"In some ways you're even worse than the Borg!"

[Mr. Laser Beam]

, didnt the maquis originally form because the cardassians were beating up citizens in the streets at random ? doing violence to drive them out or kill them ? it seems to me they have a right to defend themselves . if i remeber correctly they didnt attack the federation until the federation got involved .

The colonists had the right to defend themselves against the attacks perpetrated on them, yes. It's when they took the fight outside the colonies and started attacking Cardassian ships willy-nilly that the Federation stepped in. The Maquis' actions could have started another war between the UFP and Cardassia, and probably *did* drive Cardassia into joining the Dominion.

its kind of like , a child is at school and he is acting up and is rightfully punished by the teacher and then the parents call up the principal and then the poor teacher is left being attacked on both sides . parents on one side and the principal on the other .

The teacher would have the right to punish the student, yes. Send him home, suspend him, etc. But the teacher would not have the right to go round up the rest of the student's family and kill them, or blow up the student's house, which is the equivalent of what the Maquis were doing.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

To Jefferies...do understand there's a difference between having some problems with the Federation to include their territorial concessions in the treaty with Cardassia, and actually supporting the Maquis. I think the Federation played politics with its citizens there and was wrong to do so, but that doesn't make the Maquis saints.

, didnt the maquis originally form because the cardassians were beating up citizens in the streets at random ? doing violence to drive them out or kill them ? it seems to me they have a right to defend themselves . if i remeber correctly they didnt attack the federation until the federation got involved .

The colonists had the right to defend themselves against the attacks perpetrated on them, yes. It's when they took the fight outside the colonies and started attacking Cardassian ships willy-nilly that the Federation stepped in. The Maquis' actions could have started another war between the UFP and Cardassia, and probably *did* drive Cardassia into joining the Dominion.

Combined with the Klingon offensive, of course--we can't forget that part.

Now, do we know whether, until Eddington used WMDs in "For the Uniform" to poison that planet, the Maquis' actions were confined to attacking members of the Cardassian military, or did they ever take it out on noncombatant colonists prior to that point?

 

[Jefferies]

To Jefferies...do understand there's a difference between having some problems with the Federation to include their territorial concessions in the treaty with Cardassia, and actually supporting the Maquis. I think the Federation played politics with its citizens there and was wrong to do so, but that doesn't make the Maquis saints.

Snip.

Now, do we know whether, until Eddington used WMDs in "For the Uniform" to poison that planet, the Maquis' actions were confined to attacking members of the Cardassian military, or did they ever take it out on noncombatant colonists prior to that point?

To my knowledge the only example of the Marquis fighting Cardassian civilians is in the Marquis two-parter in Season 2. There we get to see them in dogfights but they were both well armed so it was at least even.

However, with regard to the peace treaty, what else should the Federation have done? Break of the peace talks because they weren't prepared to concede territory? Somehow that would strike me as being imperialist. Maybe the negotiators were a bit naive during the talks thinking that they could convince their citizens to move to different planets, if they were getting peace in return? In the end, however, I don't think it was unreasonable for the Federation to have expected cooperation in this situation.

 

[torius22]

The teacher would have the right to punish the student, yes. Send him home, suspend him, etc. But the teacher would not have the right to go round up the rest of the student's family and kill them, or blow up the student's house, which is the equivalent of what the Maquis were doing.

thank u for clearing that up for me , i never thought of it that way

 

[Sci]

For the most part, I'm inclined to agree with Jefferies, though I have to add a few quibbles with everyone....

I have to admit I am outright surprised and dismayed at the degree of cynicism and contempt towards the Federation voiced by many of the postings in this thread. Seriously, comparing the Federation to the Borg, are you out of your minds?

The Federation is the most liberal, tolerant and free society that humanity has ever had a part in.

I completely agree. In fact, I'd go further: The Federation is the most liberal, tolerant, egalitarian, peaceful, and free society that Humanity, Vulcanity, Andorianity, Tellariteity, Betazoidity, Trillity, Ardanity, Bolarianity, Antedeanity, Axanarity, Benzariteity, Bre'elianity, Brikarity, Bynarity, Caitianity, Damianoity, Deltanity, Denobulanity, Efrosianity, Grazeriteity, Ktarianity, Kriosianity, Medusanity, Hortaity, Nasatity, Pacificanity, Pandriliteity, Rigellianity, Risianity, Sulamidity, Tiburonianity, Zakdornity, Zaldanity, and any other -ity you can think of has ever had a part in.

