Why didn't the Federation help Bajor??

[Timo]

Why defeat the Cardassians when they are no threat?

The fact is that the Feds fought Cardassia. The fact is that Cardassian firepower and protection was ridiculously below that of the E-D or the Phoenix, posing no threat to the hero side. The fact is that the Feds didn't liberate Bajor.

It's not an obvious fact that the above three facts would necessarily be tightly connected, though.

Fear of Cardassians as a military opponent never features into Fed thinking as far as we can tell. Fear of Cardassians as North Korean style seeming insane terrorists does, though, time and again: they strike at Setlik III, spread rumors about having WMDs, amass against Minos Korva... Would this stop Starfleet from sailing to Bajor, firing once at Terok Nor at half power to blow up the station, twice at the Cardassian fleet to destroy two thirds of it, and then declaring the world off limits for the former occupiers?

Well, it didn't stop them from waging the Cardassian War(s). It's possible some Zakdorn calculated that the Cardassian patience would run out two lightyears short of Bajor and the terrorist strikes would begin. But staying away from Bajor didn't help stop those strikes - Setlik III had happened, Minos Korva was about to happen, the WMD ruse was attempted. So what stopping power would the Rabid Dog Defense actually have?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[JirinPanthosa]

The Prime Directive is much more a principle of non-interference than a "No preventing apocalypses or else we may create the next Hitler" rule.

I disagree that the Federation helping Bajor would have made them the "Galactic police". It's basic humanitarian decency to free people from slavery, that's anyone's jurisdiction. Morally speaking they had good reasons to intervene, but legally speaking, once the treaty was signed they could not.

 

[Timo]

The treaty was apparently signed around SD 43500, according to "The Wounded". After this date, the Cardassians performed many acts of aggression that should have voided the binding legal aspect of this. OTOH, in "Journey's End", around SD 47750, four years after the signing, the treaty is still shown to be in flux, with planets changing ownership, so that wouldn't be an obstacle for Bajor changing masters, either.

FWIW, the Cardassians left Bajor some short time prior to SD 46379, when we first meet Sisko with orders to take over DS9.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Horizons96]

I'm wondering how many Bajorans are in Starfleet, for how long they've served and the reasons they joined? We see Bajoran Starfleet personnel sprinkled throughout late-TNG, DS9 and VOY. Considering Starfleet Academy is (a minimum of) 4 years, many of these officers would have made their way from Bajoran territories during a time of Cardassian-Federation skirmishes and Bajoran occupation, to find Starfleet a more suitable organization to belong to.
Surely the Federation took some pride in Bajorans looking to enter service, while their world was occupied by an enemy of the Federation.
Could a specific policy of large-scale inclusion of Bajoran civilians in Starfleet uptake be kind-of seen as helping Bajor and embarrassing the Cardassians?

 

[Nyotarules]

The Prime Directive is much more a principle of non-interference than a "No preventing apocalypses or else we may create the next Hitler" rule.

I disagree that the Federation helping Bajor would have made them the "Galactic police". It's basic humanitarian decency to free people from slavery, that's anyone's jurisdiction. Morally speaking they had good reasons to intervene, but legally speaking, once the treaty was signed they could not.

The Federation is made up of different species who are not human but would have different values. t know its a fictional universe, but expecting this fictional universe to be totally influenced by human cultural values would be considered speciest by its members. They is no more moral reason to intervene freeing the Bajorans from Cardassian slavery, freeing planets from Klingon imperial aggression (their allies) or freeing planets from Romulan invasions.

 

[Kronos]

Weren't the Andorians known as conquerors?

 

[The Wormhole]

disagree that the Federation helping Bajor would have made them the "Galactic police". It's basic humanitarian decency to free people from slavery, that's anyone's jurisdiction.

It's setting bad precedent. If the Federation suddenly march in and liberate Bajor just because conquering worlds is wrong, where do that stop after that? Do they liberate all conquered world? Conquered not just by the Cardassians, but other races as well? Because if that's the case, they're more or less obligated to liberate the Remans and any other race the Romulans have enslaved, to say nothing of the many races the Klingons have enslaved and so on.

