What's new

VOTING: Galán Peace Plan

Do you support the enforcement of the Galán Peace Plan?


  • Total voters
    10
  • Poll closed .

Natal

Elder Statesman
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
904
Location
Bucharest
Capital
Camp Hill
Nick
Ovi
PANNONIAN PEACE PLAN
- for central Gallo-Germanian peace, stability and human rights -
-designed by Cristian Galán Correa -

PREAMBLE

Understanding the need of the peoples of the world to self-determinate and to perpetuate their own cultures and traditions without fear of assimilation, oppression, suppression or imperialistic aggression the Pannonian peace plan is designed in such a way to restore the ancient rights of the peoples of Pannonia in such a way to offer the Franks, Zarans and Serboves the same rights as the Bajorans which have lead the nation and to give them autonomy and the right to perpetuate their culture and language without fear and to seek happiness and joy in a safe environment which does not impede on their lives.
Avoiding unnecessary bloodshed is a must and a goal of the European Forum and thus it should be the duty of all member states to offer aid to less fortunate states and their peoples in dire need, to provide not only supplies like food and medicine, but also administration and peacekeeping. It is thus in our opinion that the nations of the European Forum must set aside their differences and band together in this project, should they want to avoid turning Pannonia into a battleground in a three way continental war.
PEACE PLAN
  • The Pannonian State will be reorganised into the Pannonian Community (Confederation), representing a directorial republic made out of autonomous communities (Bajoran, Frank, Zaran and Serbovian), with a joint presidency made out of a council formed out of representatives of each community, each of them being a primus inter pares for a one year period (henceforth the Presidency).
  • The Pannonian Armed Forces will be disbanded and reorganized by the assimilation of the Zaran and Frankish militias too into the new organisation.
  • The territory of Pannonia will enter a special status of European Forum Mandate (henceforth the Mandate), where a special council of guaranteeing powers made out of representatives of the Federation of Westernesse, the Kingdom of Eiffelland, the Republic of Remion, the Empire of Tarusa, the Rus' Peoples' Republic and the Union of Pelasgian Republics, will ensure that social concord is established and that the balance between the representatives in the presidential council is kept (henceforth the Council).
  • The Council of Guaranteeing Powers will ensure that the constitutional rights of all peoples inside the Pannonian Community is respected, while at the same time, there will be no centrifugal forces attempting to break the union.
  • The Council will observe and enforce the disarmament of groups unwilling to be assimilated in the new armed forces of the Community.
  • The Council will observe and enforce a lustration of the Pannonian administration, so as to ensure that into the nation's administration there will be no repeats of the recent crisis episodes.
  • The Council will exist for a period equal to the length of the Mandate.
  • The European Forum will provide a multinational peacekeeping force that will be stationed in the country for the period equal to the length of the Mandate, with at least half the soldiers provided by nations which are not part of the Council.
  • The length of the Mandate will last for an initial period of 5 (five) years, after which it will be either disbanded or renewed on a yearly basis.
  • The vote of the renewal or continuation of the mandate will be done in the European Forum.
CONCLUSIONS
The recent events in central Gallo-Germania and the escalation of tensions is tragical and the European Forum itself is in peril of not achieving its goals, should a war start between the nations that support each camp in the Pannonian conflict. While the project for the aforementioned Pannonian Community is far from being the exact wish of each of the camps, it is the closest one can get towards a compromise that keeps the Pannonian State together, while also guaranteeing the rights of the ethnic groups living in the country, with the special autonomous status each of them enjoy, not allowing episodes like the recent one to take place and no abuse in power from the central authorities.

The member states are invited to vote on the peace plan.
 

Pelasgia

Elder Statesman
Joined
Sep 30, 2014
Messages
2,934
Location
Athens, Greece
Capital
Decelea
Nick
Demos
Antonios Antoniou, Pelasgian Representative to the European Forum:

The United Pelasgian Republics would propose an amendment to allow internationally monitored independence referenda to take place by the end of the 5-year mandate, in order to allow Pannonia's different ethnic groups the chance to determine their own future. Nevertheless, we will vote in favour of the proposal, because it represents the best--and, so far, the only--proposal for peace presently available for the people of Pannonia. We are eager to hear any other proposals that might be aired.
 

Hradreych

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 31, 2006
Messages
5,601
Capital
Yinjing
Nick
Kyiv
Oleksandr Ruslanovsky Zakharov,
Rus representative to the European Forum

The Leader of the People has carefully considered this proposal and has found it to be satisfactory. The Rus People's Republic supports this proposal and pledges to do what is necessary to put it into effect should it be enacted.
 

