Quote:We do not want relief from the embargo. That has too many potential problems. Moving capital sized vessels through your house territory would always be after we asked permission. Our gunship is, in reality, a heavily armed freighter. Our Cruiser an exploration vessel. The only real combat capital ships we have are our Destroyer, Battle cruiser and Juggernaut. If we were to be moving ships of this size through your house we would always ask permission first.
I do want Liberty and the Zoners to have a good working relationship. While our neutrality is our problem as you put it, it is still the core issue here.
I see. If ratification is all we can offer, then as I said earlier, I will be happy to provide my signature and to gather the signatures of the relevant figures within our government and security forces once our objectives are met.
From what you say, those conditions that I require seem very close to being met.
Currently, we recognise that space around your installations as owned in the same way as corporations own land and facilities. However, we are prepared to agree that it is your sovereign territory, both the station and the sphere five kilometers around it. This would exclude any trade lanes of course, which would remain in the hands of whomever their current ownership is attributed.
As Im sure you know, there is a fine line between neutrality, which is what you aim for, and supporting acts of piracy and terrorism. Now, even though independant worlds space is currently lawless, you obviously have your own set of morals such as, but not limited to, the objection to a needless waste of life.
Surely the Council of Zoners does not support nor condone acts of violent aggression, piracy or terrorism, even within its "lawless" space? A rhetorical question, of course.
From my current understanding, what you seem to have said in your previous transmission is that:
The Forces of Liberty can continue a chase into the no-fire zone unhindered by Zoner intervention.
The Forces of Liberty can make the arrest of the fugitive inside the no-fire zone, if neccessary, with force.
Afterwards, if requested by the Council of Zoners, proof of both the chase outside the no-fire-zone and inside that zone would be provided.
If the suspect escapes or reoffends, you will deny the use of your facilities to the individual in question and take away the safety of the no-fire-zone for said individual.
This will allow us to again attempt the arrest of that individual without being hindered by the restrictions of your no-fire-zone.
The fugitive could be a violent criminal in a bomber, for example, or a smuggler with slaves, again for example.
And that:
If the Forces of Liberty encounter loiterers around a Freeport, we can request them to leave without the use of force.
If there is prior proof of the crimes of any individuals who are loitering in the Freeport no-fire-zone, then we are free to make an armed arrest of those individuals inside that zone.
If previously unconvicted accomplices of the criminals assist said criminals, then we would arrest them too and provide evidence of their agression inside the zone on request by the Council of Zoners.
Is this the correct understanding of what you propose?
Quote:Now, we live in two different realities, You have black and white and we see things more as shades of gray. This does put us at slight odds. Our situation is unique, neutrality is a necessity, if we disavow a faction then we are at potential issue with many others. We do not condone the taking of life needlessly, we do understand your position, we ask that you understand ours.
I see as many shades as there are colours in the books of law in Liberty. As you said, that is the black of the ink used to write those laws and the white of the paper that the laws themselves are written on. I do however understand your position, though I cannot put it before the concerns of the house which I represent, if you understand what I mean.
Regards, Harrison McRemitz
The secretary of state for foreign affairs.
As you can see, the person in question, a Junker pilotting the Salvager Solarstriker is carrying a full load of slaves, and proceeds to head directly into what would be Zoner sovereign space if your laws were ratified by us.
In this instance, the officer issued a warning and was ignored. Having already initiated the docking sequence with the lane and staying in that sequence, there was no way for a lone bomber to stop that transport. However, the officer followed as you can see, straight to Freeport 2 in Bering.
What would you consider this kind of evidence to be? Proof, or not enough of a justification? What action, if any, would be taken by yourselves, and what reasons would you give for any actions taken?
As I have not yet recieved an answer, which is fine given the short span of time between this message and my previous message, these are questions I need to clarify the answers to. It goes without saying that the individual in question will now be arrested when he is found and cornered within the borders of Liberty, but without clarification, I am unsure of what the Zoner community would do.
Regards, Harrison McRemitz
The secretary of state for foreign affairs.
**Incoming Transmission**
**Decryption Process initiating**
**Clear text reads**
To: Harrison McRemitz
The secretary of state for foreign affair
From: Samuel Nichols, CEO Omicron Supply Industries,
Representative of the Council of Zoners
Message reads:
Mr. McRemits,
I will be happy to clarify those points for you.
Quote:From my current understanding, what you seem to have said in your previous transmission is that:
* The Forces of Liberty can continue a chase into the no-fire zone unhindered by Zoner intervention.
* The Forces of Liberty can make the arrest of the fugitive inside the no-fire zone, if neccessary, with force.
* Afterwards, if requested by the Council of Zoners, proof of both the chase outside the no-fire-zone and inside that zone would be provided.
* If the suspect escapes or reoffends, you will deny the use of your facilities to the individual in question and take away the safety of the no-fire-zone for said individual.
