Why didn't the Federation help Bajor??

[Timo]

Well, two key differences pop into mind:

- The Feds have tanks and machine guns while the Cardassian war elephants are of an especially thin-skinned breed and their arrows have felt tips (the impotence of Cardassian weapons of war was established in "The Wounded").
- The Feds, having crossed the galactic ocean, have landed right next door to the Bajoran Fort, and only one day's march from the Cardassian High Palace (the first season of DS9 establishes the proximity of Bajor to Cardassia Prime and the absence of any Cardassian assets around or between those two locations).

Storming the Cardassian subcontinent shouldn't appear particularly laughable in the circumstances, especially as the United Kingdom of the Federation apparently also vastly outnumbers the Cardassian populance. In terms of analogies, it's more a case of choosing whether to annex Grenada or not (pretty much regardless of who's doing the choosing, the US or, say, Luxembourg).

There's another key difference that works in favor of Cardassia, though:

- The Cardassian subcontinent isn't internally divided into competing principalities: even the conquered worlds appear to be firmly under their central rule, their rebellious leanings of no tactical concern. And any territory "liberated" by the UFP in the old war remains hostile to the UFP rather than to Cardassia, as evidenced by all those "neutral" worlds surrounding Bajor in the first seasons.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[apepa]

Well, two key differences pop into mind:

- The Feds have tanks and machine guns while the Cardassian war elephants are of an especially thin-skinned breed and their arrows have felt tips (the impotence of Cardassian weapons of war was established in "The Wounded").
- The Feds, having crossed the galactic ocean, have landed right next door to the Bajoran Fort, and only one day's march from the Cardassian High Palace (the first season of DS9 establishes the proximity of Bajor to Cardassia Prime and the absence of any Cardassian assets around or between those two locations).

Storming the Cardassian subcontinent shouldn't appear particularly laughable in the circumstances, especially as the United Kingdom of the Federation apparently also vastly outnumbers the Cardassian populance. In terms of analogies, it's more a case of choosing whether to annex Grenada or not (pretty much regardless of who's doing the choosing, the US or, say, Luxembourg).

There's another key difference that works in favor of Cardassia, though:

- The Cardassian subcontinent isn't internally divided into competing principalities: even the conquered worlds appear to be firmly under their central rule, their rebellious leanings of no tactical concern. And any territory "liberated" by the UFP in the old war remains hostile to the UFP rather than to Cardassia, as evidenced by all those "neutral" worlds surrounding Bajor in the first seasons.

Timo Saloniemi

Either you're not very bright or you're outright trolling. I suspect the latter.

 

[Timo]

Hmm. I can't really see either thing from this end, but if either of the impressions was created, I do apologize.

The Cardassian-Bajoran affair simply represents a rather complex and ambiguous piece of Trek lore - it's the work of dozens of writers across several spinoffs, and really out of the control of any single writer. It can't help but be very good at what it aspires to being: the Everyman conflict, applicable as commentary to anything from the Holocaust to the Phrygian wars to the excesses of the Boy Scouts movement.

What it fails to be is a perfect analogy for any single conflict or instance of oppression, with just the faces of the players covered in alien prosthetics. Clinging on to the differences is no different from savoring the commonalities, in that it enriches the range of interpretations possible.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[apepa]

Hmm. I can't really see either thing from this end, but if either of the impressions was created, I do apologize.

The Cardassian-Bajoran affair simply represents a rather complex and ambiguous piece of Trek lore - it's the work of dozens of writers across several spinoffs, and really out of the control of any single writer. It can't help but be very good at what it aspires to being: the Everyman conflict, applicable as commentary to anything from the Holocaust to the Phrygian wars to the excesses of the Boy Scouts movement.

What it fails to be is a perfect analogy for any single conflict or instance of oppression, with just the faces of the players covered in alien prosthetics. Clinging on to the differences is no different from savoring the commonalities, in that it enriches the range of interpretations possible.

Timo Saloniemi

The idea that you read my post and interpreted that the Federation are the English, and the Cardassians as the Indians is laughable. You were trolling.

 

[TheSeeker]

Either you're not very bright or you're outright trolling. I suspect the latter.

