being treated justly. The only reason we can see for the Imperium to want “peacekeepers” in its lands is that they wish to go back on their sworn obligations outlined by the Treaty of Aquita and expel our forces from their nation, in order that they may once again become the aggressive, unjust, imperialist power that they once were. We believe that at least most of the member states of the UNK are committed to their organisation’s values of peace and justice, and we as such implore them to see reason in this matter. We have no intention of employing military force against the Imperium so long as they abide by the obligations of their treaty and treat their people fairly, and even if we did use force, we would never attempt to annex another nation. We would also caution the just and honest member states of the UNK when dealing with the government of the Imperium—they have shown, in their unprecedented acts of aggression, that they serve only themselves and care not for the blood that is spilled in order to achieve their goals, and that they also care not for the values of your organisation. Perhaps we did the world a disservice, in our haste to end the destructive conflict, by allowing them to stay in power, but, having made such a mistake, we will not now allow them to cause blood to be spilled once more.

The treaty states the occupation as a fact, but does not actually create an obligation at any point for Aquitae to allow foreign military forces to remain on their territory.

Crichton wrote: The treaty states the occupation as a fact, but does not actually create an obligation at any point for Aquitae to allow foreign military forces to remain on their territory.

In the interest of defending the Imperium Aquitus and its people, the World People's Republic will station its armed forces in the lands of Imperium Aquitus. Aquitian war industries shall aid in producing needed equipment and ammunition for these armed forces.

Please, refrain from commenting on matters that you do not understand.

The treaty states that we will allow WPRP to station it's forces in Aquitae. It doesn't state that you shall be the only nation with access to our territories. For those of you who do not already understand, our government is ran by the senate - the Emperor is a figurehead, who passes messages from the senate to the people. On the topic of the invasion of Iyartae, the senate held a vote, likewise with many other topics. The vote passed with 57%. Our government is not "un-democratic", nor is it "irresponsible" and "dangerous". A vote was cast from within the senate and enough senators managed to agree with the kerb who initialised the vote.

Tell me, your government also held a vote to carry on the undemocratic, irresponsible and unprovoked invasion of Iyartae?

No, since there was too small a time gap in order for a vote to have taken effect. We shall leave the rest of this discussion for the meeting.