Worldbuilding: New member integration in the UFP

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Timo wrote:

---

What is a single global government?

Something with more teeth than the United Nations or (gack) the European Union, I can tell you that right now.

In a general sense: There must be a single state that governs the entire planet. There can be multiple nations that are subordinate to it (much like US states make up the USA) but in the end, 'there can be only one'.

[T'Girl]

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

In "Redemption", the legally elected klingon government (supported by most of the population) asked for federation help against, essentially, terrorists.The federation refused to interfere, because stopping terrorists is an 'internal matter'.

If this 'internal matter' was beyond the federation's authority, why should romulan help for the klingons be anything the federation can interfere with?

Now the federation can't interfere in internal politics, but has free reign to interfere in external politics (that do not involve it?)? What's the justification for this division?

Returning to this. The Klingon weren't fighting terrorists, the main reason the Federation stood back was that it appeared to be a conflict between two rival political factions, at that time the Federation (wrongly) thought it was in fact "internal."

Once the participation of the Romulans was made clear, then the long standing "Treaty of Alliance" came into play. Part of the treaty was a mutual defense pact. Now Starfleet could get involved. Given Gowron's standing request for assistance, against what was now known to be a external force, there was no "hindering, obstructing, or impeding" of the Klingon government, there was no "interference."

What's the justification for this division?

Treaty of Alliance

[ProtoAvatar]

T'Girl

Gowron was the legitimate government, recognised by the federation.
Gowron asked federation help in dealing with what, legally, were terrorists.

Picard refused due to the prime directive, NOT the treaty (Gowron's request strongly implied the treaty allowed for the federation to help the klingons in internal matters, at their request).

And the prime directive - you can't involve youself in internal matters of a culture, but you can interfere in this culture's relations to political actor X (despite the fact that you're not a paricipant in these relations)?
A harebraind distiction.

Also:
"Picard saved the day only because the romulans acted equally opaque:
One wonders why, after Picard&co found the romulans, Sela didn't say:
"You found me. Big deal. I just returned from your ship, Picard. You know nothing you didn't already know.
This changes nothing - this is not hide and seek; I have no reason to return just becase you see me.
If you have the balls, open fire.
If not, get out of my way. I have a war to win. And, when I'm done, I'll come with my new klingon pals and start taking federation worlds apart.""

[T'Girl]

GOWRON: As per the terms of the Treaty of Alliance, I now formally request your assistance in fighting these enemies of the Empire.
RIKER: These enemies are Klingons.
GOWRON: By right and tradition, I am the sole leader. All who oppose me are traitors.
PICARD: But I'm sure you're aware that the Federation cannot interfere in what is, by definition, an internal Klingon affair.

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

Gowron was the legitimate government, recognised by the federation.

Gowron was recognized as the leader of the high council only by his own supporters and the Arbiter of Succession, the problem was the bulk of the Klingon high council didn't recognize him as such.

Where was it even briefly indicated that the Federation recognized him?

Gowron asked federation help in dealing with what, legally, were terrorists.

The Duras family were building a political coalition and engaging in a series of military attack upon loyalist forces. Terorism (by definition) involves intimidate, coerce and fear for political purposes. The Duras family were combating loyalist forces openly, there's no mention of them killing civilians in market places.

Picard refused due to the prime directive, NOT the treaty (Gowron's request strongly implied the treaty allowed for the federation to help the klingons in internal matters, at their request).

Gowron clearly didn't understand the terms of the treaty, Riker knew that it didn't cover Klingon upon Klingon matters and Picard knew it didn't cover treason. Picard had to (gently) remind Gowron that the treaty did not cover internal affairs.

Only when it became clear that an external force was involved did the treaty become pertinent.

And the prime directive

The Prime Directive is never mentioned.

despite the fact that you're not a paricipant in these relations

Honoring the treaty made the Federation a participant.

Picard's counseling of Worf about non-interference had to do with the Federation and the Klingon Empire being separate sovereign powers. The Prime Directive was not germane.

[ProtoAvatar]

T'Girl

Gowron become high chancellor by following klingon law aka he was the legal government.
The federation - Picard - was heavily involved in electing Gowron to the high council, treated with his as the legitimate government, etc - meaning it recognized him as the legitimate government.

Both Gowron and Worf mention the treaty, as the basis of their request.
Picard mentions the prime directive when he refuses Gowron. NOT the treaty.
All implicitly confirmed the treaty allowed for federation intervention in internal klingon matters, when its help was asked by the klingon government.