The idea that you read my post and interpreted that the Federation are the English, and the Cardassians as the Indians is laughable. You were trolling.

If there is anyone trolling here, it is you. Timo did nothing but reply to the content of your post whereas you have not once, but twice gone after the poster by accusing him of trolling. Surely you realize that accusing someone of trolling multiple times is a good way to bait them into responding in an inflammatory manner. This is pretty much the textbook definition of trolling. Therefore, you have received an infraction for trolling. Comments to PM.

 

[Timo]

...Apart from that, the comparison of the Feds to imperialists or colonialists of yore is indeed often a clever one to make, because one can then discuss the many differences and see what clever postcolonial ideas the writers sneak into their art.

DS9 was full of issues that were not outdated when the 1700s turned to a close, and introducing them in an outlandish context is little different from introducing them in a historical setting - except for the fact that one can also bring a bit of today into the discussion and not be blamed for anachronism.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Prax]

The Federation didn't help Bajor because the Federation aren't the rulers of the galaxy.

 

[Jetboogieman]

l Zone and all their other operations both within and outwith UFP space.

I'm sure the Federation would've denounced the occupation of Bajor, applied political pressure against the Cardassian Union, but with so much bloodshed already between the two powers it's doubtful they would do anything to ignite the situation for just a single planet. The terrorist tactics of the Bajorans may also have made the Federation Council nervous, not wanting to be seen condoning the actions of the Cardassians and supporting those of the Bajorans.

There may not have been any official support but I suspect there would be some citizens who would've done all they could to help, running supplies and intelligence, or even going to Bajor to help in the fighting.

An excellent post, I think there's really nothing else to be said.

 

[Timo]

It is still difficult to see why the UFP would worry about "igniting" a situation that is already a full-blown forest fire.

At the time the fate of Bajor is being pondered, Miles O'Brien is being told by his government to storm regimentfuls of Cardassian troops on Setlik III. Aren't the feelings of the poor Cardassians hurt when their regiments fall?

Some years later, a Starfleet starship blows up an outpost, a warship and a transport during declared peace, and Starfleet then grudgingly accepts the Cardassian apology for being such poor targets.

It's not as if Starfleet would feel any urge to don velvet gloves, or as if Cardassia were in any position to complain if the UFP decided to declare Bajor a cultural heritage site where the price of admission for Cardassians was an arm and a leg.

Timo Salomiemi

 

[Sci]

For whatever it's worth, the novel Terok Nor: Day of the Vipers establishes that the Cardassians seized control of Bajor slowly, culminating in the assassination of the sitting First Minister and the new First Minister "requesting" Cardassian "assistance." The Feds could no more intervene to liberate Bajor from the Cardassians than, say, the United States could have intervened to "liberate" Ukraine from its Russian puppet president if it had non-interference directive. That seems eminently plausible to me, especially since Season One of DS9 established that a collaborationist government had ruled on Bajor before they overthrew the Central Command.

Also, it seems pretty obvious to me that in apepa's post, Bajor was India and the Cardassians were the Brits.

 

[Samuel]

Has anyone considered that the Cardassian Occupation of Bajor was not considered that great of a humanitarian crisis?

Consider: The Cardassians occupied Bajor for 40 years. In the episode where the Cardassian child was raised by the Bajorans he says that the Cardassians killed 10 million Bajorans. Over 40 years that is about 250,000 annually. While it seems like a lot consider that on average on our planet currently more than 500,000 people die violent deaths every years (about 100,000 of those due to warfare, the rest are simple murders).

And we know Bajor was a heavily populated, heavily urbanized planet because Odo after flying over San Francisco describes it as nearly as large as some of the older cities on Bajor.

 

[cultcross]

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.

Except you are ignoring another possible outcome - that the war ends, and instead of annexing the territory, the winning side simply leaves it under military occupation indefinitely. This has happened in Palestine and the situation has dragged on longer than the Cardassians occupied Bajor (and I think it is fair to infer that the latter was intended, at least in part, as analogous to the former). Israel doesn't want to annex Gaza and the West Bank because it would mean that Arab Israelis would outnumber Jewish Israelis and potentially risk the state's dominant demographic. But it feels entitled to the territory and doesn't want to give it back. So instead it maintains an occupation while attempting to settle the region with Jewish residents.

