Germany, PEACE, and Neutrality

Day 609, 17:27 • Published in Germany Germany • by Chicco

[img]http://s3.images.com/huge.49.247948.JPG[/img]

Dear members of the German community,

I see that Gobba recently presented his case for joining PEACE to Congress. Obviously his post contains a fair amount of spin and I think BBJ and HuCard have been doing an excellent job debunking it. Although it is important to get the facts straight, I decided to take a slightly different angle in this article: what would be the effect of joining PEACE on the German community, and how would the obvious tensions in our community affect a potential membership of Germany in PEACE?

There has never been a collective sense of belonging among eGermans. There is the PEACE camp and the anti-PEACE camp, and then there are those who flow with the tide. However, at no point since I became active in this community has there been a real consensus on where Germany stands. This divide gives rise to a number of important questions and considerations.

Can Germany ever be a trustworthy ally to PEACE?

Although the Swedish allegations against us were contrived, the fact remains that the German community had always harbored pro-PEACE elements, and this lent credibility to the Swedish claims that Germany had been a lousy ally and even the source of a number of ATLANTIS leaks. Conversely, if Germany joined PEACE, anti-PEACE sentiments would linger and undermine the German membership in much the same way.

For example, even if the current administration is a relentless cheerleader for PEACE, how can anyone be sure that the next government will not reverse course? And the government after that? Gobba may have taken 73% of the vote in the last elections but the cynical might point out that he ran without serious opponents. Especially with the upcoming citizenship module allowing for absentee ballots, the large number of German expatriates, who are predominantly opposed to PEACE membership, will start voting again and shift the political landscape.

As PEACE likes to say, they are not an alliance but a "family". Well, not only does the prospect of joining that "family" make many of us cringe, but every family has its black sheep, and I have the feeling that Germany is going to be it. Not because the German community is inherently disloyal or treacherous, as we have been called time and again. But because we are divided, and the perceived lack of loyalty is a mere symptom of that. Perhaps, then, it is best to concede our internal divisions and embrace the logical alternative: neutrality.

Can Germany ever become an equal member in PEACE?

PEACE liberated Germany from Sweden and Poland not out of sympathy or magnanimity. Anyone following the recent events would have to be blind not to recognize that Germany's liberation served strategic purposes relating to PEACE's war in North America. First, Hungary gained access to a region bordering Canada, and second, PEACE secured its flanks by eliminating borders with Sweden and Poland.

Italy's actions in particular provide a taste of how Germany is going to be treated in PEACE. Italy liberated three minor German regions: two with the help of Indonesian tanks, and one as a result of Poland retreating from the battlefield. Next, Italy demanded cash and goods worth 950 gold in exchange for Bavaria, a region which they had not even conquered but, in fact, had received through region swaps with Austria and Hungary (battles #1, #2, and #3). That is not covering their costs. That is extortion.

This administration has been selling its renewed relationship with PEACE as a diplomatic masterpiece, when, in fact, it was not so much diplomacy but a loose wallet: 300 gold to settle Germany's debts with Indonesia (out of Sebl's pocket) and 950 gold in protection money to the Italian bag man (out of your pocket). Right now PEACE is on top and the money may look like a sound investment, but the game remains fluid and there will come a time when even the mighty PEACE GC will wither. And when between a rock and a hard place there is little doubt that this alliance will sell Germany down the river.

And why shouldn't it? The rest of the New World has spent the past one and a half years building relationships and mutual trust. For various reasons Germany has not been able to participate in this. To make up for lost ground this administration is trying to build (and pay for) relations with countries that have been traditionally hostile toward us. Hasn't our brief stint in ATLANTIS demonstrated that this is at best an exercise in futility, and at worst a recipe for disaster? Shouldn't we rather direct our efforts at deepening our relations with countries that have shown genuine sympathy toward Germany? That's Canada for starters. But even the Americans whose administration has disappointed but whose Congress and population have been overwhelmingly friendly to our cause during the Swedish invasion. And as much as I hate to admit, even Hungary merits to be mentioned here. Is any of these countries going to demand that we join their respective alliance in exchange for extending relations? I think not. And although it will be difficult to maintain relations with countries on different sides of the aisle, neutrality could make it possible.

Will membership in PEACE widen the rift in the German community?

Many of the older players who have been around long enough to see not only the ugly face of ATLANTIS but also the ugly face of PEACE, never returned to Germany after having been forced into exile by the recent war. (This exodus is so extreme that a mere 1550 XP suffice to rank among Germany's top-10 players.). There are a number of reasons for this but an important one is this administration's submissive attitude to PEACE. The government's job is not only to protect (in this case restore) the country's territorial integrity but also to maintain the unity of the community. Bearing in mind that this is a game, I actually believe that the latter carries far more weight. Sadly, this administration has dealt much damage to our community by discrediting and alienating almost everyone who served in government before them. Why was this done? On the one hand, to settle personal scores, and, on the other hand, to placate PEACE. Joining PEACE would be yet another insult in a string of insults to a large and vital part of the German community. For many eGermans living in exile, joining PEACE may be the final straw prompting them to quit the German community for good.

Obviously joining ATLANTIS was a mistake. But not only because of the unfortunate wars that have transpired but because a significant part of the German community did not support this decision. This administration is only too keen to remind Germans of that mistake in an attempt to vilify the anti-PEACE camp. While some of this criticism is justified, the irony is that they are on the verge of committing the exact same mistake. It is neither fair nor wise for such a small community to permanently alienate a large and active part of it. To join PEACE would not be learning from past mistakes.

Is neutrality a viable option?

Anyone who hasn't been completely brainwashed knows that there were valid and compelling reasons NOT to join PEACE back in March. Faced with neutrality or joining ATLANTIS, the government chose ATLANTIS. This was not an act of betrayal, but borne out of the notion that neutrality was not a viable option. But is it? While I am not privy to the conditions, if any, that Hungary attached to its MPP with Germany, entry into PEACE does not appear to be one of them. As long as Hungary is willing to extend its MPP with Germany, neutrality remains on the table. In addition, other countries may be willing to sign MPPs with a neutral Germany. The option of neutrality should be explored and not dismissed off-hand in favor of the ruling clique's personal alliance preference.

Admittedly, neutrality comes with a major disadvantage, which is that gameplay suffers a great deal. This is because a neutral country cannot engage in war. However, keep in mind that thanks to the Italian demands, Germany is not going to be in a position to fund an army for several months to come anyway. Those who want to fight are no worse off just fighting on their own. Alternatively, they can join a foreign army on their preferred side, as I did and as many others did. That is not an act of treason. It's an act of gameplay.

It has become apparent that many younger players born during or shortly before the recent war just want protection from Sweden and Poland and do not care about much else. This is understandable but let us also come up with a long-term strategy to secure Germany its rightful place among the eRepubliks which it has so long been denied. As always, viewpoints are clouded by personal affinities and personal histories, and this article as well as the discussion in Congress are no exceptions. Hopefully, however, this article will help stimulate a broader discussion on this important topic.

~Chicco