* This will allow us to again attempt the arrest of that individual without being hindered by the restrictions of your no-fire-zone.
Agreed, but let me stress that they must have the proof ready to submit if asked for. This way if there are any complaints we can supply the evidence to the opposing parties.
Quote:The fugitive could be a violent criminal in a bomber, for example, or a smuggler with slaves, again for example.
And that:
* If the Forces of Liberty encounter loiterers around a Freeport, we can request them to leave without the use of force.
* If there is prior proof of the crimes of any individuals who are loitering in the Freeport no-fire-zone, then we are free to make an armed arrest of those individuals inside that zone.
* If previously unconvinced accomplices of the criminals assist said criminals, then we would arrest them too and provide evidence of their aggression inside the zone on request by the Council of Zoners.
If you encounter a loiterer on a patrol, that is specifically wanted, meaning can not be a subject of a blanket bounty. Then yes the LN or LSF can then enter the NFZ to apprehend. If they have compatriots and they try to assist their associate, then by all means defend yourself.
Non wanted loiterers can also be instructed to leave by either of these Liberty agencies, just with out the use of force. Although pictorial proof of the loiterer ignoring the request should be posted to our NFZ violation message dump, so we can deal with the offender.
An example. You see Phate the notorious Lane hacker lounging about in the NFZ of Ames Research station. Now there are specific bounties on that individual. You can feel free to announce your intent and engage him. Now if it was just some unknown Lane Hacker that has a decided to rest in the NFZ, then he can be asked to move on or dock, not engaged in combat within the NFZ.
While we do not mind if the LN and LSF pass by our stations on patrol we would also like to point out that they are not permitted to loiter either.
One addendum we would add is to allow the LPI to have the same privileges for Bethlehem station in Pennsylvania.
Quote:Surely the Council of Zoners does not support nor condone acts of violent aggression, piracy or terrorism, even within its "lawless" space? A rhetorical question, of course.
I think that a majority of Zoners would agree with you, although, there are some that do not care as long as it does not affect them.
Quote:In this instance, the officer issued a warning and was ignored. Having already initiated the docking sequence with the lane and staying in that sequence, there was no way for a lone bomber to stop that transport. However, the officer followed as you can see, straight to Freeport 2 in Bering.
What would you consider this kind of evidence to be? Proof, or not enough of a justification? What action, if any, would be taken by yourselves, and what reasons would you give for any actions taken?
This example is a bit rough, since as a whole we do not condemn nor condone slave trading. Now the Zoner faction ZAS is set to stop slavery all together, and would gladly help Liberty track down and stop every last slaver in existence.
Now while this evidence is sufficient to prove the pursuit started outside the NFZ, it does not show the junker trying to escaped into the NFZ. Yes he will be entering it but he may just be trying to get to the next trade lane. A picture of him actually in the NFZ would be required. So it the officer had snapped a picture once he exited the trade lane showing the junker still in the NFZ, then that would have been all we required for our proof and the officer could have engaged the junker at their discretion.
Basically if the offender running through the NFZ and exiting again on the other side, but not seeking to use it as a shield, we would not be at issue with that. If anyone retreats into the NFZ to use it as a shield from pursuit then they have violated our laws.
I hope this helps clarify things for you and that from this we can move even closer to some agreement.
Sincerely
Samuel Nichols
CEO-OSI
Council of Zoners representative
In that case, I am very close to being in a firm position to ratify your laws. There are only a few things that need to be addressed from my point of view.
Quote:If you encounter a loiterer on a patrol, that is specifically wanted, meaning can not be a subject of a blanket bounty. Then yes the LN or LSF can then enter the NFZ to apprehend. If they have compatriots and they try to assist their associate, then by all means defend yourself.
Not all wanted criminals are bountied in such a specific manner. Due to the potential expense, the forces of Liberty do not have policies in place to bounty large volumes of wanted criminals individually. We do however keep records of criminals and their past activities. I'd ask that when such evidence is present, our forces would be able to forcefully arrest such a loiterer within the zone, with the production of that proof to the Council of Zoners on request.
Quote:Non wanted loiterers can also be instructed to leave by either of these Liberty agencies, just with out the use of force. Although pictorial proof of the loiterer ignoring the request should be posted to our NFZ violation message dump, so we can deal with the offender.
For loiterers that havent committed any crimes within Liberty, I expect that our forces would rarely have to ask for them to 'move on', so to speak. The only instance that we'd expect loiterers to move on would be if there were multiple vessels gathering for what an officer may reasonably assume to be a raid, and of course we would gather pictoral proof of this and submit it to you. In such a case, our forces wouldn't engage the party as it gathered, but once they exitted the no-fire-zone.
Quote:While we do not mind if the LN and LSF pass by our stations on patrol we would also like to point out that they are not permitted to loiter either.