In no way does the Federation endeavour to subjugate or even incorporate all other sentient races or any race for that matter. Only the races that explicitly wish to join are considered. Those that wish to be left alone are protected by the PRIME DIRECTIVE. Surely you guys have heard of this law?

Well, yes and no. Yes, the Federation will completely respect the wishes of any people who do not wish to join. But I think it's safe to say that one of the Federation's ultimate goals is to end interstellar conflict and war by peacefully, non-coercively persuading every sentient race to join and adopt its values.

I mean, when the Ferengi start adopting Federation-like gender laws and social reforms within twenty years of first contact with the UFP? When the last two Klingon Chancellors have been installed by Federation Starfleet officers and the Klingons themselves seem to be far less expansionist than they used to be? I think it's kind of hard to argue that Eddington was wrong in saying that the UFP wants to see every culture become one of their Member States.

I for one don't think that's a bad thing, though.

Exceptions to this only prove the rule. Some people have brought up the Ba’ku incident. If you paid any attention to Insurrection then it should have been clear that this was more of a rouge operation than anything else and once all the facts where revealed to the Federation Council it was stopped immediately.

Or you could argue that it would have been ordered stopped because of public embarrassment. The Federation may be the best government in history, but that doesn't mean it doesn't sometimes make mistakes or do things it shouldn't do.

Also the existence of Section 31 does not prove that the Federation is malevolent. This is clearly not an official organisation, but a bunch of criminals who believe to be above the laws of the Federation.

Agreed. Section 31 is no more evidence that the Federation is not at its core basically good than the Bush Administration or Blair government are somehow indications that at their cores, the US and UK are not basically good.

The Federation endeavours to be the most ethical, humane and decent government it can be, a fact that is clearly enshrined in its institutions such as Starfleet and the Council. To suggest some sinister, covert-hegemonial counter-agendum simply does not fit the facts. It rather sounds like one of those crazy conspiracy theories by people who believe that power is always abused, regardless of the laws and institutions that it is based on.

Weeeeeeellllllllllll. It almost always is, is the thing. That's why the best laws and institutions are ones that provide effective checks against abuse and encourage democracy and popular transparency.

This, however, is no moral justification for people like the Marquis. Sure, it was a less than optimal situation and clearly the Federation wasn’t happy with it. However, peace is seldom free. The fact that the Federation was willing to make sacrifices for this shows their good intent.

The colonists were given every chance of moving to safety and every warning of what would happen if they didn’t. Furthermore, the Federation was willing to assist them in any way possible to build a new life on different planets. They refused and then formed a terrorist group when things didn’t turn out the way they wanted. These people are murders and traitors. The response they eventually received from the Federation is hardly a sign of totalitarianism.

Completely disagree. The Federation government basically engaged in theft -- of their property, of their homes, of their COMMUNITIES. You don't just change planets and expect to be able to put a community back together like it was. And theft is theft, whether it's the government doing it or someone else.

And all this the Federation did to appease Cardassians who then went and began engaging in sentient rights abuses against those colonists who didn't leave. I don't care if the Federation regarded those worlds are Cardassian territory, it still regarded those colonists as Federation citizens -- it therefore had a legal obligation to act with force to protect the rights of its citizens. That it did not means that, in this case, the Federation fundamentally betrayed its citizenry: Selling their homes to a foreign state and then turning a blind eye when atrocities were committed against them.

The Maquis had every right to take up arms to defend their homes, secure territorial sovereignty from both the Cardassian Union and Federation, and declare themselves an independent polity.

Also the existence of Section 31 does not prove that the Federation is malevolent. This is clearly not an official organisation, but a bunch of criminals who believe to be above the laws of the Federation.

No. They get their "powers" from an article in the Federation charter.

Everyone's misremembering the line from "Inquisition." Here's the relevant quote, courtesy of Star Trek Minutiae:

BASHIR
And Starfleet sanctions what
you're doing?

SLOAN
We don't submit reports or ask for
approval for specific operations,
if that's what you mean. We're an
autonomous department.

BASHIR
Authorized by whom?

DEEP SPACE NINE: "Inquisition" - REV. 1/29/98 - ACT FIVE 51B.

41A CONTINUED: (4)

Sloan smiles, maintaining control of the situation.