Remion

Elder Statesman
Joined
Jul 23, 2017
Messages
911
Location
Toscana - Italy
Nick
Animalesco
Arcangelo Udinese, Remion Representative to the European Forum:

The Republic of Remion finds this proposal unsatisfactory, as it does not take into account the legitimate demands of the peoples of Pannonia. Their right to express themselves and self-government is crushed by the noise made by Rus's boots. We are voting against this resolution which will only praise brute force.
 

Eiffelland

Elder Statesman
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
11,019
Location
Rotterdam, Netherlands
Capital
Trier
Roland Hörschelmann, Representative of Eiffelland to the European Forum:

The government of Eiffelland commends the government of Corrientes for taking the initiative for a peace plan.

It also has a complete understanding for the thoughts behind this peace plan: Trying to find something in the middle between two completely opposite plans for the future of Pannonia.

Furthermore, we do understand that the Republic of the Rus should be involved in finding a solution to the Pannonian crisis. And we do so despite the very aggressive way the government of the Rus voiced its opinion and tries to push its thoughts through, something my government did not very much officially commend on but considers despiccable and severely condemnable. We would also have listened when the Rus would have voiced its stance in a less aggressive way.

But now the government of Eiffelland sees itself in a very difficult position.

On the one hand, we have very strong doubts about whether the plan put forward by the government of Corrientes is going to work, despite the good intentions. Our assessment of the situation in Pannonia leads to the conclusion that it is impossible to the various people to live together again. When we impose this plan upon the Zarans, Bourdignians, Serboves and Bajorans, there will be a lot of discontent, and probably a lot of civil unrest. The peace-keeping force will have to do a lot to keep the peace when the Zarans, Bourdignians, Serboves and Bajorans are not granted their own countries.

On the other hand, we see the threats of the Republic of the Rus to start a war when The Federation, Remion and Eiffelland do not retract their recognitions of Eugenia, Bourdignie and the Serbove Satellite Republics. We take those threats very seriously, and do want to seek for a solution that avoids such a scenario.

Basically, the government of Eiffelland sees itself pressed to choose between a full-blown war and a long-lasting civil war.

The plan currently under vote has a much bigger chance to work when it includes the independence of Eugenia, Bourdignie, the Serbove Satellite Republics and a Bajoran rump state. Then there is a much bigger chance that the tensions will lower.

I have to mention that the safety of Bourdignie, Eugenia and the Serbove Satellite Republics is Eiffelland's interest. Should the Republic of the Rus indeed decide to attack, we will respond.

Also: If we do not reach a deal here, Eiffelland will continue to militarily support Bourdignie.

However, we will agree with Bourdignie, Eugenia, the Serbove Satellite Republics and a future country for the Bajorans and Csengians becoming militarily and diplomaticly strictly neutral countries, if that will lead to a peace deal with the Rus, because then the people living in Pannonia will have a basis to move on after the split-up of the country.

If the proposal currently under vote is amended so that Bourdignie, Eugenia, the Serbove Satellite Republics and a future country for the Bajorans and Csengians become militarily and diplomaticly strictly neutral independent countries, we will vote in favour of this proposal. At this moment, we will not vote, pending discussions on whether it is possible to amend the proposal currently under vote.
 

San Jose

Regional Actor
Joined
Oct 31, 2006
Messages
6,985
Location
Los Angeles, California
Capital
Palmira
Nick
Jose
Demetrio Verdugo, Representative of San Jose to the European Forum:

Honorable Representatives of the European Forum, despite being in agreement often with our brother nation of Corrientes, it is with a heavy heart and with much regret that San Jose must vote against their otherwise well-crafted peace proposal, done with the best intentions, and we praise the Honorable Representative Cristian Galán Correa for his efforts. Our reason, however, for voting against his peace plan has been detailed extensively by the Honorable Representative Roland Hörschelmann of Eiffelland, but we repeat from the debate: San Jose is in favor of a peace plan that recognizes the legitimacy and sovereignty of the Bourdignie and the Eugenians based on their current, de facto borders, but also their permanent, legal neutrality with all other regional powers, and protection from annexation or unification with other regional powers. That way, they are allowed to flourish as independent states, free of exploitation and oppression by their neighbors, and allowed to coexist on their terms with their neighbors.

As such, Honorable Representatives of the European Forum, inspired by the tireless work of the Honorable Representative Cristian Galán Correa, the Archipelagic Collectivist Republic of San Jose has crafted its own peace proposal as a viable alternative, and we shall hereby submit it for your consideration.

