Membership and Decision-Making Process in Entente
The Council of Entente. The Ultimate Power
It should be vested with absolute powers within the Alliance; its decisions should override any other decision by any Entente official. The Council will consist of all core and League states. Core states have the power to veto council's decisions. Why veto?
The Right to Veto
Generally, every military alliance declares the absolute equality for its members in decision-making. By having two tiers of commitment (as stated in Declaration) Entente is doomed to divert from this absolute principle. Countries will have rights that have to depend heavily upon their commitment. Every issue is to be reviewed by the Council of Entente and the decision is to made. As an ultimate authority, the Councils decisions are obligatory for all member nations. The League of Entente (that includes the associates) should surely be also entitled to participate and vote in the Council. However, to protect core nations from unnecessary or unwanted obligations, the Core nations should have the right to veto any decision being taken by the Council, similar to the veto right vested in RL for the permanent members of the UN Security Council.
Envoys to the Council
Every nation in the Entente must appoint one Envoy to the Council. Generally, the Envoys are appointed by the President (or the President himself may serve as Envoy). The Envoys have the power to vote, expressing the will of their countries.
Core nations and League representatives have one vote in the Council. Most decision is made by simple majority of the Council. If votes are divided equally, the final decision is postponed, new discussions are to start until a compromise is reached.
Core nations share the leadership in the Council, by rotating the post of Secretary General between the countries’ Envoys. The Envoy takes the position of the SG for ten days. The exact order of succession could be decided by the Council.
SG manages all diplomatic and public relations and will be tightly controlled and guided by the Council. SG is responsible for gathering and moderating all Council meetings. Council meetings must be held at least twice for the duration of each SG’s term. Every country of the Entente has the right to demand the Secretary General to gather a Council meeting.
SG could independently appoint deputies and assistants. However, the Council reserves the right to cancel any appointment by its decision.
SG has the exclusive right to speak on behalf of the Entente and controls the organization and the newspaper. Whenever the Council believes a particular decision should be made public, the SG is obliged to publish it in the newspaper.
Secretary General does not have any control over the allied military forces and can not be the Commander-in-Chief in Entente’s campaigns for the duration of his term.
SG may declare the mobilization to start a defensive Campaign either by himself (if Entente member is under attack) or by decision of the Council (in case of retaliation).
New member are accepted both to the League and to the Core by the decision of the Council (remember the right to veto vested to the Core members)
For any member to be expelled from the Entente, at least 66% of the Council must vote for this decision and veto will not work to cancel the expelling
All members could have the right to leave the Alliance at their will. To do so, the President of a country must publish the “intention to leave” in official newspaper of his country and notify the Secretary General.
If this country is a League member, the country continue to fulfill all its obligations for 7 days.
If this country is a core member, the country needs to fulfill all its obligations within the Entente (except leading the council) for 32 days. During that time this “intention to leave” may be revoked without any further effect.
The country has to finish its involvement in all campaigns before leaving the Entente.
A notable difference between Entente and other Alliances rests in Entente's solely defensive status. It is more or less clear what happens in case of a defensive campaign. Whenever a defensive campaign starts all countries of the Entente are obliged to provide full assistance to the cause of defending the attacked ally. By default all offensive campaigns are temporarily suspended for the duration of the defensive campaign (i.e. until the peace treaty is signed).
Whenever a campaign starts the Council appoints the Commander-in-Chief to lead the campaign. Every country engaged in the campaign specifies the military force and resources (gold and/or commodity) available for the Commander-in-Chief to use. The Council provides him with the strategic advice and the list of available military forces and resources (money and/or commodity). However, the Commander-in-chief will be solely responsible for the campaign itself. Every order of the Commander-in-Chief is to be fulfilled by the country engaged in the campaign (unless such order is revoked by the Council).
There may be several concurrent campaigns, each one led by its own Commander-in-Chief. The Council has to distribute available military forces and resources between the campaigns in order of priority.
