Crisis of Confidence
Day 2,249, 05:20
•
Published in Canada 
•
by
•
by Alias Vision
“Far too many people continue to jabber about a supposed 'special relationship' between our two countries.
I used to think that no such thing existed. Recently, I have become convinced that it does, and that it is in fact a Specially Bad Relationship.”
-Peter Hitchens
So we are at war and it is going well. In fact, although we all hoped for success (preferably early and often), we all readied ourselves for a setback and even a wipe.
Then yesterday a bombshell hit the media with the official announcement that TWO was disbanding. Suddenly the war effort gets interpreted differently, enthusiasm rises and we spend the appropriate funds to make concrete in the field what we've convinced ourselves in our minds.
You will please forgive me a little rain on the dawn of this parade as I wish to speak to a crisis of confidence. This crisis is not in the Canadian Executive (although they are not off the hook either) but rather is directed to our standing on the international scene.
When Canada performed an air strike on Estonia our opponents reacted, both in the field and in the media. The impact of our actions continued to have ripple effects as the tide of the campaign turned and we were pushed out. This matters, this means that our efforts were perceived as legitimate (if completely misguided).
When Canada decided to invade the UK what a difference in the way the New World responded. TWO in general, and the UK specifically, gave a monumental shrug of the shoulders. In fact, one of the few UK citizens that even bothered the make the effort to comment on the situation stated unequivocally that nobody cared. That's pretty harsh. This continues and we can see it in the media. Canada is predictably concerned with the war and the articles reflect that. The English media on the other hand has the necessary mention of the conflict in the CP update... but it's almost an afterthought. There are no other articles of any substance on it. They lost one region, soon two, and there is still a generalized sense of boredom with what we are doing over there.
The optimists will say it is because of the collapsing alliance. This may be partly true and how temporary of a pulling back of influence will give us the best clue whether or not this is happening. The pragmatists will rather point to the fact that even with two region defeats, we have done virtually no harm to the UK, its ability to wage war and to a great extent to its economy. This will continue to be true until and unless we reach London or cut the island in half.
But what if the real story here has more to do with realpolitik and the global position of UK in the New World. You don't need to be an international expert to realize there is more alliance building/leading experience in the UK than pretty much anywhere else. Certainly the highest ratio of accomplished diplomats with far ranging contacts that can have immediate and devastating impact on the fate of countries like Canada.
The first quote above by Hitchens was in relations to the UK and US. I'm appropriating it here in the New World for Canada and the US. I put it there because of the rumour already making the rounds that the core of a new alliance will comprise the US, UK, Poland and Spain. All of those nations represent direct threats to Canada.
And when we talk about the US and changing alliances, you have to think that Croatia, Albania, B&H and to a lesser extent Pakistan, if not officially aligned will at least informally always form a front.
Who do we have on our side to balance that out? More importantly who do we have that will selflessly throw all their resources our way when the time is crucial to do so?
The collapse of TWO is only news in the sense that it is official. You would have to be incredibly naive not to realize that the power brokers have known the jig to be up days, weeks... likely months in advance. That is the head start that they have. While we are becoming aware that everything is shifting now, many of those shifts have already happened although they have yet to be consummated. Canada needs to be active on this front.
I'm in Congress and I'm not aware of any concerted effort on the foreign affairs file. We are extremely lucky that we have the friends and allies that we do but at what table will we be sitting at tomorrow and next week?
Historically, virtually ever since most New World nations matured, Canada and the US have sat at the same tables. Although never a super power, we always were part of the conversation. This time? Do we even know where the tables are?
As Canada prepares to be surrounded by the 2nd, 11th, 13th and 16th military powers respectively, we need a plan. Since we can't rely on old ties, new ones should be considered. All options need to be open to us. And we need to go back to our own roots as alliance builders rather than the limbo we've found ourselves in rather too often lately.
Finally, remember the quote below. It is time that Canada got a little more serious and a little more dedicated. Our alliance future and the health of our population numbers depend on it.
“Nations are guided only by their own interests and have no obligation to other countries which did not conform to those interests.”
― Indira Ghandi
I used to think that no such thing existed. Recently, I have become convinced that it does, and that it is in fact a Specially Bad Relationship.”
-Peter Hitchens
So we are at war and it is going well. In fact, although we all hoped for success (preferably early and often), we all readied ourselves for a setback and even a wipe.
Then yesterday a bombshell hit the media with the official announcement that TWO was disbanding. Suddenly the war effort gets interpreted differently, enthusiasm rises and we spend the appropriate funds to make concrete in the field what we've convinced ourselves in our minds.
You will please forgive me a little rain on the dawn of this parade as I wish to speak to a crisis of confidence. This crisis is not in the Canadian Executive (although they are not off the hook either) but rather is directed to our standing on the international scene.
When Canada performed an air strike on Estonia our opponents reacted, both in the field and in the media. The impact of our actions continued to have ripple effects as the tide of the campaign turned and we were pushed out. This matters, this means that our efforts were perceived as legitimate (if completely misguided).
When Canada decided to invade the UK what a difference in the way the New World responded. TWO in general, and the UK specifically, gave a monumental shrug of the shoulders. In fact, one of the few UK citizens that even bothered the make the effort to comment on the situation stated unequivocally that nobody cared. That's pretty harsh. This continues and we can see it in the media. Canada is predictably concerned with the war and the articles reflect that. The English media on the other hand has the necessary mention of the conflict in the CP update... but it's almost an afterthought. There are no other articles of any substance on it. They lost one region, soon two, and there is still a generalized sense of boredom with what we are doing over there.