One addendum we would add is to allow the LPI to have the same privileges for Bethlehem station in Pennsylvania.
Naval and security force vessels have no reason to loiter that I can think of, but even if they did, that is a fair treatment of our personnel.
The Police would of course get the same privelidges around Bethlehem station in Pennsylvania, thankyou for bringing that on to the table. It may have slipped my mind otherwise.
Quote:Basically if the offender running through the NFZ and exiting again on the other side, but not seeking to use it as a shield, we would not be at issue with that. If anyone retreats into the NFZ to use it as a shield from pursuit then they have violated our laws.
According to the officer on duty at the time, the vessel entered on one side and exitted on the other. My question here is that, as the demand for the contraband to be dropped was made outside of the no-fire-zone, under this agreement, would it be permissible for the engagement to continue into the zone and then back out again? I feel that it should be, but I'm not sure from your response so I'd like some clarification.
Just a few more hurdles to jump, and we will be at a stage of a finalisation of this agreement between us and the ratification of your document by the Republic of Liberty.
Regards, Harrison McRemitz
The secretary of state for foreign affairs.
**Incoming Transmission**
**Decryption Process initiating**
**Clear text reads**
To: Harrison McRemitz
The secretary of state for foreign affair
From: Samuel Nichols, CEO Omicron Supply Industries,
Representative of the Council of Zoners
Message reads:
Mr. McRemits,
Lets see if we can clear up these final points.
' Wrote:In that case, I am very close to being in a firm position to ratify your laws. There are only a few things that need to be addressed from my point of view.
Not all wanted criminals are bountied in such a specific manner. Due to the potential expense, the forces of Liberty do not have policies in place to bounty large volumes of wanted criminals individually. We do however keep records of criminals and their past activities. I'd ask that when such evidence is present, our forces would be able to forcefully arrest such a loiterer within the zone, with the production of that proof to the Council of Zoners on request.
Maybe bountied was the wrong term. If the person was specifically wanted by the Liberty government, and not just wanted because they were part of a certain organization, it would be valid to enter the NFZ to apprehend them. Correct those records of past activities would be the proof we are looking for in this situation.
Quote:For loiterers that havent committed any crimes within Liberty, I expect that our forces would rarely have to ask for them to 'move on', so to speak. The only instance that we'd expect loiterers to move on would be if there were multiple vessels gathering for what an officer may reasonably assume to be a raid, and of course we would gather pictoral proof of this and submit it to you. In such a case, our forces wouldn't engage the party as it gathered, but once they exitted the no-fire-zone.
That of course is perfectly acceptable. What goes on outside the NFZ is not really our concern. Any evidence of a gathering would be welcome so we can deal with the offenders.
Quote:According to the officer on duty at the time, the vessel entered on one side and exitted on the other. My question here is that, as the demand for the contraband to be dropped was made outside of the no-fire-zone, under this agreement, would it be permissible for the engagement to continue into the zone and then back out again? I feel that it should be, but I'm not sure from your response so I'd like some clarification.
In that case the "engagement" started before entering the NFZ, he had proof of the pursuit outside of the NFZ and if he had a chance to engage the person inside the NFZ that would have been legal. As for it traveling outside of the NFZ, thats fine also.
Sincerely
Samuel Nichols
CEO-OSI
Council of Zoners representative
[Incoming Transmission]
[Source: Whitehall, New London]
[CommID: Foreign and Colonial Office]
Representatives of the Council of Zoners, Secretary of State,
The Bretonian Government has taken an interest in these negotiations between your good selves and, after consultation with Her Majesty Queen Carina and the Honourable Lord Mountbatten, Prime Minister of Bretonia, I can inform you that we are willing to ratify the Zoners proposals along the same terms as the Republic of Liberty, with one minor amendment.
Whilst sections I, II and IV are entirely acceptable and section III has been broadly resolved with the Republic of Liberty to the extent that we consider the latest description of terms to be to our satisfaction, the difference in status of Freeport 1 compared with 2 and Ames requires a minor additional clause for legal reasons. Whilst Ames and Freeport 2 are located in independent systems that are under the shared influence of 2 Houses, making it easy to acknowledge Zoner 5K sovereignty around your bases, Freeport 1 is located in Omega 3, a system which is currently classed as a Protectorate of the Bretonian Crown and under partial Bretonian sovereignty, meaning that the 5K sphere around Freeport 1 is currently claimed as under private Zoner ownership but under the Legal Sovereignty of the Bretonian Crown.
However, in order that this difficulty might be eliminated and we can fully recognise Zoner Sovereignty around Freeport 1, Her Majesty has most graciously agreed to lease the 5K sphere of space around the Freeport to the Zoner Confederation on a renewable 10 year lease, for the most reasonable price of 60 million credits per month (which would be financially cancelled out by the current Bretonian lease on Port Jackson, hence negating the neccessity of you actually paying anything for it).
