and no canonical source that I can recall has ever claimed that its Member worlds are the sovereigns
In two separate episodes the United Federation of Planets is directly referred to as a "
Alliance."
Two lines of dialogue vs. a vast preponderance of evidence in which the Federation
behaves like a sovereign state.
The preponderance of evidence goes towards contradicting those two lines.
Meanwhile, the Federation is sovereign in its own right
Problem there is it's never directly referred to as such.
But it consistently behaves as such.
As a allied assemblage of sovereign star nations, the organization's governing body (the Council) could have the ability to make group decision in the areas of defense and external diplomatic affairs.
Then they've already yielded their sovereignty
de facto if not
de jure. It is the nature of a sovereign that
it is the one that decides its foreign and defense policies; this is fundamental to sovereignty.
You have already described a sovereign state in fact, even if it is not a sovereign state on paper.
The Council's presiding official could hold the title of "President," or even PotUFP. They would be elected by other members of the Council as the Council's leader.
This would seem to contradict "Homefront," in which Jaresh-Inyo speaks of having "run" for President, rather than as having been chosen by a couple dozen Councillors.
The Federation Council President would have the authority to declare a State of Emergency on the one Member world where the Federation governing body meet, but not necessarily on any other world in the Federation.
1. There is no evidence that the right to declare a State of Emergency on Earth does not exist for other Federation Members.
2. Alliances don't get to declare States of Emergency, period. This is by definition one of the traits of a sovereign state. NATO doesn't get to declare a State of Emergency in Brussels -- the Belgian government does. The Commonwealth of Nations does not get to declare a State of Emergency in London -- the British government does. The Organization of American States doesn't get to declare a State of Emergency in Washington -- the U.S. and District of Columbia governments do. Etc.
The multiple territories of the various sovereign Members of the Federation, the home worlds and colonies.
The problem is that in an alliance, those wouldn't be Federation territory. Those would be territories of the members. But when we see the show, we don't see the
Enterprise captain declaring, "You have entered the sovereign territory of the Commonwealth of Planet Zog, who is allied with the sovereign state of United Earth and whose territorial interests we will defend as though they were our own (even though they are not) because we're such nice allies!"
We see Captain Picard say, "You have entered Federation territory." Not
allied territory.
Federation territory. Meaning, the
Federation holds sovereignty over this territory.
Plus additional territorial claims by the Federation.
Alliances cannot make territorial claims; only sovereign states can.
it has its own military in the form of Starfleet
Providing for a common defense would be one of the primary reasons for forming the Federation in the first place.
"Providing for a common defense" is a very different thing from having your own military. Possession of a military is one of THE defining traits of statehood.
it has a legislature capable of making binding statutory law
Are you bringing up that speed limit thing again Sci?
That is one example of binding statutory law. Another would be the relocation of Federation colonists from planets the Federation Council had conceded by treaty to other sovereign states -- a territorial decision no alliance could ever make for its members, but which a sovereign state alone may make.
The people on the show clearly self-identify with their respective home worlds and species, and not with being
Federationists.
1. You are attempting to conflate cultural identification with legal citizenship. I identify as English-American; this does not mean that I identify as a British citizen.
2. Then why did O'Brien assert his natural rights in the face of a tyrannical Cardassian tribunal by declaring, "I am a Federation citizen"? Obviously his Federation citizenship is important to him if he is using it in an ideological battle with an alien culture.
Some more:
Identifying by Federation citizenship.
More examples of the importance of Federation citizenship.
Being a "Federation citizen" is like being a modern day "citizen of the world."
As the above quotes demonstrate, Federation citizenship is a specific legal status that confers and protects certain specific rights for those who hold it. It is an important legal determinater for numerous conflicts.
The U.N., by contrast, contains none of these traits; it describes itself as "a tool of its Member States."
"A tool of its Member States." would be a excellent way of describing the Federation.
When have we ever seen the Federation letting one of its Members take the lead instead of taking the lead itself?
QUOTE=Sci;9413194]
If I'm the Director of the Federation Security Agency, I'm gonna want at least three Defiant-class starships permanently attached to defending Paris One wherever she goes.