Of course, the distinction makes little difference to my point:
"About the prime directive (or the treaty, if you prefere) - you can't involve youself in internal matters of a culture, but you can interfere in this culture's relations to political actor X (despite the fact that you're not a paricipant in these relations)?
A harebraind distiction."

In both cases, Gowron asked for federation intervention and the Duras house opposed it - no distinction here.


T'Girl, you still have not adressed:
"Picard saved the day only because the romulans acted equally opaque:
One wonders why, after Picard&co found the romulans, Sela didn't say:
"You found me. Big deal. I just returned from your ship, Picard. You know nothing you didn't already know.
This changes nothing - this is not hide and seek; I have no reason to return just becase you see me.
If you have the balls, open fire.
If not, get out of my way. I have a war to win. And, when I'm done, I'll come with my new klingon pals and start taking federation worlds apart.""

[Mr. Laser Beam]

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

The federation - Picard - was heavily involved in electing Gowron to the high council

Uh, no, not really. Klingons are not *elected* to the council, they are *given* roles on it. The Chancellor can give a seat on the council to anyone he wants, for any reason, at any time; the Federation has never had anything to do with that.

As for Gowron, the Federation did not guarantee him the chancellorship, or have anything to do in selecting him. One individual - Picard - served as Arbiter of the succession. And that was only because K'mpec, the previous chancellor, told him to. Everything Picard did was according to Klingon law and tradition. Even Worf, in killing Duras, did so according to that same tradition (in that case, a revenge killing).

[ProtoAvatar]

Mr. Laser Beam

In conclusion:

Gowron became high chancellor by "klingon law and tradition" aka he is the legally elected (by the nobility, not the masses) leader of the klingons (there is no klingon rulling dynasty).

Picard, a starfleet captain, was heavily incolved in the process as arbiter of succession - meaning he did not refuse to take part in the proceedings;
Since then, the federation treated Gowron as the legitimate leader of the klingon empire in its dealings with the klingons aka the federation recognised Gowron as the legitimate high chancellor.

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Well, I don't know about "heavily." Picard was arbiter, yes (and again, this was only because K'mpec made him so), but it was still Gowron and Duras' job to fight it out for leadership of the council. And the only reason they didn't do that was because Worf killed Duras - which was a Klingon matter, not Federation.

Clearly Gowron was the more honorable candidate, but if Duras had survived and won, Picard wouldn't have been able to do anything about it.

So if you're arguing that the Federation was responsible for Gowron's ascension, or that the Federation was too involved in the succession, then I'm afraid that's not true.

[ProtoAvatar]

Mr. Laser Beam

I'm simply saying that, as far as the federation was concerned, Gowron was the legitimate, recognized klingon leader.
(And yes, he was the 'lesser evil' between him and Duras; Also, the federation, through Picard, WAS most definitely involved in electing Gowron; heavily or not involved: that's a matter of semantics/interpretation of little importance - the gesture was present through Picard)


As such, when Gowron asked the federation to help him against outlaws, the klingon empire asked the federation to interfere in internal matters.
In such cases, the prime derective need not apply.

Why did Picard came with that draconian/suicidal interpretation of the prime directive in order NOT to interfere - you cannot interfere unless every single faction of a society (no matter how illegitimate) asks you to?

And if this was Picard interpretation, why did he interfere in external matters of the klingon empire that did not involve the federation, in the same conditions (Gowron asked him to, Duras house opposed it)?
In doing so, Picard broke his prime directive twice - by interfering in klingon affairs (without being asked by every single klingon) AND in romulan business (without being asked by the romulans at all).

In conclusion, I'm saying Picards' behaviour vis a vis the prime directive was all over the place.

Also, Sela's behaviour made no sense - she had no reason (beyond - the main characters have to win) to stop just because Data found her ships (ships everyone - federation, klingons - already knew were there)?

[T'Girl]

SHANTHI:None of which is our concern, Jean-Luc. The Klingon civil war is, by definition, an internal matter of the Empire.
PICARD: Agreed. But if the Duras are being aided by the Romulans, it becomes very much our concern.

Two people who have apparently actual read the treaty.

SELA: Ah. Then I can tell my superiors that a fleet of twenty three Federation starships is on our border for, what, humanitarian reasons?
PICARD: It is our intent to prevent any external power from interfering in Klingon affairs.

Again per the treaty.