SLOAN
Section Thirty-one was part of the
original Starfleet charter.

BASHIR
That was two hundred years ago.
Are you telling me you've been
operating on your own ever since?
Without specific orders?
Accountable to nobody, but
yourselves?

SLOAN
You make it sound so... ominous.

BASHIR
Isn't it?

Bold added.

Note Sloan's words (assuming they can be trusted): "Original Starfleet Charter." Well, as ENT revealed, there are two Starfleets: The Federation Starfleet, and the United Earth Starfleet. So his line would seem to indicate that Section 31 legally justifies its existence through a clause from the United Earth Starfleet Charter -- a charter that would have no legal effect, since the UE Starfleet ceased to exist (so far as we know) upon the incorporation of the United Federation of Planets and the establishment of the Federation Starfleet with the Federation Starfleet Charter.

In other words, they're justifying their existence through a clause of a charter that is no longer in effect. It would be as though we were to find out that a division of the United States Navy justifies its existence through a clause in the British Royal Navy's charter.

Sure enough, ENT's "Affliction" confirms this when Agent Harris establishes that his bureau derives its authority from Article 14, Section 31 of the United Earth Starfleet Charter.

They are as much an official part of Starfleet as the engineering corp are.

Not necessarily. All we know about Article 14, Section 31 of the UE Starfleet Charter is that it allows "certain rules of conduct to be 'bent' during times of extraordinary threat." That's a far cry from the complete and utter autonomy that the agency now known as Section 31 claims. Even if the UES Charter was still in effect, Section 31's purported legal justification of its existence is dubious at best; to me, that clause sounds like it's there to give legal cover to Starfleet Command or to individual officers during times of extraordinary crisis, not like a statute authorizing the existence of a permanent cabal of officers who are given carte blanche and elevated above the rule of law. To me, it sounds more like a group of officers decided to begin to engage in a criminal conspiracy and cited Article 14, Section 31 as their nonsense legal justification. It would never stand up in court.

Starfleet admirals work with them. Starfleet medical covers up their acts.

The existence of high-ranking officers within a criminal conspiracy does not make it any less of a criminal conspiracy. If we were to find out that a United States Air Force General was a member of the Mafia, we wouldn't assume that the Mafia has official standing.

When they try to commit genocide Starfleet "condems" them but are pretty happy with the result. At least the Romulans acknowledge that the Tal'Shiar are a part of them. The Federation as Odo said look the other way when they want the dirty work done.

A perfectly valid complaint however. The UFP and Starfleet may not actually authorize or be responsible for Section 31's actions, but they certainly aren't doing enough to fight them. Though one must consider the possibility that A) most members of the government and Starfleet Command don't know that they exist, and/or that B) they refuse to admit to themselves that Section 31 exists because it's such a fundamental departure from the Federation's normal political culture. It would be a bit like finding out that the President of the United States had personally committed murder in the Oval Office -- even if the evidence was damning, a lot of people would never be willing to believe it.

At no point do we see that they are treated with disregard. If anything Sisko’s father seemed to be a highly respected member of the community.

Sure until he's forced to take a blood test because he's related to someone in Starfleet.

And, of course, the point of that episode was that the Federation realized that it was giving into its worst impulses and discontinued those policies, and did so within only a few weeks.

(As opposed to the United States, which seems posed to continue its civil rights-violating policies unless or until Barack Obama is elected President....)

 

[bintak]

2. Picard wanted to stomp Borg flat, and he just about rolled over anybody who wasn't strong enough to resist him or the Federation. He also has some questionable international law crimes of his own for which to answer-such as meddling in the internal affairs of the Klingon Empire.

Hardly. Picard was legally appointed Arbiter of Succession for the Chancelorship according to Klingon law. He performed his legal function, and then he let the Klingons duke it out -- until he found evidence that the Romulans were manipulating the Klingons in their civil war, at which point he alerted them that the Duras faction was getting Romulan support but did nothing else.

I'd say Picard's actions with regards to the Klingon Empire are completely respectful of Klingon sovereignty and tradition.

Oh, diplomacy rather than war. Who would have thought that, one day, that would be considered "meddling?"

[Sarcasm]
Like what we are doing today in mediating the INTERNAL political disputes of one of our client states? One of our generals sent their government a three page ultimatum stating our terms, after he found out that a neighboring state was trying to apply some political influence via its diplomatic service.