Whoa, how wild a place is the Federation?[/quote]
The Federation does not need to be a wild place for a few lone political actors to undertake violence. Nor for interstellar borders to be very permeable.
We see the Galaxy class face the unknowns of the frontiers of explored space unescorted, but travel within the Federation is so dangerous a Galaxy can't defend herself without three Defiants? That seems fairly overblown to me.
Those ships in unexplored space aren't carrying the President. Of course it's overblown. That's the point.
Whether the President really is worth protecting is another issue. Why should he/she/it be a high value target to anybody with the means to harm a spacecraft (as random nutcases would be deterred by the defenses of a runabout already)?
Considering how many United States Presidents and other heads of state have been the victims of assassination, I am honestly flabbergasted that you would imagine the risk of irrational political actors engaging in violence against the head of government of the most powerful state in local space would be so low.
Well, the Federation *did* have the power to force residents to leave the colony worlds that they traded to the Cardassians to settle a border dispute. That doesn't sound like they ONLY have the power over sovereign members that is granted to them by those members. It sounds like a Federal system.
Exactly.
But honestly, I think this is useless to argue unless you're willing to bring the novels into play,
The novels have come down pretty definitively on the side of the Federation being a sovereign state in its own right.
Well, the Federation *did* have the power to force residents to leave the colony worlds that they traded to the Cardassians to settle a border dispute.
I don't think that territory was the Federation's to start with,
It was explicitly established to be Federation territory.
That doesn't sound like they ONLY have the power over sovereign members that is granted to them by those members. It sounds like a Federal system.
An alliance could authorize employing it's combined armed forces to expand it's territory.
What you are describing is an alliance in name only.
But honestly, I think this is useless to argue unless you're willing to bring the novels into play ...
I for one am not willing to do that.
Why not? Most of the novels these days are better than the TV shows they were based on, anyway.
Well, you'd better tell Obama to stop using Air Force One then! Damn thing sticks out like a sore thumb!
The president will sometimes travel on a US government aircraft other than the traditional Air Force One 747, a smaller boeing 757 or big business style jet. just for the reason mentioned, security.
Whatever plane he on is still Air Force One, but it's less obvious.
Well, no. Whatever
United States Air Force craft he's on is Air Force One. If he's on a Navy aircraft, it's Navy One; Marine plane or aircraft, it's Marine One; Army craft, it's Army One; civilian aircraft, it's Executive One.
Then again: Is there any real reason why the President would ever want to leave Earth in the first place? Technology is sufficiently advanced to enable absolute real-time teleconferencing. Throw in a holodeck and it's just like being in the same room with whoever the President wants to talk to. So why not stay on Earth, which is deep in Federation space and therefore a lot safer?
Because hiding your president away in an ivory tower where he or she never has contact with the people is pretty much a guaranteed way to ensure he/she loses touch with reality, to be frank. To say nothing of the fact that the leader of a people needs to actually go amongst them and connect with them.
ETA:
For the record, the recent
Enterprise: Rise of the Federation novels have given us some background on the evolution of Federation political institutions.
When the Federation was first founded, there was no President, just the Council. Six months after the founding, the Council decided to create the position of President of the Council of the United Federation of Planets, a position it appointed, giving the Council President the authority to act in the Council's name when it was not in session and granting to him the position of commander-in-chief of the combined Federation Starfleet (which had been formed by combining each Member world's space service, making each a separate branch of the unified Federation Starfleet).
By 2164, the Council had decided to establish a full-on office of the President of the United Federation of Planets, to be popularly elected to a four-year term. The first Federation presidential election was held that year, for a term commencing in early 2165.
The early Federation also had what was called the Federation Commission -- popularly-elected officials who served as the heads of the Federation's executive departments, a sort of elected cabinet. Soval served as the first Federation Commissioner for Foreign Affairs.
It also utilized what were called Ministerial Conferences for key decisions, convening the relevant ministers from its Member States along with the relevant Federation Commissioners at central locations to debate and decide on certain key issues.
By the time of the 24th Century, the Commission and the Ministerial Conferences seem to have ended, with the Federation Council assuming more of their functions.