The Maquis - where do you stand?

[Dancing Doctor]

As Sisko said to Eddington - what these people needed was a negotiated peace, not a military victory. Agressive Maquis activity made a peaceful solution harder, not easier to reach.

Ironic he should feel that way, since HE once noted: It's easy to be a Saint in Paradise.

It's easy for him to talk about negotation, when he didn't have to wonder if he was going to be poisoned by his morning raktajino or randomly shot down by infiltrators disguised as monks.

That cuts both ways. Neither the Federation/former Federation colonists nor the Cardassian/former Cardassian colonists are completely innocent.

 

[neozeks]

Even if it's "disputed," if the Federation has the legitimate claim and the Cardassian claim is NOT legitimate, then the Cardassians can shout all day, but the colonists had absolutely every right to settle there and should have been able to expect defense. "Risks" should NOT have included abandonment and treachery by their own people.

Ok, I already said why I think abandonment, treachery, appeasement and other labels are way too simple for a complex situation like this, I won't repeat myself What I meant under 'risks' is that the colonists had to be aware the Federation could in the end lose the dispute. If you settle in a disputed area with undefined and fluctuating borders you simply have to take that risk.

It's easy for him to talk about negotation, when he didn't have to wonder if he was going to be poisoned by his morning raktajino or randomly shot down by infiltrators disguised as monks.

How is abducting Cardassian officials, blowing up freighters (we don't even know for sure the Bok'Nor transported weapons) and using biological weapons going to protect you from that? I already said I'm not against purely defensive actions. But escalating the conflict sure doesn't help the Maquis' credibility.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

And how do we know those borders were undefined??? They could have been CLEARLY defined--but the Cardassians may have simply seen weakness and took advantage of it. The more I think about the situation, the more I'm convinced that's what occurred...that the Federation claimed it first, but the Cardassians realized they would be able to intimidate them into giving up what was rightfully the Federation's. The Federation should NEVER have rolled over to that demand.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

That cuts both ways. Neither the Federation/former Federation colonists nor the Cardassian/former Cardassian colonists are completely innocent.

The Cardassians terrorized Federation colonies first. Blame falls to the agressor.

 

[neozeks]

And how do we know those borders were undefined??? They could have been CLEARLY defined--but the Cardassians may have simply seen weakness and took advantage of it. The more I think about the situation, the more I'm convinced that's what occurred...that the Federation claimed it first, but the Cardassians realized they would be able to intimidate them into giving up what was rightfully the Federation's. The Federation should NEVER have rolled over to that demand.

If the borders were defined and the Federation was sure of it's claim why did it warn the colonists not to settle there?
You can speculate according to your views and beliefs about the Federation but it's also equaly possible the Cardassians actually had some kind of a claim and the Feds ventured in not aware of that claim. The Cardassians are ruthless and totalitarian but that doesn't mean they are always completely wrong. We don't know.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

It's very similar to moving to a border town near Mexico, with the drug war going on down there (or even Phoenix)--the violence has a risk of spilling over. But that does NOT mean Americans have no sovereign right to their territory.

Obviously Mexico's official forces are not invading (though there may have been some cross-border harassment incidents, which to my mind should bring about a strong warning about frakking around with citizens of another country), but the comparison holds because whether we're talking official OR paramilitary/terrorist forces, if that territory is owned by the Federation then if you ask me, their FIRST signal of weakness in Cardassian eyes was to not send any backup with their colonists when they settled (or, conversely, restrain the colonists by force from settling in that area--not a move I would advocate unless the Cardassian claim was the first legitimate claim, but one that the Cardassians would be looking for as a clear sign of the Federation's stance). That was a sign that they did not take guarding their people seriously.

What the Federation did, by refusing to defend their people but not restraining the settlement was rather like dangling a string in front of a kitten--too tempting to refuse. Had they shown up with enough of a force that they could clearly protect their colonists, the Cardassians would've been more likely to think twice about trying to stake a claim (or if they did try, they would've gotten their noses bloodied as a result, like they did when they made a try at Setlik III and the Federation stuck up for their colonists the way they're supposed to).

 

[T'Girl]

Well, it doesn't make them into "second-class citizens," it makes them into folks who are disobeying the law.

To paraphrase many of the quotes I cited some posts back: "An unjust law is NO law". The Federation had no right to take those colonist's homes from them just to placate a foreign power that started a war with them.