Point. Picard is a military officer of the Federation handpicking and influencing the choice of Chancellor of the Klingon Empire.
[/Sarcasm]

 

[Timo]

Point. Picard is a military officer of the Federation handpicking and influencing the choice of Chancellor of the Klingon Empire.

So what? That has nothing to do with the Federation or its military. Klingons chose Picard, and might have chosen him even if he were an emailman or a replicator sanitizer. Of course they appreciated Picard's being a warrior, because all of them are that - especially their politicians, foreign representatives and legislators.

It would be absurd for Picard to retire for the duration of his Arbiter role, or to turn it down because he happens to be of a certain occupation.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Jefferies]

Dear Sci and this goes for Timo as well, I'm glad to see that not everyone in this thread is a cynic or a conspiracy theorist.

Having said that, Sci, I have to strongly disagree with you on one issue, the Federation neither stole anybody’s property, nor did they engage in appeasement.

The Federation generally does not appease its enemies, in fact, I know of no example when they ever did. Appeasement is a strategy to avoid conflict by making concessions without getting anything directly in return. This clearly does not apply here. The Federation and the Cardassian Union had been at war. Therefore, the Federation does not mind fighting to defend itself.

The way I always understood it, the war ended in a stalemate with disputed territories on both sides of the border. In the peace treaty both sides made compromises, giving up colonies, planets and star systems. I am sure the Federation did not do this light heartedly.

However, this exchange was necessary in order to achieve recognition of each others borders. Therefore, with regard to property, we do not really know what belonged to whom and which authority guaranteed this before the treaty. Because of these unstable conditions the border colonies where in danger anyway and if the Federation had insisted on keeping them, I doubt the colonists would have been safe from the Cardys.

Therefore, the Federation made the best deal it could. It didn’t steal anything! For the ownership to be clear there needed to be an agreement between the Cardassians and the Feds.

In addition, the Federation has a communist economy, where large real estate like entire colonies, planets and such like is probably owned by the state anyway.

Thus the marquis were completely out of line. They committed acts of terrorism in order have their will, regardless of the consequences to the rest of the Federation, i.e. reigniting the war. This could have cost hundreds of thousands of lives, hardly worth some underdeveloped settlements on the fringe of your space.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Thing is, Eddington was right. And about time someone said what he said.

I agree. Eddington's argument hit upon something that's rarely discussed in Trek: the Federation as a form of hegemony. After all, in TOS and TNG, our heroes ran around the galaxy "bettering" aliens, exposing them to human ideals, and flew away once the different aliens learned their lesson (very true of Picard).

More true, I'd say, of Kirk. And it's why I call the fantasy that Iraq could be easily transformed into our style of democracy "Star Trek diplomacy." It holds about as much verisimilitude as Frodo's Ring of Doom.

 

[Sci]

The Federation generally does not appease its enemies, in fact, I know of no example when they ever did. Appeasement is a strategy to avoid conflict by making concessions without getting anything directly in return.

And there's never been any indication that the Cardassian Union conceded any territory to the Federation. So far as we know, the Federation conceded all the territory, not the Cardassians. They did this in order to avoid conflict -- deliberately turning over entire communities of Federates who had settled there in good faith in the belief that the Federation would protect them and their homes. And when atrocities began being committed against those colonists, the Federation turned a blind eye.

However, this exchange was necessary in order to achieve recognition of each others borders. Therefore, with regard to property, we do not really know what belonged to whom and which authority guaranteed this before the treaty. Because of these unstable conditions the border colonies where in danger anyway and if the Federation had insisted on keeping them, I doubt the colonists would have been safe from the Cardys.

We know for a fact that the Federation government guaranteed the property of the worlds that it claimed as being within its jurisdiction. Ergo, the Federation's obligation is to protect the property rights and sentient rights of its citizens. They did not do this.

Therefore, the Federation made the best deal it could. It didn’t steal anything! For the ownership to be clear there needed to be an agreement between the Cardassians and the Feds.

No there didn't. The Federation is under no obligation to consider Cardassian opinion in determining private property rights.

In addition, the Federation has a communist economy, where large real estate like entire colonies, planets and such like is probably owned by the state anyway.

There's no evidence that the Federation is a communist society. We know that its citizens do long long for wealth, that it lacks money but still possesses an electronic form of currency (eg "The Trouble With Tribbles"), and that its citizenry lives in a state of abundance outside the realm of scarcity for most purposes. That does not mean, however, that private property rights have ceased to exist, and it does not mean that those colonies are all property of the Federation government.