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

Picard mentions the prime directive when he refuses Gowron.

Where? The words "Prime Directive" never appear once in the entirety of the two-part episode.

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

The federation - Picard - was heavily involved in electing Gowron to the high council

The Federation played no part in Gowron becoming leader, that too would have been interference in a foreign sovereign power.

Picard preformed his duties as the Arbiter of Succession only as a "accomplished mediator." Not as a Starfleet Officer or a official Federation representative.

And as I and other have reminded you, Klingon don't elect their leaders.

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

T'Girl, you still have not adressed: "Picard saved the day only because the romulans acted equally opaque:

GOWRON : And once the Romulan connection has been exposed, support will fall away from Lursa and B'Etor.

ProtoAvatar, what could be clearer, the forces supporting the Duras family didn't know of the Romulan connection. Once the Romulan "opaque" disappeared, so would the Duras's political and military power.

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

One wonders why, ... Sela didn't say: "I have no reason to return just becase you see me.'

Once Data proved (no longer supposition) that the Romulans were running supplies, why would Sela continue forward? At that point the Duras family no longer possessed allies.

SELA: Reverse course. Order the fleet back to Romulan territory.

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

One wonders why, ... Sela didn't say: "I have a war to win. "

Win how? Against the reassembled might of the remaining Klingon military? With only fifteen Romulan ships? And also against Picard's twenty-three ship fleet? With more Starfleet ships likely on the way, remember ProtoAvatar once the Romulan connection was confirmed (not supposed) the treaty could then be invoked.

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

One wonders why, ... Sela didn't say: "I'll come with my new klingon pals and ..."

GOWRON: The Council appreciates your report, Captain. The information on the Romulan supply ships will prove very useful.

At that point, what new Klingon pal s ... the Duras sisters by themselves?

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

T'Girl, you still have not adressed ...

Just did.

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

Of course, the distinction makes little difference to my point

Apparently.

[Sci]

Begging everyone's pardon for having been gone a few days.

T'Girl wrote:

---

Wrong, the Ohio government isn't same thing as Ohio's citizens. Ohio is it's citizen,

No, it's not. Ohio is a state -- literally, it's in the name: The State of Ohio. A state is "a set of institutions that possess the authority to make the rules that govern the people in one or more societies, having internal and external sovereignty over a definite territory" and possessing the legal monopoly on the use of force within its territory. It is not its citizenry. Now, the State of Ohio works for its citizens, but it is not the same thing as its citizens.

And, by extension, no, the United States of America is not its people. It is the state that works for its people.

Claiming that the state is its people is like claiming that a car is its passengers.

Look I aware that there are employees (I consider elected politicians employees) who think that the US Government is somehow the entire country all by itself,

A country is the geographic area of land over which a state possesses sovereignty. Obviously a government cannot by definition be a country, as a political association is not the same thing as the territory over which it has jurisdiction.

And, no, the United States government is not the whole of society all by itself. But the United States is not its society; the United States is the political association that serves its society. If the United States were to be abolished tomorrow and replaced with the United Kingdom of Central North America, American society would still exist, but the United States of America would not.

that they are in no way "ambassadors" of the little people who elected them

1. American governance is based on the concept that there are times when the elected legislators need to exercise judgment independent of the populace who elected them because sometimes the majority of people are wrong or favor violating a minority's rights. There is a such thing as a tyranny of a majority -- this whole situation with the Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero in New York, where 70% of the American people object to innocent people building a completely benign cultural center there because ten years ago some lunatics who happened to be Muslims committed mass murder is a prime example of a majority of people seeking to violate the rights of a minority. There is, as a result, a constant contest in American politics between what is called delegation (only acting on the will of the majority) and trusteeship (using independent judgment even if it is unpopular). Neither side is dishonorable, provided there is a balance.

2. Members of Congress are not ambassadors of their constituents, for that very reason. An ambassador is someone who is legally empowered only to represent the will of their bosses -- they are, in other words, never empowered to engage in trusteeship. The United States Ambassador to the Court of St. James's will never be able to make U.S. policy towards the United Kingdom; he can only represent the policies of the President of the United States. That's why Members of Congress are not in any way ambassadors -- they are expected to exercise independent judgment sometimes, and everyone knows that. The fact that if the consistently violate the will of their constituents, they will lose at re-election is the thing that serves as a check on their trusteeship. This is the essence of representative democracy (or, if you will, of democratic republicanism), and notably sets elected legislators apart from ambassadors.