Therefore, for no net cost to yourselves, we would fully recognise Zoner Sovereignty of this space and fully agree to all your remaining terms as they currently stand.
Hoping that you find this entirely acceptable,
Yours faithfully,
Lord Charles Canning
9th Earl of Malmesbury
Foreign Secretary of Bretonia
I think the position of the Bretonian Government, considering their circumstances concerning Freeport 1 as opposed to ours concerning Freeport 2 and Ames, is a reasonable stance to take.
Regarding the latest clarifications, I am happy with them and provided that my Bretonian collegues also aquire their lease, I imagine that both our houses will be ready and willing to ratify your laws. As for the official Foreign Law Enforcement Treaty between the Republic of Liberty and the Zoner Confederation, I will be willing to write up a draft myself. I expect that the Bretonian Crown would use some similiar derivation of the aforementioned draft in its dealings with yourselves.
We look forward to your response, mister Nichols.
Regards, Harrison McRemitz
The secretary of state for foreign affairs.
**Incoming Transmission**
**Decryption Process initiating**
**Clear text reads**
To: Harrison McRemitz, Lord Charles Canning
The secretary of state for foreign affair
From: Samuel Nichols, CEO Omicron Supply Industries,
Representative of the Council of Zoners
Message reads:
Mr. McRemits and Lord Canning,
Ah welcome to these negotiations Lord Canning.
So I will outline our agreements.
Liberty
In conjunction with Zoner patrols to police our installations and uphold our policies,
The Zoners grant to
1) The LN and LSF have the ability to pursue opponents into the NFZ, as long as pictorial proof of the engagement can be provided that it was started before entering the NFZ and said opponent retreated into the NFZ. Proscribed for these locations only: Ames Research station, Freeport 2 and Bethlehem station
2) The LN and LSF have the ability to enter the NFZ to arrest known criminals that are loitering about Zoner installations. Proof of the criminal's specific crimes must already be available, before such an action can be taken. Pilots just associated with an organization or House, but with no crimes on record, are not subject to this ability. Proscribed for these locations only: Ames Research station, Freeport 2 and Bethlehem station
3) The LN and LSF have the ability to ask loiterers around Zoners installation to move on or dock. No use of force is authorized in this instance, unless covered by part 2. This does not grant the ability for Liberty officials to loiter themselves. Proscribed for these locations only: Ames Research station, Freeport 2 and Bethlehem station
4) The LN and LSF have the ability to defend themselves inside the NFZ, if attacked by other forces when trying to apprehend criminals.
5) The LPI will be granted the above abilities for the Bethlehem station only
In return Liberty agrees to
1) Abide by the Zoner policies in all instances, except those modified by the above agreement.
2) Officially recognize Zoner installations and the 5k NFZ as Sovereign Zoner territory. Subject to Zoner laws and policies.
3) Not to engage in military actions or combat against other houses inside the NFZ.
Bretonia
In conjunction with Zoner patrols to police our installations and uphold our policies,
The Zoners grant to
1) The BAF and BPA have the ability to pursue opponents into the NFZ, as long as pictorial proof of the engagement can be provided that it was started before entering the NFZ and said opponent retreated into the NFZ. Proscribed for these locations only: Freeport 1
2) The BAF and BPA have the ability to enter the NFZ to arrest known criminals that are loitering about Zoner installations. Proof of the criminal's specific crimes must already be available, before such an action can be taken. Pilots just associated with an organization or House, but with no crimes on record, are not subject to this ability. Proscribed for these locations only: Freeport 1
3) The BAF and BPA have the ability to ask loiterers around Zoners installation to move on or dock. No use of force is authorized in this instance, unless covered by part 2. This does not grant the ability for Bretonian officials to loiter themselves. Proscribed for these locations only: Freeport 1
4) The BAF and BPA have the ability to defend themselves inside the NFZ, if attacked by other forces when trying to apprehend criminals.
In return Bretonia agrees to
1) Abide by the Zoner policies in all instances, except those modified by the above agreement.
2) Grant a a 10 year lease of the 5k of space about Freeport 1, and recognize this space as Sovereign Zoner territory during the term of this lease. The amount of said lease will the be sum of 60 million credits per month.
Sincerely
Samuel Nichols
CEO-OSI
Council of Zoners representative
You beat me to it, mister Nichols, and I see you did a fine job writing up the terms. I am happy with them as they stand in the draft you have just presented. Once they are signed into force by the Council of Zoners if that is neccessary, I'll add my signature to it and to your own laws. I think Lord Canning will also be satisfied with this agreement, but I am not in a position to speak for him of course.
Regards, Harrison McRemitz
The secretary of state for foreign affairs.