Eternity RPC Board
07-29-2019, 02:25 PM
"If you allow me a few words before we can continue, Mr. Lisle", Minister Borislav Zahovek said. "I'll be brief, my aim is not to obfuscate the discussion".
"We are rather disappointed to hear what could only be described as crude and cheap propaganda from the Nerysian delegation", he said. "I can only hope that we are able to build a common understanding in which in 17th-century Brigidina, shooting to peaceful demonstrators, throwing your citizens into torture chambers, and bombing your own cities is not understood as a legitimate exercise of your sovereignty. Our peoples deserve better than that".
"I can only hope that Mr. Dubius' rant was not a sudden change of Nerysian policy", Zahovek continued. "We are not here to decide the future of any country or state, but as he misrepresented the Mordvanian position I can not help but clarify it: We haven't supported any "separatist rebellion", neither our government nor Iossilin government are opposed to the Kaljuran sovereignty and territorial integrity. On the contrary, our hopes aim that such sovereignty can exercise by the Kaljuran people after successful negotiations and through democratic elections. The only way to achieve that is through negotiations as established in the Denil Accords. As Mordvanian foreign minister, I will never call, neither in public nor in private, West Kaljurand's government -despite their evident institutional flaws and abuses of human rights- to be "wiped off the face of Brigidna", rather I call them to sit in the negotiation table so n united, peaceful, and democratic future can be built for the Kaljuran people. I hope, Mr. Dubius, that your government can be a force for good and do the same".
"As I said before", Zahovek added, this time looking at Lanlanian delegation, "we are not here to decide the future of any country. However, I can only ask Mr. Jonassen, that it's maybe it's time for the Holy Lanlanian Empire to reconsider their, maybe well-meaning but unpractical, decision. It has been 20 years since the end of the war, and citizens in East Kaljurand have continously and successfully expressed their voice through free and fair elections, building stable and democratic instutions. Their success can't be ignored. I don't expect an answer here, obviously, it's not the reason why we are here -although an united and democratic Kaljurand would certainly help to build a more stable Brigidna, there is no doubt in that-, but it's my hope that your government will reconsider its position in the coming future".
"But as returning as the real issue of our discussion here", Minister Zahovek continued, "despite our obvious disagreements, we believe that we can build a more stable Brigidna through cooperation in some important issues, such as security. There is much we can gain from inter-regional law enforcement cooperation, sharing security and even sharing intelligence, to fight organized crime, terrorism, and so on. While national sovereignty is a typical concern when such cooperation is proposed, there are other risks as well. It would be contrary to that established and desirable aim if we are not careful to build a system which is not abused for different aims. We can't waste our time, our resources, or the integrity of our constitutional order, to persecute crimes that are only imaginary in the minds of bureaucrat from a police state, or even worse, does not even exist in our legal system. That is why we propose building a rules-based system, something that I believe nobody can seriously oppose".
"We are rather disappointed to hear what could only be described as crude and cheap propaganda from the Nerysian delegation", he said. "I can only hope that we are able to build a common understanding in which in 17th-century Brigidina, shooting to peaceful demonstrators, throwing your citizens into torture chambers, and bombing your own cities is not understood as a legitimate exercise of your sovereignty. Our peoples deserve better than that".
"I can only hope that Mr. Dubius' rant was not a sudden change of Nerysian policy", Zahovek continued. "We are not here to decide the future of any country or state, but as he misrepresented the Mordvanian position I can not help but clarify it: We haven't supported any "separatist rebellion", neither our government nor Iossilin government are opposed to the Kaljuran sovereignty and territorial integrity. On the contrary, our hopes aim that such sovereignty can exercise by the Kaljuran people after successful negotiations and through democratic elections. The only way to achieve that is through negotiations as established in the Denil Accords. As Mordvanian foreign minister, I will never call, neither in public nor in private, West Kaljurand's government -despite their evident institutional flaws and abuses of human rights- to be "wiped off the face of Brigidna", rather I call them to sit in the negotiation table so n united, peaceful, and democratic future can be built for the Kaljuran people. I hope, Mr. Dubius, that your government can be a force for good and do the same".
"As I said before", Zahovek added, this time looking at Lanlanian delegation, "we are not here to decide the future of any country. However, I can only ask Mr. Jonassen, that it's maybe it's time for the Holy Lanlanian Empire to reconsider their, maybe well-meaning but unpractical, decision. It has been 20 years since the end of the war, and citizens in East Kaljurand have continously and successfully expressed their voice through free and fair elections, building stable and democratic instutions. Their success can't be ignored. I don't expect an answer here, obviously, it's not the reason why we are here -although an united and democratic Kaljurand would certainly help to build a more stable Brigidna, there is no doubt in that-, but it's my hope that your government will reconsider its position in the coming future".
"But as returning as the real issue of our discussion here", Minister Zahovek continued, "despite our obvious disagreements, we believe that we can build a more stable Brigidna through cooperation in some important issues, such as security. There is much we can gain from inter-regional law enforcement cooperation, sharing security and even sharing intelligence, to fight organized crime, terrorism, and so on. While national sovereignty is a typical concern when such cooperation is proposed, there are other risks as well. It would be contrary to that established and desirable aim if we are not careful to build a system which is not abused for different aims. We can't waste our time, our resources, or the integrity of our constitutional order, to persecute crimes that are only imaginary in the minds of bureaucrat from a police state, or even worse, does not even exist in our legal system. That is why we propose building a rules-based system, something that I believe nobody can seriously oppose".