Cardassia may not have wanted to annex Bajor or acknowledge it as Cardassian territory. They just want to strip it of resources using the population as slave labour, and then Foxtrot Oscar leaving them with nothing. It maintained the military occupation of the world for the duration of their stay. Hence the use of that terminology. If isn't analogous to the expansion of the Roman or British Empires, who actually wanted the areas conquered to become fully fledged parts of their Empire.

 

[MadeIndescribable]

Has anyone considered that the Cardassian Occupation of Bajor was not considered that great of a humanitarian crisis?

Consider: The Cardassians occupied Bajor for 40 years. In the episode where the Cardassian child was raised by the Bajorans he says that the Cardassians killed 10 million Bajorans. Over 40 years that is about 250,000 annually. While it seems like a lot consider that on average on our planet currently more than 500,000 people die violent deaths every years (about 100,000 of those due to warfare, the rest are simple murders).

And we know Bajor was a heavily populated, heavily urbanized planet because Odo after flying over San Francisco describes it as nearly as large as some of the older cities on Bajor.

Regardless of numbers (although 10 million is still ALOT!), it's not just the killings, its also the stripping of resources, impoverishment, slavery (both for labour and sex), etc as well.

Plus city size doesn't necessarily correlate to population. Older Bajoran cities would most likely have been spread out in terms of area whereas San Fran etc could house millions in sky scrapers building upwards.

 

[Spot261]

Has anyone considered that the Cardassian Occupation of Bajor was not considered that great of a humanitarian crisis?

Consider: The Cardassians occupied Bajor for 40 years. In the episode where the Cardassian child was raised by the Bajorans he says that the Cardassians killed 10 million Bajorans. Over 40 years that is about 250,000 annually. While it seems like a lot consider that on average on our planet currently more than 500,000 people die violent deaths every years (about 100,000 of those due to warfare, the rest are simple murders).

And we know Bajor was a heavily populated, heavily urbanized planet because Odo after flying over San Francisco describes it as nearly as large as some of the older cities on Bajor.

You seem to be implying we simply accept those half a million per year real life deaths. On the contrary we make significant , albeit inconsistent, efforts to reduce them. The federation are supposed to be our moral and ethical superiors, it's hard to see them shrugging their collective shoulders, not to mention we have several series full of evidence the federation will respond at risk to their own stability for far lesser crises.

 

[XCV330]

Has anyone considered that the Cardassian Occupation of Bajor was not considered that great of a humanitarian crisis?

Consider: The Cardassians occupied Bajor for 40 years. In the episode where the Cardassian child was raised by the Bajorans he says that the Cardassians killed 10 million Bajorans. Over 40 years that is about 250,000 annually. While it seems like a lot consider that on average on our planet currently more than 500,000 people die violent deaths every years (about 100,000 of those due to warfare, the rest are simple murders).

And we know Bajor was a heavily populated, heavily urbanized planet because Odo after flying over San Francisco describes it as nearly as large as some of the older cities on Bajor.

well now i see it in a whole new light
and what about these boncentration bamps?

 

[Samuel]

It should be noted that apparently the Bajorans were potentially quite powerful themselves.

In one of the alternate universes in TNGs "Parallels" the Bajorans had thrown off Cardassian control, become militant and one of their warships had blown apart a Federation deep space telescope array (something a Cardassian Galor class cruiser had done in another universe.

 

[Spot261]

One of the alternate universes that represented every possible outcome? That hardly tells us anything, but more importantly it makes no difference, every group or nation is potentially militarily powerful, that has no bearing on the question of whether their current circumstances warrant intervention.

 

[MadeIndescribable]

well now i see it in a whole new light
and what about these boncentration bamps?

Are you saying it was all the fault of Mr Hilter, you silly leg before wicket English person?

 

[Spot261]

Are you saying it was all the fault of Mr Hilter, you silly leg before wicket English person?

Who do you think you are kidding Mr Hitler?

(I'm guessing that'll be a mainly brits only reference)

 

[Rincewiend]

Who do you think you are kidding Mr Hitler?

(I'm guessing that'll be a mainly brits only reference)