The Maquis or the Federation?

Discussion in 'Deep Space Nine' started by los2188, Aug 4, 2012.

  1. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    This is also the same Gul Evek who in DS9, tortured and killed the man who bombed the Bok'Nor, and seemed to be covering for the Cardassian colonists in "Preemptive Strike" when he paid lip service to "taking measures" to dealing with their colonists who had armed themselves.

    Furthermore he's also the same Cardassian who had O'brien arrested under fabricated charges of assisting the Maquis. Heck in another episode, "Playing God" I think he wouldn't even help DS9's crew with any tips on fighting Vole infestations.

    That all contradicts his behavior in "Journey's End" when he was acting like such a nice guy then. I'd say it's more likely he was doing exactly what Hudson was, being the one who was secretly leading the Cardassian colonists against the Federation citizens in the neutral zone and probably had official support behind the scenes being they were so eager to use Dukat as their fall guy.
     
  2. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    That's not really the way decisions in a democratic society work. Tiny minorities(and that's all the Maquis seem to be, a tiny minority of the Federation) don't get veto power over every little decision that gets made.

    You say that they did it without the colonists' "consent," but presumably a democratic government that the colonists got to vote for or against DID make that decision.

    What you're describing seems to be more like nullification, basically that a minority group in a government can just disregard whatever proper and legal decisions a government makes if they don't like them.
     
  3. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    Well the American colonies were pretty much a minority group in the British Empire. They disregarded the legal decisions the British parliment made when they didn't like them and rebelled. Now those rebels are written into history as marble saints. History does define winners and losers very differently, even if the circumstances in which they fought weren't very different at all.
     
  4. sonak

    sonak Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Location:
    in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination

    I'll agree with your overall point even if I find the analogy somewhat flawed.
     
  5. DonIago

    DonIago Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Location:
    Burlington, VT, USA
    One wonders how the American revolutionaries might be remembered if their declaration of independence had caused a world war.
     
  6. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    It pretty much did. France, Spain and Britain's colonial empires were going at it world wide.
     
  7. Jono

    Jono Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2001
    Location:
    Australia
    You don't need to imagine it, the UK and US have already done that with Diego Gracia. The UK gave the island to the US to use and booted off the inhabitants, which the US seems fine with since they get a nice big military base in the Indian Ocean.

    The inhabitants have tried to get their island through the courts, but haven't succeeded. The UK was even exposed as trying to make it impossible for them to ever get their island back off the US.

    These were both before the treaty was signed.
     
  8. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    Perhaps written into American history as marble saints.

    But the analogy is flawed, The Maquis didn't appear to declare independance and set themselves up as an independant state(s). Rather they were unhappy with the treaty and decided to engage in acts of terrorism against both the Cardassian Union and the UFP.
     
  9. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    NECHEYEV: An Indian representative was included in the deliberations of the Federation Council.

    NECHEYEV: ... settled there only twenty years ago, and at that time they were warned that the planet was hotly disputed by the Cardassians.

    A better example might be the Columbia/Oregon territory dispute between America and Britain. Beyond the Rocky Mountains the British wanted the Pacific region down to the 42nd parallel, below which was Mexico. America want up to the 54th parallel, (54°40 ) above which was Russia. After the threat of war, a treaty was sign establishing a boarder at the 49th parallel.

    The treaty was a compromise.

    America and Britain both claimed, and wanted the entirety of the disputed area, neither had control over it. America citizens and British subjects who found themselves on which ever side of the boarder had the option of moving or staying.

    The impression I have from the episodes concerning this subject is that neither the federation, nor the union formally possessed the disputed region, it wasn't actually inside the federation, but was just beyond the federation's established boarders in that part of the galaxy. In colonizing the planets in question, the colonists had move just outside the federation. Hoping perhaps that the federation's boarder would be one day extended to encompass their new worlds.

    After fighting over the disputed region for over two decades, and realizing that neither could win the area in it's entirety, the federation and the union divided the area between them. It wasn't that the federation didn't try to gain the space in which the colonies were located, they simply couldn't, it wasn't going to happen.

    Neither federation, nor the union "ceded" anything, it was not theirs in the first place. They divide up a unincorporated portion of the galaxy.

    The union lost colonies too. By staying on the worlds, which were then inside the new boarders of the Cardassian union, the federation colonists were voluntarily emigrating into the union.

    :)
     
  10. R. Star

    R. Star Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Location:
    Shangri-La
    No. The treaty was signed in TNG's season 6. The two episodes were respectively in season 7 of tng and season 1 of ds9.

    Chain of Command, the episode where the treaty was signed, was for the purpose of giving the Trek viewers a major Cardassian episode to introduce them to the would be DS9 audience so they main villains over there don't just seem like another "alien of the week"
     
  11. DonIago

    DonIago Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Location:
    Burlington, VT, USA
  12. JRoss

    JRoss Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2010
    Location:
    Stain'd-by-the-Sea
    Maquis. And yes, that includes Eddington's cloaked WMD plan.
     