In point of fact, if the Federation is what its name implies -- a federal state -- then that means that those colonies are no more the property of the UFP than the State of Ohio is the property of the USA. Those colonies were the property, collectively, of the colonists, just as Ohio is, collectively, the property of all Ohioans. That's federalism.

Thus the marquis were completely out of line. They committed acts of terrorism

Against whom? What innocent civilians did the Maquis harm? Because the only victims of the Maquis I can recall are Cardassians who settled in their territory.

in order have their will, regardless of the consequences to the rest of the Federation, i.e. reigniting the war.

Hardly. They were trying to establish an independent polity that wouldn't be part of the UFP. If anything, they were trying to wage a war that was restricted to themselves and the Cardassians. The Federation should have applied the Prime Directive and stayed out of it. After all, under the Treaty, the Federation no longer regarded those words as Federation worlds, and the Maquis made it clear that they had renounced Federation citizenship. The UFP should have treated it as a conflict between two foreign powers that did not involve them.

 

[Damask]

Sure enough, ENT's "Affliction" confirms this when Agent Harris establishes that his bureau derives its authority from Article 14, Section 31 of the United Earth Starfleet Charter.

However we have no idea what charter Sloan was referring to. The line could be in both charters which would also be plausible. What new in ENT is old in DS9.

To me, it sounds more like a group of officers decided to begin to engage in a criminal conspiracy and cited Article 14, Section 31 as their nonsense legal justification. It would never stand up in court.

But it has. The incidents that we know Section 31 have been involved in have not been punished and even agreed with. Indeed there doesn't seem to be any effort of the Borg, Dominion, Klingon, Q defeating Federation to do a thing with S31 except for Bashir.

The existence of high-ranking officers within a criminal conspiracy does not make it any less of a criminal conspiracy. If we were to find out that a United States Air Force General was a member of the Mafia, we wouldn't assume that the Mafia has official standing.

Yes however I would also expect the Mafia General to be removed from power. That's not the case with any person we've seen work with S31.

Though one must consider the possibility that A) most members of the government and Starfleet Command don't know that they exist, and/or that B) they refuse to admit to themselves that Section 31 exists because it's such a fundamental departure from the Federation's normal political culture.

It would be a bit like finding out that the President of the United States had personally committed murder in the Oval Office -- even if the evidence was damning, a lot of people would never be willing to believe it.

Well not only do they know about it, they're quite happy with the results.

SISKO
Starfleet Command didn't acknowledge its existence. But
they didn't deny it either.

SISKO
The Federation Council considered giving the Founders the cure...
but they decided against it

And, of course, the point of that episode was that the Federation realized that it was giving into its worst impulses and discontinued those policies, and did so within only a few weeks.

Only after they discovered that one of their admirals was planning a military coup. It's not that they just realized it was bad.

 

[Sci]

Sure enough, ENT's "Affliction" confirms this when Agent Harris establishes that his bureau derives its authority from Article 14, Section 31 of the United Earth Starfleet Charter.

However we have no idea what charter Sloan was referring to.

Yes we do. The original Starfleet Charter. Well, the United Earth Starfleet is the original Starfleet, so the original Starfleet Charter must be the United Earth Starfleet Charter.

The line could be in both charters which would also be plausible.

It's possible, but there's no canonical evidence of the line being in the Federation Starfleet Charter.

To me, it sounds more like a group of officers decided to begin to engage in a criminal conspiracy and cited Article 14, Section 31 as their nonsense legal justification. It would never stand up in court.

But it has. The incidents that we know Section 31 have been involved in have not been punished and even agreed with.

But it hasn't. No one has ever sued Section 31 for existing. There has been no judicial determination of the legal status of Section 31, because they've kept themselves secret.

Indeed there doesn't seem to be any effort of the Borg, Dominion, Klingon, Q defeating Federation to do a thing with S31 except for Bashir.

I don't have the slightest clue what this sentence means. What on Earth do the Borg, Dominion, Klingons, or Q have to do with Section 31?

Yes however I would also expect the Mafia General to be removed from power. That's not the case with any person we've seen work with S31.

Because so far as we know, that Mafia General -- aka, that Starfleet Admiral -- hasn't been uncovered yet.