 

[Nyotarules]

It's setting bad precedent. If the Federation suddenly march in and liberate Bajor just because conquering worlds is wrong, where do that stop after that? Do they liberate all conquered world? Conquered not just by the Cardassians, but other races as well? Because if that's the case, they're more or less obligated to liberate the Remans and any other race the Romulans have enslaved, to say nothing of the many races the Klingons have enslaved and so on.

And make the Federation no better than the Dominion

 

[JaxsBrokenHeart]

Its easy to say they could have moved in and freed Bajor but consider the time period. Between the Romulan's lack of activity in the decades previous, the relative peace with the Klingons, and the recent conflicts with the Tholians and the Tzenkethi being more minor wars; being a more strongly militarized UFP may not have been a pressing matter until events like Wolf 359 and the discovery of the Dominion delivered one hell of a wake up call to the Federation and Starfleet.

At the time off the Occupation, outright liberation could have likely meant a movement away from where the UFP was headed. Not to mention a commitment to a bigger/bloodier war with Cardassia that would not only cost countless lives, but as noted, send the message that the Federation is willing to violate the sovereignty of other galactic powers to free subjugated people within it. Its a notion that is ripe for creating problems for their peace with the Klingons and even get movement from the Romulans if the Empire suspects the Federation will do the same to them.

 

[MAGolding]

I think that many posters have a problem with terminology.

1) There is no reason to use the term "Cardassian occupation of Bajor" merely because characters in DS9 do. The use of terminology that is inaccurate at the present time by fictional future characters should not be an excuse to use that inaccurate terminology.

An occupation is a temporary thing that happens during war. If country A is at war with country B and the armies of country A advance into country B, the territories of country B they control are occupied territories.

If that happens, there are about four main possible outcomes. One, country B strikes back and drives the forces of country B out of its territory, thus ending the occupation. Two, in the peace treaty ending the war, country A keeps the occupied territories and annexes them, thus ending the occupation. Three, country A conquers and annexes all of country B, thus ending country B and the occupation. Four, in the peace treaty country A agrees to end the occupation of the occupied territories of country B and return them to the control of country B within a specified period of time, thus ending the occupation.

In any case a military occupation is usually a very temporary thing, ending in a few months or years.

Thus writing about the Roman "occupation" of Britain really annoys me. The Romans conquered, annexed, and ruled many former tribes and kingdoms in the Island of Britain, ruling in many places for as much as 364 years. Considering that the present British nation, the United Kingdom, was founded on January 1, 1801, only 217 years, 2 months, and 9 days ago as I write on March 10, 2018, the modern British have no right to call the Roman rule an "occupation" implying it's temporary nature.

And as far as I can tell from the limited evidence, the Cardassians conquered, annexed, and ruled the entire former Bajoran state, which makes calling their rule an "occupation" highly misleading.

2) Slavery. Many posters claim that the people living on planets conquered by the Cardassians, the Klingons, and the Romulans are enslaved. As far as I can tell slavery is only known to exist for green Orion slave women and for Terrans in the mirror universe. Slavery for conquered people might exist in the Cardassian, Klingon, and Romulan empires but there is certainly no statement that slavery exists in those realms.

 

[The Wormhole]

There is no reason to use the term "Cardassian occupation of Bajor" merely because characters in DS9 do. The use of terminology that is inaccurate at the present time by fictional future characters should not be an excuse to use that inaccurate terminology.

As you say, that is the term used on screen, across all of the 24th century shows. I'm not changing this twenty years later just because someone says it isn't accurate to the definition of the word.

Slavery. Many posters claim that the people living on planets conquered by the Cardassians, the Klingons, and the Romulans are enslaved. As far as I can tell slavery is only known to exist for green Orion slave women and for Terrans in the mirror universe. Slavery for conquered people might exist in the Cardassian, Klingon, and Romulan empires but there is certainly no statement that slavery exists in those realms.

The Remans are slaves of the Romulans. This is stated in Nemesis. Likewise, I'm pretty sure there were numerous references to the Bajorans being slaves to the Cardassians during the Occupation. The term used in the novels for the races the Klingons have conquered is IIRC, the literal translation of "slave race." Seems to me satisfactory evidence these races are engaging in slavery.