  13. JRoss

    JRoss Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2010
    Location:
    Stain'd-by-the-Sea
    Exonctly.
     
  14. Pavonis

    Pavonis Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    But the Dominion didn't go to war against the Alpha Quadrant powers to control mere territory, they went to war to control the evil solids. Even if every human evacuated Earth, they'd still be chased down by the Jem'Hadar, and either killed or corralled, because solids on the loose are a threat.

    The Maquis could've ended the problem by evacuating the disputed territory. The Cardassians weren't going to chase them down, just chase them out. Similar tactics wouldn't have worked against the Dominion, so comparing the situations is nonsense.
     
  15. commanderkai

    commanderkai Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2012
    Location:
    Windsor, Ontario, Canada
    They don't solely deserve the right, but they do deserve some say, since it is their colonies being surrendered over to Cardassia. Just because they constitute a fraction of the population/territory of the Federation, does not mean that their rights should be violated.

    It is how the Federation treated the colonies in question is what set the foundation for the Maquis. The Maquis felt disenfranchised, and they felt rights were violated in the treaty, and rightfully so. If, let's say, the leaders of the various colonies took part in the negotiation, no matter how small the colony might be, the Federation ambassadors could have reached a compromise with the very people who were making the sacrifices.

    Here's a short list of things I would have done as the head negotiator of the treaty.

    First, I'd gather as many of the colony leaders as possible to get their input on the negotiation process. If they're going to be screwed over, at least they should have a small part in the process.

    Then, I'd explain that the borders, as they are, are too disorganized to properly defend all of these colonies from future Cardassian aggression, so the borders need to be normalized. I'd state that it'd be unlikely for the Federation to keep all of the colonies, and some sacrifices might be necessary to secure and defend the majority of your worlds and populations.

    Then, I'd basically show them of the borders, pre-War, which I imagine are Cardassian and Federation colonies scattered about, and the "border" that would exist if they kept the same layout. I can only imagine it'd be a bunch of scribbles, with some colonies basically being little pockets surrounded by Cardassian worlds.

    After that, I'd negotiate with the colonists about a more defensible border, basically being a more straight line which consists of the densest pockets of Federation colonies, with some scattered Cardassian pockets, and thus highlighting the few worlds that would basically fall under Cardassian jurisdiction.

    After what I'm sure what would be a lot of grumbling, and some discussion of possible minor shifts, I'd tell the colonies on those worlds on the Cardassian side of the border their options.

    1. Evacuate and resettle on the Federation side, thus insuring their freedom and security from Cardassia. Any threat by the Cardassian Order against them would be an act of war.
    2. Stay, surrender their Federation citizenship and become members of the Cardassian Union, although that means they basically become under the heel of a fascist dictatorship.
    3. Stay, keep Federation citizenship, but realize that their freedoms and security cannot be guaranteed, and any attempt by the Cardassians to take their worlds will not receive Starfleet assistance.
    Now, once their options are on the table, and once they realize being Federation citizens within Cardassian space means absolutely nothing to either the Cardassians or the Federation (as canon shows to be true since Starfleet basically did nothing once Cardassian state involvement in violating the treaty came to light), a majority of those colonists would realistically leave. No doubt there will still be some who stay, but there will always be a few stubborn individuals who refuse to leave. However, since they were made fully aware of the consequences of that, the Federation can wash their hands of any guilt.

    Once an agreement with the colonists is made, then you go to the Cardassians, and hammer out a deal. Now, since the proposal would most likely consist of keeping the largest clusters of Federation colonies under your side of the border, it'd be logical that is how the negotiations would proceed. If the Cardassians get greedy, remind them that:

    1. We're stronger than you.
    2. We have Klingons as allies.
    3. We have superior technology.
    4. We're more numerous than you.
    So on and so forth. The one advantage of the Cardassians is that they have a higher tolerance for war weariness. Anyway, since Cardassians aren't stupid, even if they are arrogant and egotistical, they should realize that they can't push too much, and I wouldn't compromise too far from said territorial border exchanges. Maybe some monetary payments, maybe some scientific exchange, but the border would be hard to change.

    Once it is settled, then we discuss how to manage colonies that fall on the other side of the border. I'll tell them which worlds are voluntarily evacuating, and which want to stay. I'd politely suggest, as a sign of the new peace agreement, that these worlds are treated properly, and given sovereignty in domestic affairs. In exchange, we'd allow Cardassian colonies on our side of the border to freely communicate and exchange with the Cardassian Union, and security matters can be handled on any colonial justice system established planetside.

    No colonies on either side of the border can have a large military presence (beyond X troop garrisons, Y fleets, Z orbital military installations) for whatever amount of distance. Basically creating a DMZ. However, if either side begins building up military forces, this segment of the treaty is voided, and the other side can respond to the buildup in kind. Of course, this provision would be unnecessary since the Cardassians are an honorable and lawful people, and such a provision would almost be deemed insulting, but protocol is protocol.