To put it another way:

If there is a criminal conspiracy within the United States Navy comprised of enlisted men, regular officers, and flag officers, and the flag officers used their clout to cover up that conspiracy's existence for as long as they could, that does not mean that the conspiracy is accepted by the US government as a whole. How could it? And on the day that conspiracy is exposed to the public, yes, it's fair to say that admiral would be dishonorably discharged and tried for his crimes, just this is also true of Section 31.

Though one must consider the possibility that A) most members of the government and Starfleet Command don't know that they exist, and/or that B) they refuse to admit to themselves that Section 31 exists because it's such a fundamental departure from the Federation's normal political culture.

It would be a bit like finding out that the President of the United States had personally committed murder in the Oval Office -- even if the evidence was damning, a lot of people would never be willing to believe it.

Well not only do they know about it,

We don't know that. We don't know that at all. I mean, imagine that you're the Federation Councillor from Andor, and you sit on the Starfleet oversight committee, and you suddenly hear that this doctor -- this illegally genetically engineered doctor, by the way, who normally would never be allowed in the service, and who just last year was involved with a group of genetically engineered military consultants who tried to commit treason by delivering sensitive military deployment information to the Dominion -- is running around, claiming that there's a massive conspiracy within Starfleet that is responsible for committing attempted genocide against the Founders by creating that virus. And not only that, but he's actually gone and presented a cure for this virus, meaning that, as far as you can tell, he's been trying to treat a Founder. All the while, Starfleet, which has almost universally been an honest and respectable service throughout its history, is saying that his allegations aren't true, they don't know why he's trying to treat the enemy, oh, and, by the way, he was trying to access classified material above his security clearance.

I think given those circumstances, there would be a LOT of members of the Federation Council who would refuse to believe that the virus was anything other than a naturally-occurring disease and that they have no particular moral obligation to help the leaders of a society that they know themselves to be genocidal.

Is it right? No. Is it an accurate worldview? No. Does that mean that they believe 31 exists or condones their actions? No. It means they're in denial -- which, yes, is a bad thing in its own right. But it's hardly the same thing as authorizing Thirty-One or being their accomplices.

And, of course, the point of that episode was that the Federation realized that it was giving into its worst impulses and discontinued those policies, and did so within only a few weeks.

Only after they discovered that one of their admirals was planning a military coup. It's not that they just realized it was bad.

So? Sometimes it takes an extreme negative consequence for people to learn the error of their ways. They still learned the error of their ways a hell of a lot sooner than the current United States has.

 

[Admiral2]

When Michael Eddington is revealed to be a Maquis at the end of the episode For The Cause, he gives an angry speech to Sisko, explaining his feelings about the Federation in no uncertain terms.

A couple of thoughts: First of all, Benjamin Sisko is probably the last person to whom you'd ever want to make an argument comparing anything to the Borg!

However, Eddington's comment also kind of reminded me of how in real life (or rather in the media), whenever someone wants to attack something for being oppressive (or for just cramping their style), they compare something to the Nazis or compare someone they intensely dislike to Adolf Hitler. And as liberal a person as I am, I often find it embarrassing when these kinds of comments are made by people of an extreme leftist stripe. Not to mention that it devalues genuine anti-fascist sentiment, numbing people and making them insensitive to things which are truly evil and fascistic.

Has this little parallel occurred to anybody else? Or is it just me?

That never occurred to me, because I thought Eddington was right.

 

[Jefferies]

The Federation generally does not appease its enemies, in fact, I know of no example when they ever did. Appeasement is a strategy to avoid conflict by making concessions without getting anything directly in return.

And there's never been any indication that the Cardassian Union conceded any territory to the Federation. So far as we know, the Federation conceded all the territory, not the Cardassians. They did this in order to avoid conflict -- deliberately turning over entire communities of Federates who had settled there in good faith in the belief that the Federation would protect them and their homes. And when atrocities began being committed against those colonists, the Federation turned a blind eye.

However, this exchange was necessary in order to achieve recognition of each others borders. Therefore, with regard to property, we do not really know what belonged to whom and which authority guaranteed this before the treaty. Because of these unstable conditions the border colonies where in danger anyway and if the Federation had insisted on keeping them, I doubt the colonists would have been safe from the Cardys.

We know for a fact that the Federation government guaranteed the property of the worlds that it claimed as being within its jurisdiction. Ergo, the Federation's obligation is to protect the property rights and sentient rights of its citizens. They did not do this.