The optimists will say it is because of the collapsing alliance. This may be partly true and how temporary of a pulling back of influence will give us the best clue whether or not this is happening. The pragmatists will rather point to the fact that even with two region defeats, we have done virtually no harm to the UK, its ability to wage war and to a great extent to its economy. This will continue to be true until and unless we reach London or cut the island in half.
But what if the real story here has more to do with realpolitik and the global position of UK in the New World. You don't need to be an international expert to realize there is more alliance building/leading experience in the UK than pretty much anywhere else. Certainly the highest ratio of accomplished diplomats with far ranging contacts that can have immediate and devastating impact on the fate of countries like Canada.
The first quote above by Hitchens was in relations to the UK and US. I'm appropriating it here in the New World for Canada and the US. I put it there because of the rumour already making the rounds that the core of a new alliance will comprise the US, UK, Poland and Spain. All of those nations represent direct threats to Canada.
And when we talk about the US and changing alliances, you have to think that Croatia, Albania, B&H and to a lesser extent Pakistan, if not officially aligned will at least informally always form a front.
Who do we have on our side to balance that out? More importantly who do we have that will selflessly throw all their resources our way when the time is crucial to do so?
The collapse of TWO is only news in the sense that it is official. You would have to be incredibly naive not to realize that the power brokers have known the jig to be up days, weeks... likely months in advance. That is the head start that they have. While we are becoming aware that everything is shifting now, many of those shifts have already happened although they have yet to be consummated. Canada needs to be active on this front.
I'm in Congress and I'm not aware of any concerted effort on the foreign affairs file. We are extremely lucky that we have the friends and allies that we do but at what table will we be sitting at tomorrow and next week?
Historically, virtually ever since most New World nations matured, Canada and the US have sat at the same tables. Although never a super power, we always were part of the conversation. This time? Do we even know where the tables are?
As Canada prepares to be surrounded by the 2nd, 11th, 13th and 16th military powers respectively, we need a plan. Since we can't rely on old ties, new ones should be considered. All options need to be open to us. And we need to go back to our own roots as alliance builders rather than the limbo we've found ourselves in rather too often lately.
Finally, remember the quote below. It is time that Canada got a little more serious and a little more dedicated. Our alliance future and the health of our population numbers depend on it.
“Nations are guided only by their own interests and have no obligation to other countries which did not conform to those interests.”
― Indira Ghandi
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
"You don't need to be an international expert to realize there is more alliance building/leading experience in the UK than pretty much anywhere else."
True facts. I've first-hand witnessed great successes in Peacegc and Phoenix thanks to the effort and planning of some UK players. They're in general much more rational than the Balkan-style leaders that are focused on 'my country needs more resources'. I don't think they're as good as they were back then though.
It's about time you resumed writing! 😉
yep, we are children in this area....actually we might just be children in general 😃
meh.... who cares....
Whens my next free Power Spin and what do the prizes on next weeks challenge look like?
It's good to know you can always be counted on.
So your a smart guy... you see no value whatsoever in being proactive here? I guess you're in a pretty unique position where you don't need to consider or care what others do and say. However, for the silent majority of the Canadian community... alliances will matter. What the leadership of Canada decides to do or not do will matter. It will have a direct consequence on activity and if we have the ability to retain people.
Mine is more a commentary that the scales have tipped to the point that more people (in the game) are more concerned with ranking their individual player up than the macro goal involving their entire country - I echo the sentiments of J.Canuck below...
If you told me, and most other eCanadians that in any given 3 month span we could fight for 4 weeks and be wiped for 2 months, or sit idle for all 3 months and be whole, I am convinced most of us would choose the fighting/wipe option - This game is stagnant enough as it is, and too few people get off on make believe diplomacy and forum posts
I'm waaay on the outside looking in but I think you're applying old assumptions to a world that we all used to know but that no longer exists. It doesn't seem that anyone takes the game as seriously as we used to and careful maneuvering, long term thinking and stability aren't desirable or even necessary given some of the recent game changes. Stability = boredom. I haven't followed them much recently but it seems the eUSA has become utterly fickle and its probably why many of their long-time, big-time players have left them, some even landing here in l'il old eCan. You can't have a relationship with someone who is just looking for cheap thrills and a good time on a moment by moment basis. If we're honest we'd have to admit we're becoming a bit like that ourselves. Plato too for that matter. Power Spin anyone?
I won't disagree in broad terms but only to say that some are in fact thinking long term. Have already made plans and are maneuvering every day. My argument is that maybe it's time to reverse that trend a little, for our own sake and to preserve our ability to explore different options in the future. If you are only fickle then eventually that is the only card you are left to play. That get's boring real fast as you end up isolated.
Exceptional article, although with Sweden and France jumping in as planned, this will get much bigger. I do agree though, although we have a war front, our second front is on the diplomatic side of things of which we must tread carefully.
o7 We need to secure our standing with the US and work on changing our image in front of Spain. Otherwise we are done.....
worst thing that can happen is we get wiped which isn't really a bad thing because moar war and True Patriots \o/
~hyuu~