[DMV3] Atlas Shrugged

Day 2,442, 14:01 Published in Canada Canada by DMV3


Yesterday eCanada's President announced the creation of a "Friendship Pact"(read as alliance) between eCanada, ePortugal, and eFrance. As a result of the "Friendship Pact" both France and Portugal appear to be poised to hold referendums to leave LETO in favor of ATLAS. While this move may not hinder eCanada's membership in LETO it does pose a serious conflict of interest for our nation should our new "Friendship Pact" have different military objectives than our current alliance. This issue in addition to the fact we're already in an alliance pose major problems for our foreign policy moving forward.

ATLAS has been signed by eCanada for a period of one day and already it poses serious foreign policy implications moving forward. Both of our partners in this treaty have already expressed their intention to leave the alliance we currently all share. This makes eCanada look as if it is playing both sides to see what benefits us more long term. The damage being done to our reputation among our allies is tremendous. As I have stated elsewhere I believe being a member of LETO and of ATLAS is a huge conflict of interest for eCanada. Regardless of what we choose to call this treaty it has already created a wedge between us and our alliance. The fact is we can not ride two horses with one a**. eCanada must decide what it wants to do moving forward and stay on that course. Our best course of action would have been to withdraw from LETO before creating ATLAS, if indeed ATLAS is the course we want to take as a nation.

The way LETO works is all new members must be approved first by a majority of LETO nations, and then by Asteria's leadership. On top of this restriction to membership Asteria must be notified and approve of any and all treaties before they are signed by Asteria or LETO members. In the case of ATLAS this did not happen. I spent the greater part of yesterday talking with Asteria and LETO HQ to find out what exactly happened. After talking with both I found out that LETO HQ was not notified of the treaty and Asteria was notified by the Portuguese CP, but he was told that further discussion was necessary before moving forward. Upon being told this the CP of Portugal notified Asteria SG that Portugal would be holding a referendum to leave LETO and no further discussion ever took place. After further digging I found out that no member of eCanada's government ever bothered discussing ATLAS with anyone inside either alliance. This type of communication breakdown severely damages eCanada's reputation and standing among our allies.

While I have focused on the damage ATLAS is doing to eCanada and our alliance, I must also mention the benefits and opportunities it provides. ATLAS provides eCanada with equal standing with the other members of the alliance and does not require Asteria to approve of new members in order to build the new alliance. This has always been one of my major concerns with LETO. The members of ATLAS are some of our closest friends, excluding Ireland and Australia. Atlas is built on friendship as opposed to damage, much like the alliances of old. As you can see ATLAS provides us with flexibility and the potential for growth long term. I would like to say I personally like the possibilities that ATLAS provides for eCanada, but as I have said I believe joining ATLAS while belonging to LETO poses a huge foreign policy nightmare for eCanada moving forward.

Due to the way ATLAS was handled, our nation must be able to navigate the foreign policy implications of this dual membership with tact and grace. We must be able to make a choice between moving forward with ATLAS as an alliance, or staying the course with LETO because belonging to both will cause more harm to eCanada than benefit. While I applaud the work and effort put into ATLAS, I do not believe the foreign policy implications were properly considered. eCanada is now faced with a problem, but also with an opportunity. While I can definitely see the benefits of either decision it is my belief that a choice must be made in the relatively near future.