The Federation never took the colonists homes, as was later shown, the colonists (former colonists) had the option to attempt to stay in them after the final Federation/Union border was hammered out, it was the government of the planet that pushed them out of their homes. Ultimately the Federation could only recommend that they leave prior to the arrival of the Cardassian colonists.

Once the Federation made that legal agreement, it became law of that sector that those planets were Cardassian after a certain period of adjustment.

Only under the theory that Might makes Right.

Under the theory that a democratic government can make collective decisions for the populace.

The Maquis decided to carry out an ILLEGAL WAR AGAINST THE RIGHTFUL GOVERNMENT OF THOSE COLONIES!!!

The right of self-defense is a sovereign right of ALL people.

But "self-defending" what? The colonists colonized a world outside the establish sovereign space of the Federation, in a area that the Federation hoped to be expanding into. But still outside the Federation proper. And it's not like the Federation didn't even try to establish sovereignty over the entire area, Starfleet did fight a mult-year territorial war there. And obviously they did seceded in some areas.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Only under the theory that Might makes Right.

Under the theory that a democratic government can make collective decisions for the populace.

Not if that decision is unconstitutional--and I would say this would be dereliction of the government's duty to provide defense for its people and to punish crimes, piracy, and enemy aggression in its territory.

Furthermore, if we were to look at it instead as eminent domain theory, eminent domain must be for a public use BY THAT NATION as a PART of that nation, NOT for giving it away for the benefit of a party that is NOT that nation, be it a private entity or another nation. This is why Wesley was absolutely in the right when he stated that forced removal would be illegal.

 

[neozeks]

It's very similar to moving to a border town near Mexico, with the drug war going on down there (or even Phoenix)--the violence has a risk of spilling over. But that does NOT mean Americans have no sovereign right to their territory.

But the very reason that they were given for not settling was that the region was disputed. There's no 'spilling over'. Of course, that doesn't mean the Feds claim is not legitimate, only that the Federation wasn't sure it could hold on to it or protect the people there.

What the Federation did, by refusing to defend their people but not restraining the settlement was rather like dangling a string in front of a kitten--too tempting to refuse. Had they shown up with enough of a force that they could clearly protect their colonists, the Cardassians would've been more likely to think twice about trying to stake a claim (or if they did try, they would've gotten their noses bloodied as a result, like they did when they made a try at Setlik III and the Federation stuck up for their colonists the way they're supposed to).

See, there you do it again - you're letting your preconceptions about the Feds lead you into seeing things that aren't there. Who says they refused to protect them? They fought a years long war that killed millions! Who says Setlik III was the exception? For all we know, Stafleet going in to protect the colonists may actually have started the war. And given that most of the colonists were live and well after the war I'd say the Feds did a damn good job of protecting the colonists!

Furthermore, if we were to look at it instead as eminent domain theory, eminent domain must be for a public use BY THAT NATION as a PART of that nation, NOT for giving it away for the benefit of a party that is NOT that nation, be it a private entity or another nation.

That is very much subject to interpretation. 'Public use' or 'public benefit' is a very broad term. What about Israel forciby removing it's Gaza settlers? Was that illegal?
The intention of the Feds obviously wasn't to benefit the Cardassians, it was to benefit it's own citizens by stopping a bloody war.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Well, it doesn't make them into "second-class citizens," it makes them into folks who are disobeying the law.

To paraphrase many of the quotes I cited some posts back: "An unjust law is NO law". The Federation had no right to take those colonist's homes from them just to placate a foreign power that started a war with them.

The Federation never took the colonists homes, as was later shown, the colonists (former colonists) had the option to attempt to stay in them after the final Federation/Union border was hammered out, it was the government of the planet that pushed them out of their homes. Ultimately the Federation could only recommend that they leave prior to the arrival of the Cardassian colonists.

The Federation had no right to give those planets away. They were the homes of Federation citizens and the Federation had a duty to protect them, not use them as bargaining chips.

Under the theory that a democratic government can make collective decisions for the populace.

The rule of law MUST also bind the lawmakers, or you have tyrrany.

But "self-defending" what?

Their lives (under threat from sabotage and terrorist attacks). Their homes.

The colonists colonized a world outside the establish sovereign space of the Federation, in a area that the Federation hoped to be expanding into. But still outside the Federation proper. And it's not like the Federation didn't even try to establish sovereignty over the entire area, Starfleet did fight a mult-year territorial war there. And obviously they did seceded in some areas.