The people are the ones (usually) in control.

It would be more accurate to say that there are constant checks and balances on everyone's power, even the people as a whole, but that the people as a whole are the ones from whom legislative power is by consent derived. That's why Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf can still build Park51, even when the American people are against him. Nobody is in complete control.

And the people of Ohio were asked (through their mouth pieces) about the declaration of war.

No, they weren't. They weren't given a popular referendum. Their elected representatives -- who do not work for the State of Ohio, but rather who work for their constituents in their districts -- were asked. That's not the same thing. And even if the majority of Ohioans had been against the war, the fact that the majority of Members of Congress were for it means that it would have happened, even if the entire Ohio delegation had voted against it.

And I want to emphasize, again, that Members of Congress do not work for their home states, but for the people of their home states. It would be illegal for the Governor of the State of Ohio to contact the Ohio delegation to Congress and order them to vote a certain way in Congress; the State of Ohio has no authority over the Ohio delegation in Congress. The Ohio Members of Congress work for their constituents and no one else.

What I'm seriously claiming is that Starfleet gets to decide when to engage in COMBAT, not war. That, barring any instructions from the politicians of the moment, Starfleet would fight a foreign force attacking the Federation.

As long as you're conceding that Starfleet has to obey the Federation President and Federation government, I've got no problem with that idea.

Starfleet officers operate under standing rules of engagement. They started fighting the Dominion under those standing orders.

If you're talking about the commencement of hostilities in "A Call to Arms," I don't think that's true at all. Starfleet mined the Bajoran Wormhole, sovereign Bajoran territory, over the legal objections of the Bajoran government (as indicated by Major Kira's "I must object to this course of action, good now that that's over, Kira Nerys reporting for duty sir" line); the Dominion attack was in retaliation for the mining of the Wormhole. As such, it seems clear to me that the start of hostilities in "A Call to Arms" was probably a deviation from the standing rules of engagement that had to be authorized by the Federation President.

Just that, we contact the planet, not the government. (maybe the government too, at some later time)

But a direct contact would be the epitome of the inhabitents "making it own choices."

Are you the democratically elected representatives of the people of Planet Zog? No? Then what gives you the right to make decisions for Planet Zog?

The people of Planet Zog have created their own government and imbued their government with the authority to make decisions for the whole of society. Who are you to take away that right to make decisions for Zogian society when you are not part of the Zogian populace that gave it the right to make decisions for all of Zog?

[ProtoAvatar]

T'Girl

How can Sela win? Simple - by doing what she was already doing - by continuing to help help the Duras house against Gowron. No need to face the entire klingon fleet.
And when, with romulan help, the Duras house will win the klingon empire, the new klingon-romulan alliance could go against the federation.
No element of this plan is impeded by the fact that Picard can see her on sensors, as opposed to only knowing she's there.

T'Girl, once again, Gowron and Worf cited the treaty when they asked the federation to help the legitimate klingon government against outlaws - these guys know what the treaty holds (unlike you), meaning the treaty allows for help against such outlaws (much as it, apparently, allows for help against external threats).
Picard refused due to non-interference in matters of another culture - he recited the prime directive - giving it a draconian interpretation.

Later on Picard helped Gowron against 'external foes' as per the treaty. The non-interference of the prime directive would forbid this, too - interfering in romulan matters? are they excempt from the prime directive?
Well, Picard broke his prime directive interpretation with no hesitation.

[T'Girl]

Sci wrote:

---

Are you the democratically elected representatives of the people of Planet Zog?

Is the planet's government? Remember the planet Zog is being contacted solely because a group of people from that planet made a warp flight, no other reason. Should the government not be "democratically elected," would you still advocate the government being the primary point of contact?

Then what gives you the right to make decisions for Planet Zog?

By contacting them at all, your making a decision for them. You're certainly making a assumption about them wanting to be contacted in the first place. Now don't get me wrong, if (big if) your purpose is to establish diplomatic contact with the planet's governments, sure go that route.

But instead should a informal cultural relationship with the planet's people be your aim point, why contact the government? A protracted social interaction with a planets people would tell you much more about a planet's government that you would ever find out through official contact.

It might turn out that after evaluating a planet's government through discussions and interviews with the populace that the Federation may decide to permanently avoid official diplomatic contact.

Sci, you're in social contact with people in many countries just by posting here, did you ask permission of each of their governments first?

The people of Planet Zog have created their own government ...

