Intergalactic Summit

The CEP corporations never signed the Federal charter.

The CEP was a rogue criminal organization.

How can an organization that was never party to laws or treaties, break them.

[Cognitive Dissonance Intensifies]

@veikusenpai

She's just being modest. Arrendis is a far better director than I ever was. Madame Director is a well earned title and honestly should be used often and consistently.

As you wish, madam director.
CONDI got a slot open for a skyteam staff officer?

Things you don't know. Arra gets to tell you.

To play devil's advocate on the previous discussion, the CEP Corporations were, technically, subject to the Federation when war broke out.

You see, treaties between nations cover the nations themselves as the parties. While yes, the colonies were set up before the Federation existed, as private enterprises, the Corporations were registered subjects of the Caldari State. The treaty that brought the Caldari into the Federation was signed by the Government on behalf of the state itself. It's how all international treaties are signed, so if/when there is a change of government there's no need to renew a mutually consented treaty since the parties are strictly the states themselves, not the people who physically signed it.

As the subject of the treaty is the nation as a whole, that means that the Corporations, as Caldari registered private entities, would be subject to the Federation treaty and those laws it defined as being subject to the Caldari. This is no different then the free trade treaty between the Amarr Empire and the Federation, which changed the relationship between Federal and Imperial Corporations and tarrifs charged on goods produced by private enterprises between the two states. It's why a large number of treaties tend to get made anyways, namely to benefit (or control) one/both parties' private interests in some way.

A further example is the Yulai treaty that bound the five original signatories into a formalised diplomatic council with equal representation, and moderated by CONCORD. With further treaties/amendments, signed by the states themselves, private interests became subject to more and more CONCORD influence and oversight despite there having been none before.

And now to get back on to point. Does this mean the Federation had the legal right to demand control of the colonies and take the actions they did? That depends on the interpretation of Federal and Caldari law at the time, combined with how it applied to private ventures, but it must be looked at under the knowledge that after the signing of the treaty the Corporations involved were indeed subject to the Federation. I'm not personally in a position to make that justification as I'm not an expert on laws regarding private colonisation of the time, nor the fine print of the treaty, but I think there was possibly a case on both sides. I do, however, think the Federation's actions in enforcing their claim went above and beyond what could be considered excusable, even under Federal law, in how they conducted the military campaign. But, again, I'm not an expert on the Federation's laws at the time on military affairs, so this is my rather biased viewpoint.

Does it make it morally right the Federation's claim and the actions taken to enforce it? Well, that one is a lot more subjective to the viewer, but I'll simply leave it that it should be painfully obvious which side my bread is buttered, and it's not Caille style.

To all that have responded, thanks you are much appreciated.

I have not emailed everyone back yet because of the number of responses but I shall contact you all by email individually as I work thru the list with missions specifics.

I totally agree with Tyrel. Tash-Murkon is one of the more liberal Amarr houses, and if you kill Catiz, conservative Amarrians will take back control and make the relationship with the Republic even worse than it is already.

Yep, I've fixed my post. Thanks for reminding me.

I feel that this is a topic that merits further discussion.

Practically, I agree with you that the Empress to be is perhaps the best best choice in when speaking in terms of the relationship with the Tribes.

However if this were a theoretical argument, one could argue that her success gives credence and legitimacy to the Amarr Empire's most basic tenant of Foreign Policy; namely the Reclamation. Here we have a an empress that is from a people other than the True Amarr. Her people were reclaimed, and her coronation is a statement that says their religion, their system works. that the Reclamation works. With the possibility of one day, perhaps far in the future, a Brutor could be crowned Emperor, the defeat of that idea and of the Empire becomes that much harder.

Following this train of thought, should we not be subtly be encouraging this purity of the thrown movement instead?

But not too subtly.