Economic sanctions are restrictions placed on domestic entities. As such, they fall under the exact same legal framework and arguements that the Empire uses to justify the pacification efforts on Kahah and Thebeka. These are entirely domestic matters that fall outside the Yulai Accords.
2 Likes
Discounting of course that the Commerce Assessment Division of the Secure Commerce Commission is responsible for the oversight of interstellar trade agreements and cross-regional trade.
As youāre undoubtedly aware, the SCC is governed by the Yulai Convention.
The SCC provides the framework for interstellar trade and agreed-upon regulations. It doesnāt restrict nations from imposing their own domestic trade policies. The Federation and Republic have as much legal basis to impose sanctions as the Empire had when it cut off trade with the Republic after the Elder Fleet attack. They have as much legal basis as every single heir and holder does when they dictate which Amarrian families and businesses may and may not deal with outsiders.
Ideally there wouldnāt need to be demands. Ideally the Empire would act according to proper moral behavior and not need such heavy-handed methods as targeted sanctions in order to punish sinners. Too bad weāve decided that itās okay to be a nation that destroys worlds and massacres innocents.
When last I looked, neither the Republic nor the Federation are legally obligated to provide the Amarr Empire with economic activity. As the sanctions were entirely internal matters, rather than attempted blockades of Amarr stargates, I fail to see how they had no legal basis. Are you claiming that the nations of New Eden do not have the right to regulate who their citizens can and cannot trade with? Is supporting the Blood Raidersāan acknowledged sovereign power by CONCORD over a number of systemsālegal within the Empire?
2 Likes
It is not uncommon within trade frameworks involving multiple parties to maintain clauses forbidding unilateral proscription of individual trade partners within the framework. Considering the intensity of economic competition between Federation and State when the Accords were reached, I would be surprised if such a clause did not exist.
That is however speculation on my part, what is fact is that none of the presumably many people who have in fact seen the appropriate documents have challenged the official and public assertion that the Accords were breached.
Federal and Republic representatives have both affirmed it being legal within the framework of the Accords. Only xer Qosh is claiming the Accords were breached.
ā¦ on this, at least. Itās the opposite story with regards to claims of breaches of the EMWPA and Accords over Amarrās enslavement operations on Floseswin.
Itās possible not all Republic representatives are reading from the same hymn-sheet.
Which Republic representatives are reading from hymn-sheets? Thatād be quite a scandal.
Also, congratulations, everyone. Thereās no point in continuing to argue in circles. Youāre all 100% correct, Iām wrong, Iām an idiot, have a good night. Iām done.
It does. But you know what else it has? Basic literacy, where the use of a collective noun in a response to an individual includes by necessity the inclusion of that specific individual in the entire collective class, i.e., specific designation of me as a āFreedom Fighterā. Thatās rather what makes a collective pronoun collective.
What a lovely and transparent way to attempt to suppress the continued illustration of your incompetence. Completely unsurprising from the culture that said āhey, I know how we can get people to stop objecting to mass murder! LETāS COMMIT MORE OF IT!!ā
Really?
It appears you are lying.
To reframe and qualify an extant narrative is hardly a challenge, one could easily make a case that the emphasis of specificity in the recent statement is an attempt to improve the legal foundation of the sanctions. Something hardly necessary were even the servants of the Republic confident in their footing.
Combine the qualification of the Republic stance with the softening of the Federal stance and itās reasonable to have said Lord xer Qosh has not been challenged.
I did not for instance claim his interpretation of the accords met universal acceptance. If that was the implication carried in my words, then you have my apologies for my carelessness; and my thanks for the forbearance shown in light of it.
Or it could be taken to mean that the Republic was referring to the sanctions specified in the Empireās complaint, and that asserting that they are lawful in this way is a direct challenge to xer Qoshās claim.
As for the Federal stanceā¦ it has long been known that if you offer the Gallente enough time to flap their lips, they will talk themselves out of any resolve.
Finally, common ground.
1 Like
So, continuing with socks, what are your favourite socks to sleep with?
Pink ones with fluffy little furriers dotting it.
Noneā¦ Iām a daring archbishop.
And that is not surprising.
I would like to remind that I have already issued a warrant for arrest of a person named @Saronu_Yassavi in order to put her under trial for charges of: public slander.
Junior officers do not issue international warrants, for you to pretend otherwise would be injurious to the reputation of the State; if not so absurd as to defy all possibility of belief.
Considering how the state does not consider their citizens as citizens, but rather a property or an investment that is only judged by their worth, it is still a very fitting analogy indeed.
Caldarian curs are very likely to develop a slavish pride on being toyed upon by their corporate masters.
We do often take pride in our service. A civilization without it might not stay a civilization for very long, you know?
1 Like