It is also clear, that every core member should maintain the right to start an offensive campaign, and ask other countries to provide assistance in such attack. Every country decides at its own discretion whether to join that offensive campaign or to abstain. No country could be expelled from Entente or otherwise punished for not joining the offensive campaign. However, once joined the campaign country must follow the orders of Commander-in-Chief of that campaign and need the Council’s approval to leave the campaign.
Additionally, in its everyday operation the Alliance might face some tricky situations worth mentioning here:
(A) An Entente member starts an attack
I believe such member should not have an unrevokable right to demand the Alliance for help in this attack. А member state must manage its attacks by itself. Surely, if and when Entente is operating as a unit (and we hope it will), the member will ask fellow states to help, which would make Entente de facto lose its exclusively defensive status. Legal consequences of such assistance provided by all Entente's members are that grave, that we should provide that no country should be expelled from Entente for not helping in the Entente's offensive.
😎After a member state attacked, it receives the retaliation from the attacked
Under the system of mutual protection, whenever the avenging forces enter the attacker's core territory, Entente is obliged to join. There is a tricky point here since the defensive alliance faces the consequences for what initially was an offensive action.
Military Campaigns and Mobilization Scheme
To solve this issue we designed a somewhat elaborate Campaign and Mobilization Scheme. The Scheme will turn the Entente from the solely defensive alliance to a defensive alliance.
As we have thought before, whenever a member of the Entente is under attack, the Council of core nations should declare the mobilization and appoint the commander-in-chief for defence. A simple and workable scheme, but we have managed to work out a better one that would give the Alliance more space to manoeuvre
In this new (and approved) scheme, whenever a member of the Entente is under attack, the Council declares a campaign for defence of the attacked country (for instance, now a campaign for liberation of France is under way). The Council then appoints a commander-in-chief to lead that particular campaign. The campaign closes only after every lost province has been returned and a peace treaty has been signed (when the defending state publicly refuses to sign peace and wants to start a retaliation the defensive campaign will also be considered closed).
So, whenever someone of the Entente (backed up by his fellow states) wants to start an attack, regardless whether to punish a country who has attacked us before or just for lulz
🙂, the council assembles an offensive campaign. Any member of Entente may join this campaign; however there will be no consequences for refusing to participate. Then the campaigning members appoint their own commander-in-chief and that guy leads the campaign.
If the offensive campaign has failed and enemy has begun its retaliation and the Entente member who started the war has his regions under attack — that becomes the problem for the particular states engaged in the campaign, not the Entente as a whole. Of course, the state then may appeal for the Council to start the defensive campaign, and the Council may vote to declare a mobilization to defend Entente's member. But, I repeat, to avoid unnecessary problems caused by a too aggressive member, in this case the Council is not obliged to start such campaign.
Every attack launched against the Entente member in the war that was declared by that Entente member counts as the retaliation of the enemy, therefore the Council has to debate the need for mobilization.
Clear provisions to determine when the Council has the right to declare the mobilization in case of enemy’s retaliation and when the mobilization is not necessary are to be worked out. Of course, mobilization needs to start when the very existence of a country is under direct threat; however, losing a region or two might be a good lesson for the attacker
There must be some time limit on when the enemy attack counts as a retaliation. Say, if there are no battles in two weeks the campaign counts "closed" and further attacks of the enemy will trigger the defensive campaign even if the war is still open in game terms.
Another thing we need to ad
😨every member of the Entente must pledge to take all available diplomatic means to stop the retaliation on a fellow country and prevent further retaliations.
There should also be a strict provision for the country that suffers from retaliation to accept any peace offer that the Council accepts. If the country asks Entente to help in defending from retaliation that country needs to surrender all diplomacy on the issue of this war to the Council.
Allied forces and treasury
It is not clear yet if Entente requires a common military force. At least we may try and build a common tank squad of 20-30 people and see how it goes
Common treasury, on the other hand, is a must. As soon as we have liberated France we must start collecting fees to use it as insurance in case of an attack – if we’d have a lot of small neutral countries, we may not be able to afford constant mpps with each other. So the money will be needed for extra mpps, tickets for moving armies (I think the tickets being far cheaper way to participate in a war than a constant mpp), starting attacks and RWs and, of course, tanking. Also we may need our own training war as soon as alliance expands.