I yield the floor.
 

Hradreych

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 31, 2006
Messages
5,601
Capital
Yinjing
Nick
Kyiv
Oleksandr Ruslanovsky Zakharov,
Rus representative to the European Forum

The Leader of the People is extremely concerned about persistent efforts to make peace negotiations contingent on the recognition of self declared statelets backed by foreign military forces. We do not view the restoration of the prior constitutional order as prerequisite for peace and we conceed the possibility that Bajororszag may cease to exist as a unitary polity. But this is a question which should be decided by the nation's of Bajororszag themselves. How can it be denied that once the European Federation has established a mandate and disarmed the opposing groups, there will be ample opportunity for the legitimate representatives nations of Bajororszag to reach an amicable political settlement?

The Leader has made it clear he would order an intervention if necessary, to bring a swift end to the conflict is preferable to indefinitely prolonged agony.
 

Eiffelland

Elder Statesman
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
11,019
Location
Rotterdam, Netherlands
Capital
Trier
Roland Hörschelmann, Representative of Eiffelland to the European Forum

I would like to ask His Excellency Mr. Zakharov to take a look at the Verdugo Peace Proposal. It leaves enough room for the people of Eugenia, Bourdignie and the future Bajoran country to improve their relations with each other. Maybe that is going to even lead to a re-unification. But at this moment, the only way to give the Zarans, Bourdignians and Bajorans enough rest to reconsider and develop understanding for each other, is by letting them live in their own nations.

THe problem with the Galán peace plan, and eh, also with the plan of action that the government of the Rus has in mind, is that we force the people living in Pannonia to like each other. That is not going to work. The peace corps will mainly be occupied with establishing its authority, and will be viewed with suspicion. The only way in which a peace plan will work, is that we involve the Pannonians in it. At this moment, the Zarans and Bourdignians do not feel represented by the government in Kispest, so we have to involve the people they feel represented by.

In any case, we think that the Verdugo plan has a much higher chance to succeed than the Galán plan. Therefore, my government has decided to vote against the Galán plan.

OOC:
 

Vrijpoort

Elder Statesman
Joined
Jul 27, 2018
Messages
568
Location
Berlin, Germany
Capital
Vrijpoort
Nick
Drei
Durston Howell III, Vrijpoorter High Commissioner to the European Forum:

Honourable members,

The Principality of Vrijpoort finds most of this proposal to be satisfactory save for two issues.

One, we would like Vrijpoort, as a bordering state and important economic partner of Pannonia, to take an active role in the EF peacekeeping organisation.

Two, we find it important that provisions are made to organise legitimate, legal, free and fair referenda for the future statuses of any potential new independent states, autonomous regions, etc.

As it stands, the current declarations of independence by various sham governments are illegal and undemocratic. This sets an extremely dangerous precedent. While we support self-determination, this proposal currently on the floor should have provisions in place for a democratically supported change in the legal status of various regions of Pannonia.

As such, given the current draft of this proposal, the Principality of Vrijpoort votes AGAINST.

I give way.
 

San Jose

Regional Actor
Joined
Oct 31, 2006
Messages
6,985
Location
Los Angeles, California
Capital
Palmira
Nick
Jose
Demetrio Verdugo, Representative of San Jose to the European Forum:

Honorable Representatives of the European Forum, as a week has passed since this peace plan was brought to the floor for a vote, and a 60% majority against this proposal has been established thus far, San Jose moves that voting end by the end of today and the results recorded and archived in the European Forum records.

I yield the floor.

OOC: I know there's nothing established for certain in regards to how much time is allowed to pass for an official vote, and that this is retroactive, but I'm proposing this so that we can move things along and have a relatively established procedure going forward. Obviously at some point more concrete rules for the EF need to be established to address this, but for now I hope this is overall acceptable.
 

San Jose

Regional Actor
Joined
Oct 31, 2006
Messages
6,985
Location
Los Angeles, California
Capital
Palmira
Nick
Jose
Demetrio Verdugo, Representative of San Jose to the European Forum:

Honorable Representatives of the European Forum, as no objection has been raised to our motion to conclude voting regarding the Galán Peace Plan after a significant grace period, San Jose considers this vote to be officially concluded, with four votes in favor of the European Forum adopting the Galán Peace Plan, and six votes against. The peace plan has failed to obtain a simple majority, and as such it shall not be adopted.

We request the Archivist of the European Forum record the results as they stand today for the archives of this venerable body.

I yield the floor.

OOC: Not the most ideal way to conclude a vote, but I don't know how else to wrap this up.
 
Top