No there didn't. The Federation is under no obligation to consider Cardassian opinion in determining private property rights.



There's no evidence that the Federation is a communist society. We know that its citizens do long long for wealth, that it lacks money but still possesses an electronic form of currency (eg "The Trouble With Tribbles"), and that its citizenry lives in a state of abundance outside the realm of scarcity for most purposes. That does not mean, however, that private property rights have ceased to exist, and it does not mean that those colonies are all property of the Federation government.

In point of fact, if the Federation is what its name implies -- a federal state -- then that means that those colonies are no more the property of the UFP than the State of Ohio is the property of the USA. Those colonies were the property, collectively, of the colonists, just as Ohio is, collectively, the property of all Ohioans. That's federalism.

Thus the marquis were completely out of line. They committed acts of terrorism

Against whom? What innocent civilians did the Maquis harm? Because the only victims of the Maquis I can recall are Cardassians who settled in their territory.

in order have their will, regardless of the consequences to the rest of the Federation, i.e. reigniting the war.

Hardly. They were trying to establish an independent polity that wouldn't be part of the UFP. If anything, they were trying to wage a war that was restricted to themselves and the Cardassians. The Federation should have applied the Prime Directive and stayed out of it. After all, under the Treaty, the Federation no longer regarded those words as Federation worlds, and the Maquis made it clear that they had renounced Federation citizenship. The UFP should have treated it as a conflict between two foreign powers that did not involve them.

I believe we are both working on the basis of different assumptions here.

As far as I know, It was stated in the Marquis two-parter and the TNG episode Journey’s End that both sides conceded territory. I watched these episodes just a few weeks ago so I am quite certain about this fact.

With regard to the citizenship of these colonists we are faced with a bit of an inconsistency. In Journey’s End the Indians gave up being citizens of the Federation and agreed to Cardassian rule.

In the "Marquis", however (and I believe in Pre-emptive Strike as well), members of the Marquis were repeatedly refered to as Federation citizens.

Also it was never mentioned that they declared their independence so I can’t see why you are arguing that they should have been regarded as an autonomous political entity. And even if they did declare themselves independent, for that to be legal there probably would have to be some kind of official democratic vote or something. You see, not all colonists were marquis rebels.

With regard to the economy, maybe you are right and I am inferring a bit too much in saying that it’s communist. Although, I do limit this interpretation to the type of market system they use and not extend it to the society in general. Politically, the Federation was certainly democratic which is not communist.

One fact however that has been clearly established is that by the end of the 24th century and maybe as early as Star Trek IV The Voyage Home, the Federation economy does not use currency and that the accumulation of wealth is not a primary concern of the large majority. However, if private enterprise mainly ceased to exist, which this fact seems to indicate, then the state would have to control the economy which would point to economic communism.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Against whom? What innocent civilians did the Maquis harm? Because the only victims of the Maquis I can recall are Cardassians who settled in their territory.

I can think of at least one: the Bok'Nor - a civilian Cardassian freighter which was blown up by the Maquis.

The Maquis claimed that the Bok'Nor was transporting weapons, but we never saw any proof of that. True, the Cardassian government didn't *deny* this, but they didn't confirm it either. Either way, we have no idea.

And there's a legitimate point that not every human colonist in the DMZ was a member of the Maquis. I wonder how those colonists were treated who refused to join? Look at Eddington. How do you think he would have handled them?

 

[Anwar]

As for the Fed-Cardie treaty that made the DMZ, the Cardies did give up colonies and territory. They said so in "Journey's End".

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Thus the marquis were completely out of line. They committed acts of terrorism

Against whom? What innocent civilians did the Maquis harm? Because the only victims of the Maquis I can recall are Cardassians who settled in their territory.

OK, and were all of those settlers armed militants? I'm aware the Cardassian government did at some point arm their settlers, but did they do it in response to Maquis attacks or to provoke them? And can we be sure everyone the Maquis attacked were indeed committing acts of aggression against the Federation settlers?

As I see this from the Cardassian side, the most likely scenario is that the Cardassian government told those settlers they could go in there and that civilians picked up and moved thinking everything was going to be all right. Realistic? No, but in that society you do not question what the government tells you--the belief in its might and that of the military is such that to many, such a promise might as well be the word of God. So now here these people are, they get out there and suddenly they've got Federation settlers shooting at them and endangering their families. (I doubt the Maquis would've ever targeted children in most cases--though Eddington definitely did it when he contaminated an entire world--but still, that's the perception from the other side and that's what matters, not the actual chain of events.)