It is quite clear that the worlds ceeded were Federation worlds. The Federation would have no ABILITY to cede non-Federation worlds. That would be like one nation ceding another nation's territory to a third nation.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

That is very much subject to interpretation. 'Public use' or 'public benefit' is a very broad term. What about Israel forciby removing it's Gaza settlers? Was that illegal?

Yes.

 

[neozeks]

That is very much subject to interpretation. 'Public use' or 'public benefit' is a very broad term. What about Israel forciby removing it's Gaza settlers? Was that illegal?

Yes.

I guess Israeli courts don't agree with you. At least I haven't heard of any settler successfully contesting in it in front of a court.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

That is very much subject to interpretation. 'Public use' or 'public benefit' is a very broad term. What about Israel forciby removing it's Gaza settlers? Was that illegal?

Yes.

I guess Israeli courts don't agree with you. At least I haven't heard of any settler successfully contesting in it in front of a court.

So what? OUR Supreme Court ruled in favor of ED for developers...that doesn't make THAT right either.

 

[neozeks]

So what? OUR Supreme Court ruled in favor of ED for developers...that doesn't make THAT right either.

But that doesn't make THIS wrong either. Personally, it's a matter of opinion. Legally, I at least have the courts on my side of the argument.

 

[T'Girl]

dereliction of the government's duty to provide defense for its people

Which the Federation did by fight a long territorial war for the star systems that both the Federation and the Union wanted. The Federation did not just give up, they lost some of the star systems. Starfleet is not all powerful.

Some posters make it sound like Starfleet didn't even try.

PICARD: Anthwara, I want to make absolutely sure that you understand the implications of this agreement. By giving up your status as Federation citizens, any future request you or your people make to Starfleet will go unanswered. You will be on your own and under Cardassian jurisdiction.

ANTHWARA: I understand, Captain. And we are prepared to take that risk.

Apparently no they weren't

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Perhaps if Picard had recorded his conversation with Anthwara and set it to broadcast non-stop throughout the entire DMZ, there never would have been a Maquis?

 

[DonIago]

Given some of the opinions expressed in this thread, I don't share your optimism.

 

[T'Girl]

NECHEYEV: the Indians on Dorvan are a nomadic group that have settled there only twenty years ago, and at that time they were warned that the planet was hotly disputed by the Cardassians. The bottom line is they never should have gone there in the first place.

It was a colony of Federation citizens, not a Federation Government colony. Private citizens were building colonies without the permission of the Federation government. Necheyev makes it very clear the colonies were being built on non-Federation worlds. They could not have established a colony on that world, against the Federation's permission, if it in fact was a sovereign Federation world. The Federation government had no say in what happen on that world, they couldn't stop them.

GUL EVEK: Captain, we have been sent here to perform a preliminary survey of all the buildings and equipment being left behind. I have no intention of leaving until our mission is complete.

It is quite clear that the worlds ceeded were Federation worlds. The Federation would have no ABILITY to cede non-Federation worlds. That would be like one nation ceding another nation's territory to a third nation.

The Federation wasn't ceding the world, at the most they were ceding the Federation's hopeful claim to the worlds. Prior to the treaty the worlds were at best "non-aligned." What Picard was ordered to remove from the surface of the world, was a private colony site, composed of Federation citizens. It was never a sovereign Federation world.

PICARD: This border places several Federation colonies in Cardassian territory and some Cardassian colonies in ours.
NECHEYEV: Those colonies finding themselves on the wrong side of the border will have to be moved.

If the Federation didn't move them, the Cardassians would.

.

 

[Dancing Doctor]

That cuts both ways. Neither the Federation/former Federation colonists nor the Cardassian/former Cardassian colonists are completely innocent.

The Cardassians terrorized Federation colonies first. Blame falls to the agressor.

We don't know that.

And, considering this is the Cardassians being talked about, having Federation citizens (humans) settle worlds in a contested area with an entity that is known to be highly paranoid, territorial, and lacking in recources, it could be considered that the Federation citizens were the aggressors.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

That cuts both ways. Neither the Federation/former Federation colonists nor the Cardassian/former Cardassian colonists are completely innocent.

The Cardassians terrorized Federation colonies first. Blame falls to the agressor.

We don't know that.

Yes we do. Several times various people talk about what the Cardassians have been doing. Cal's talks with Ben establish that the Maquis were formed to do what Starfleet could not (because the Federation WOULD not).