 

[Spot261]

If that were the case then "The Wounded" and everything that followed it wouldn't have been an episode because there would be no Cardassian Union as the Federation would've defeated them. The Cardassians are clearly enough of a threat to fight Starfleet to a stalemate if nothing else.

I've never really seen it in these terms, I always got the impression that the Cardassians had fought the resources brought to bear against them to a standstill, the overall picture being that the Federation put as many local military assets in place as they felt was necessary to moderate the threat without unduly compromise their effectiveness elsewhere rather than exert themselves on a war footing.

 

[Nyotarules]

2) Slavery. Many posters claim that the people living on planets conquered by the Cardassians, the Klingons, and the Romulans are enslaved. As far as I can tell slavery is only known to exist for green Orion slave women and for Terrans in the mirror universe. Slavery for conquered people might exist in the Cardassian, Klingon, and Romulan empires but there is certainly no statement that slavery exists in those realms.

The Bajorans on Terak Nor were not paid for their work or treated like employees.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

And there were also labor camps filled with Bajoran prisoners. Some of which Kira helped liberate.

 

[STEPhon IT]

It's always bothered me that the Federation did absolutely nothing to help Bajor, below are a few reasons (and dismissals of said reasons) I would like some input.

1) The Prime directive.
Yes but the prime directive doesn't apply, they're already way off their 'natural evolution' because of the Cardassian occupation, plus I think they already had Warp Drive?

2) Not wanting to antagonise the Cardassians and potentially start another war.
Fair enough, but surely they could at-least smuggle some food/medical supplies in to help a species that was literally on it's knees. I'm sure they could've done it.

I'm sure they could've even 'bought' Bajors freedom in some kind of treaty, we know they were there for the planets resources. I'm sure the Federation could've supplied the resources (given it's gigantic size) in exchange for pulling out of Bajor.

Thoughts>

How come the Federation hasn't done this with the people having issues within the Romulan Neutral Zone? I doubt the species there enjoy the Romulan ethical system and would love to defect.

As to your thread, it's possible Star Fleet were aware of the situation on Terok Nor and Bajor and were working on a resolution. Probably had cells within the planet and Cardassia to give the sufferers aid and give intel to what's happening. I would like to think Star Fleet was in the process but had to take small steps in order to not involve an interstellar war.

 

[velour]

Also, Dukat and his Cardassian ilk took many Bajoran women and forced them to be comfort women.

About the occupation, I suppose it is a matter of perspective (not the episode btw ). To the Cardassians and those that officially recognized the annexation, it was no longer an occupation. To the overwhelming majority of Bajorans and those that didn't recognize the takeover as legitimate, it was always an occupation.

Besides, the Cardassian Bajoran armed conflict never really ended. The Bajoran resistance continued throughout the occupation.

 

[Timo]

Curiously enough, the assumptions above of Bajorans being slaves or the workers of Terok Nor not being paid appear to be wrong.

"Necessary Evil" centers on characters who work on Terok Nor as a privilege, in order to make profit. Kira's alias was supposed to have become unemployed (and not, say, executed!) for having punched her boss, and said alias was now seeking employment opportunities on the station. Among the suspects in her crimes were Bajorans doing business on the station, at least one of whom turned out to be a privileged collaborator.

No reference was made in this episode to those working in supposed hellish conditions as outlined in "Civil Defense". But again curiously, even "Civil Defense" falls short of referring to slavery, with both the Starfleet and Bajoran heroes and the Cardassian recordings consistently referring to "workers" instead. Did these people work in deadly conditions voluntarily, for the same reasons the people who built the Hoover Dam competed for the right to go to their deaths?

The writing remains very deliberately ambiguous on such things so that the Cardassian occupation of Bajor could be projected onto as many real-world counterparts as possible. In modern occupations, enslaving of the population is virtually never a feature, so emphasizing this would alienate the audiences whenever a connection to a modern phenomenon were attempted by the writers.