In my opinion, the Federation settlers got screwed by their government, which ceded their territories and told them to either get out or live with the loss of their citizenship.

And the Cardassian settlers got screwed by THEIR government, which told them they could safely settle their families there and they wind up getting caught in the crossfire between the Maquis and their military--and possibly sometimes becoming targets themselves. So then when they accept the weapons their government gives them to help the situation, the situation just escalates--and sucks for EVERYONE.

I actually feel for the civilians on both sides. But BOTH governments were screwing around big time, and neither of them were excused.

 

[bintak]

Point. Picard is a military officer of the Federation handpicking and influencing the choice of Chancellor of the Klingon Empire.

So what? That has nothing to do with the Federation or its military. Klingons chose Picard, and might have chosen him even if he were an emailman or a replicator sanitizer. Of course they appreciated Picard's being a warrior, because all of them are that - especially their politicians, foreign representatives and legislators.

It would be absurd for Picard to retire for the duration of his Arbiter role, or to turn it down because he happens to be of a certain occupation.

Timo Saloniemi

Just because a foreign government chooses you as an arbitrator and you as a military officer break your primary oath of national loyalty and International Law by meddling in another nation's affairs, where you don't belong (which is what you argue).........IT MATTERS if you are military or a governement functionary in the Federation. Its a criminal; act. Do you not understand this? Call it treason one way; or imperialist colonialist intervention the other, either way I would have Picard, dead to rights, either by US UCMJ, British or French field regulations, or by the Hague and Geneva Conventions, on this point of law.

Since he cannot separate his role as a Federation officer from his role as a political faction (not government as you claim as it is made very clear in the episode) invited "Klingon Arbiter" that makes him historically very similar in function to Robert Clive; an Indian faction invited British opportunistic imperialist who mediated in Indian internal affairs and set up the British system of oppressive criminal colonial imperialism in India.

In law, that is called an established criminal precedent .

You lose this argument no matter which way you twist..Timo. Picard is a criminal and I can prove it. I just proved it.

 

[Anwar]

Picard was asked to arbitrate by the Chancellor himself, the head of state. And the Chancellor made it clear that if he refused it would be a great insult from the Federation to the Empire.

Picard had no choice, Km'pec forced him into it.

 

[Damask]

I don't have the slightest clue what this sentence means. What on Earth do the Borg, Dominion, Klingons, or Q have to do with Section 31?

The Federation did what was necessary to counter these enemies. They don't seem to be as willing to counter Section 31.

Because so far as we know, that Mafia General -- aka, that Starfleet Admiral -- hasn't been uncovered yet.

And on the day that conspiracy is exposed to the public, yes, it's fair to say that admiral would be dishonorably discharged and tried for his crimes, just this is also true of Section 31.

Sure they have. The medics who sent Bashir false information. Bill Ross assisting S31 with the Romulans.

We don't know that. We don't know that at all. I mean, imagine that you're the Federation Councillor from Andor, and you sit on the Starfleet oversight committee, and you suddenly hear that this doctor -- this illegally genetically engineered doctor,

What does that have to do with anything? The picture you're painting of the Federation isn't the prettiest here.

And not only that, but he's actually gone and presented a cure for this virus, meaning that, as far as you can tell, he's been trying to treat a Founder.

Doesn't he also have a body to go along with the cure? The way you're talking I'm surprised the Federation hasn't tried Bashir for murder.

All the while, Starfleet, which has almost universally been an honest and respectable service throughout its history, is saying that his allegations aren't true, they don't know why he's trying to treat the enemy, oh, and, by the way, he was trying to access classified material above his security clearance.

Doesn't mean a thing. Sisko okayed it. The question would be why Odo's files were classified to Bashir. Also why Starfleet medical would send Bashir fale information and try to present it as the truth. Hardly something an honest and respectable organization would do.

Also given that Starfleet had attempted a coup on the Federation in the recent past, the Federation might be a tad more concered than you're suggesting.

But it's hardly the same thing as authorizing Thirty-One or being their accomplices.

Again we have the whole sending false information to Bashir regarding Odo? Even after he had been cleared by Sisko.