    There, rights of Federation colonies respected. Border most likely resolved similarly to what occurs on the show, but this time said colonists understand that those who stay behind are basically on their own. DMZ established, with a firm commitment to the Cardassians that if they rearm, so shall we, and we have the better guns...and the Klingons. Basically, I would commit to the colonies that they are Federation citizens, and they deserve the respect and protections as Federation citizens on Earth or Vulcan, and I will not throw them to the wolves, or in this case, an aggressive fascist empire.
    [LEFT]
    [/LEFT]
     
  16. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    And do we know that they weren't consuluted or represented?
     
  17. DonIago

    DonIago Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Location:
    Burlington, VT, USA
    If anything, evidence suggests otherwise, as Nechayev mentions at least a limited degree of inclusion in "Journey's End".
     
  18. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    This is the mistake I think a lot of Trek fans make. The Cardassian are not, repeat are not, weaker than the Federation, they can't be. These two interstellar power fought for decades, the Federation didn't in that time roll over the Cardassians. If the Federation were superior in technology and numbers at the very least Starfleet would have destroyed the bulk of Cardassian military starships. Obviously they did not.

    The Federation eventually signed a treaty that all agree was a compromise, the Federation didn't dictate terms to the Cardassians, which they had not choice but to accept.

    :)
     
  19. JRoss

    JRoss Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2010
    Location:
    Stain'd-by-the-Sea
    Respectfully disagree. If they were on equal footing, Benjamin Maxwell would have been destroyed in short order.

    The problem isn't that the Feds couldn't roll over the Cardies, it's that they wouldn't roll over the Cardies. They seem to fight only defensive wars, and they have this crazy thing about not conquering people.

    Watch any Cardassian episode that takes place before their union with the Dominion. When are they "scary"? In "Chain of Command" it's when they erroneously are thought to have WMDs and once Picard is captured they are scary only in that the Feds will be embarrassed if their mistake is made public.

    In DS9 they are scary in the first few episodes when it is a warship versus runabouts and a mining facility.
     
  20. Saito S

    Saito S Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    Location:
    Redeithia
    It's a tough call, made even tougher by the mishandling of the whole Maquis thing. The concept was interesting, and there were some great eps centered on this plotline, but the whole "Are they still UFP citizens or aren't they?" continuous flip-flop kinda made it harder to parse the whole thing out. I sympathize with the Maquis, but given the larger interests and responsibilities of the UFP government, it's hard to argue with the idea that they shouldn't let one small group of colonies derail something like a peace treaty. At the same time, I could never shake the feeling that it couldn't have been that hard to just redraw some of the lines so that none (or at least fewer) of those planets had to switch hands at all, while still accommodating whatever both sides wanted from the treaty as a whole. :shrug:

    But assuming that they couldn't, for whatever reason... again, the problem is the citzenship thing. They said in "Journey's End" that they'd have to give up being UFP citizens. This makes sense. Essentially, they are becoming their own little nation, one that happens to exist in Cardassian territory. Yet so much of what went on after this ep with the DMZ/Maquis plotline seemed to indicate that they all WERE still citizens, and that a big part of the tension was the possibility that they could drag the Feds back into war with Cardassia if not stopped.

    Finally, while the Maquis themselves need to take their fair share of blame for what went on, and went over the line sometimes (fortunately the "cloaked missiles to Cardassia" thing was a ruse, but if it had been real, all sympathy would have gone out the window), I will say this: given that part of the arrangement apparently was that the Cardassian government was also ok with these people being on these planets in their territory, any Cardassian that enters one of those former Federation colonies uninvited with the intent to cause harm deserves whatever fate he receives. Whether or not the Maquis stepped over the line doesn't change the fact that those "rogue" Cardassians had no right to harass and attack those colonists, which they clearly were doing.
    No mistake. The Federation is considerably more advanced technologically, and any one-on-one combat situation between a Federation starship and a Cardassian warship heavily favors Starfleet. Of this there can be no doubt.

    The evidence is the TNG ep "The Wounded." There were two different instances in that ep of a Federation starship taking fire while their shields were down, and then effortlessly pasting their Cardassian opponents. Both of those opponents were warships (the one that attacked the E-D was clearly Galor-class, and the one that attacked the Phoenix was identified by Macet as a warship).
    Numbers? Perhaps not. The Federation is big, and certainly has a higher gross population than the Cardassian Union. It follows that Starfleet would be pretty large as well, but UFP citizens have a LOT of varying interests and career paths open to them. Whereas in Cardassian society, a rather ridiculous percentage of their population seems to serve in the military in some capacity. So the Fed's numbers advantage might be very slight, if it exists at all, especially if the Cardies were pouring all of their military resources into the war, and the Feds weren't.

    Yes, that's all speculation, but that's part of my point: we must speculate about the nature, length, and severity of the Fed/Cardie war, because no on-screen dialog or flashbacks or anything ever gave us a clear indicator of what it was really like. Whereas the superiority of Federation military technology over Cardassian military technology was clearly and unambiguously laid out in canon. So the only thing we can do is speculate and come up with fan theories about why the war lasted for so long (and why the treaty is so two-sided and treated as so important), despite that superiority.