On the issue of labor camps, only one is ever mentioned or implied to exist. Gallitep was a place where Bajorans were worked to their deaths, but it was left ambiguous whether the place was supposed to be an execution facility or merely wasn't a nice place to be forced to work in; whether it was supposed to produce something other than piles of bodies; and what got one thrown into Gallitep. (Memory Alpha is especially misleading here, presenting rumors and the not just possibly but highly probably biased statements of a known liar as the facts of the matter when for the most part the opposite was intended by the writers.)

Interestingly, the two times a Cardassian uninhibitedly rants about the blessings of the Occupation and the infinite right of the Cardassians to do as they please with the local cattle, both of these (the playacting Marizza of "Duet" or the crazy Dukat of "Waltz") actually end up lamenting that they never went for death camps or planetwide slavery.

As for the exactness of terminology, we can't avoid noticing that 1960s terminology is back in fashion in the 2260s, and 1980s in the 2360s. OTOH, many words familiar from today have a completely different meaning in the 22nd century and beyond (transporting, say). So I see no reason not to take the characters for their word when they establish the Cardassian rule over Bajor as an occupation. At most, we can argue over the role of the Universal Translator in favoring one player's choice of words over others when giving us the English word from the mouths of Bajorans and Cardassians and Klingons and Belorussians and so forth.

In the end, though, all the Cardassians polled seem to think Bajor was always going to be thrown away after emptied of valuables. Only their personal estimates on when exactly this should have happened vary. So "occupation", in emphasizing the temporary nature of the affair, seems especially fitting.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[MacLeod]

I think that many posters have a problem with terminology.

1) There is no reason to use the term "Cardassian occupation of Bajor" merely because characters in DS9 do. The use of terminology that is inaccurate at the present time by fictional future characters should not be an excuse to use that inaccurate terminology.

An occupation is a temporary thing that happens during war. If country A is at war with country B and the armies of country A advance into country B, the territories of country B they control are occupied territories.

If that happens, there are about four main possible outcomes. One, country B strikes back and drives the forces of country B out of its territory, thus ending the occupation. Two, in the peace treaty ending the war, country A keeps the occupied territories and annexes them, thus ending the occupation. Three, country A conquers and annexes all of country B, thus ending country B and the occupation. Four, in the peace treaty country A agrees to end the occupation of the occupied territories of country B and return them to the control of country B within a specified period of time, thus ending the occupation.

In any case a military occupation is usually a very temporary thing, ending in a few months or years.

Thus writing about the Roman "occupation" of Britain really annoys me. The Romans conquered, annexed, and ruled many former tribes and kingdoms in the Island of Britain, ruling in many places for as much as 364 years. Considering that the present British nation, the United Kingdom, was founded on January 1, 1801, only 217 years, 2 months, and 9 days ago as I write on March 10, 2018, the modern British have no right to call the Roman rule an "occupation" implying it's temporary nature.

And as far as I can tell from the limited evidence, the Cardassians conquered, annexed, and ruled the entire former Bajoran state, which makes calling their rule an "occupation" highly misleading.

2) Slavery. Many posters claim that the people living on planets conquered by the Cardassians, the Klingons, and the Romulans are enslaved. As far as I can tell slavery is only known to exist for green Orion slave women and for Terrans in the mirror universe. Slavery for conquered people might exist in the Cardassian, Klingon, and Romulan empires but there is certainly no statement that slavery exists in those realms.

Isn't the difference between annexed and occupation the side you are on? The Cardassians would say they annexed Bajor, the Bajorans would say they were occupied.

 

[The Wormhole]

The Bajorans on Terak Nor were not paid for their work or treated like employees.

And there were also labor camps filled with Bajoran prisoners. Some of which Kira helped liberate.

Hell, the station itself was built by slave labour. As stated in dialogue even:

DUKAT [on monitor]: Then I'll make it simple then A few days ago, I swore all Cardassia had lost would be regained. That space station you're so fond of was built by Cardassia.
SISKO: Funny, I thought it was built by Bajoran slave labour.

 

[matthunter]

An occupation is a temporary thing that happens during war. If country A is at war with country B and the armies of country A advance into country B, the territories of country B they control are occupied territories.

Nice in theory. Gets murky where one nation claims territory was "unoccupied" by a "nation" or "historically belonged to us". Ask the Palestinians if you're not clear how unclear this can get.