And if the people of Planet Zog were to tell the multiple contact teams that "no no, you can't talk to any of us, you can only speak to our government," then of course communicating solely with the government(s) would be a fall back option. Perfect example of the planet's inhabitants "making their own choices."

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

How can Sela win? Simple - by doing what she was already doing - by continuing to help help the Duras house against Gowron.

ProtoAvatar, the Duras sisters were not fighting Gowron, the Duras coalition of allies was fighting Gowron's coalition of allies. Political and military allies. Once the Duras allies realize that the Duras sister were in alliance with the Romulans, the majority of them would switch sides over to Gowron's forces.

Unless you believe that the powerful Klingon house families would knowingly allies themseleves with the Romulans, that the various squadron commanders would do the same. The Duras sister were keeping the connection with the Romulans secret, for this reason.

Klingons and Romulans are enemies.

No need to face the entire klingon fleet.

But once the Romulan connect was known, that is exactly what the Romulan's would be facing.

And when, with romulan help, the Duras house will win the klingon empire

The Duras house? All by themselves?

No element of this plan is impeded by the fact that Picard can see her on sensors, as opposed to only knowing she's there.

Seeing the Romulan supply convoy on sensors is how Picard knew they were there. Sensor record would have been made available to the Klingons. And were.

Picard was selected as Arbiter of the Secession because he was trusted to be impartial. By refusing to back Gowron outside of the terms of the treaty meant that he would have continued to seen as impartial within the Klingon Empire by both factions. Both Gowron and Duras sisters courted his co-operation, he obliged neither of them.

Gowron and Worf cited the treaty ...

Please refer us all to where Worf even once cited the treaty.

Picard ... recited the prime directive

Please refer us all to where Picard even once recited the prime directive.

meaning the treaty allows for help against such outlaws

No, there are two separate scenes in the episodes where a Starfleet Admiral, Picard and Riker note what the treaty does and does not cover. Never are "outlaws," or for that matter revolutionaries, political rivalries or attempted coups considered to be justification to invoke the treaty.

Later on Picard helped Gowron against 'external foes' as per the treaty.

Yes, per the treaty.

[ProtoAvatar]

T'Girl

Duras house's "coalition" was receiving help from the romulans for some time - and they had no problem with it.
We're talking supplies to fight an interstellar war, NOT some covert stuff - you can't hide something on this scale, T'Girl.

Picard knew Sela was in the vicinity because she was ON BOARD the Enterprise.


About treaty vs prime directive - already answered - your counterarguments are repetitive:

Worf was right there near Gowron when Gowron asked for help as per the treaty; Worf did his part in trying co convince Picard. Whatever Gowron was saying, it had Worf's full support/confirmation - meaning:
As per the treaty, the federation could interfere in internal klingon matters (as well as external matters), IF asked by the legitimate government.

Picard recited the overused "non-interference in internal matters of other cultures" AKA the prime directive.
This was the reson they did not interfere in 'klingon internal matters'.

As it turned out, Picard forgot about his draconian 'prime directive' interpretation when he interfered in klingon external matters.

[T'Girl]

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

As per the treaty, the federation could interfere in internal klingon matters (as well as external matters), IF asked by the legitimate government.

GOWRON: ... request your assistance in fighting these enemies of the Empire.
RIKER: These enemies are Klingons.
PICARD: ... by definition, an internal Klingon affair.

-----

ADMIRAL SHANTHI: The Klingon civil war is, by definition, an internal matter of the Empire.
PICARD: Agreed.

-----

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

Duras house's "coalition" was receiving help from the romulans for some time - and they had no problem with it. We're talking supplies to fight an interstellar war, NOT some covert stuff - you can't hide something on this scale,

GOWRON : And once the Romulan connection has been exposed, support will fall away from Lursa and B'Etor.

-----

ProtoAvatar wrote:

---

"non-interference in internal matters of other cultures" AKA the prime directive.

PICARD: Our people have a strict policy of non-interference in other cultures. It's our Prime Directive.
ANIJ: But at one time, we explored the galaxy just as you do.
PICARD: You have warp capability?
ANIJ: Capability, yes. But where can warp drive take us, except away from here?
PICARD: I ...apologize for our intrusion.

PICARD: ...and because they have warp capabilities, the consequences to their society are minimal.

The prime directive applies to pre-warp cultures, The noninterference that Picard referred to had to do with the separate issue of interfering with another sovereign power. Not all "noninterference" matters pertains to the prime directive.