Fandom

Alternate History

Treaty of Dandiri (Principia Moderni III Map Game)

40,500pages on
this wiki
Add New Page
Talk0 Share

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

The Treaty of Dandiri was an agreement between the Borealian State of Australia and the Empire of Germany, signed in the city of Dandiri (OTL Brisbane) in January, 1929.

Borealia invites any member of the Union of Borelia and Hesperia and her allies to participate in these negotiations.

Terms

  • Germany will release New Mecklenburg as a totally independent state by 1938
  • Both Germany and Borealia will reserve special rights for oil drilling and military basing in New Mecklenburg
  • Borealia will allow the State of Australia to be annexed by New Mecklenburg by 1940
  • Until that time, New Mecklenburg will be under joint protection between Germany and Borealia
  • Germany will pay reparations to Australia as consequence for the rash military mobilization in 1928
  • The nations signing this treaty may vote at any time proposed on whether any of the proposed time tables be altered

Signatures

Borealia invites any other nation that feels affected by this decision to sign as well

Discussion

Haha, no. We never agreed on New Mecklenburg joining Australia in 1940. You never even brought that up. Nice try tho. I was Normandy in PM2. It was great. (talk) 03:27, July 16, 2015 (UTC)

Yeah. It's fairly clear from the in-game negotiations that independence was stipulated by Bavaria, and accepted by Borealia. Here is the 1929 exchange (emphasis is mine):

  • Bavaria-Germany supports the stance of the federal government, and is willing to extend joint rule by ten years. HOWEVER, after that ten years, the New Mecklenburg government will be allowed to go independent in 1938/9.
  • Borealia accepts Bavaria's proposal as long as, being in joint control of the region, it retains the same military and oil rights as Germany.

It would be, I would think, impossible to infer an agreement for Neu Mecklenburg to join the State of Australia from that. Callumthered (talk) 12:30, July 16, 2015 (UTC)

I don't believe reparations are called for, seeing as the mobilization was a defensive one, and nothing to pay reparations for actually happened. I am that guy (talk) 12:54, July 16, 2015 (UTC)

Um, the part about merging Australia was part of the agreement made with Hamburg back in 1887. It's just returning Australia to control by New Mecklenburg. Also, the military mobilization was certainly disruptive to the region, and entirely uncalled for as Germany could have requested an extension of the joint rule at any time.Nathan1123 (talk) 13:22, July 16, 2015 (UTC)

(Nathan said I could jump in) Andea would like to point out that Germany's actions have disrupted world trade and undermined German integrety. 

  • German Dip: In response to Borealian betrayal, and a bogus accusation of imperialism, Germany will be officially severing communications and relations with Borealia for an indefinite amount of time. Furthermore, Germany will officially proscribe Borealia as a state enemy.
  • Borealian Dip: We present an ultimatum against Germany, to no longer be recognized as an enemy in return for joint control of New Mecklenburg (east and west) and full annexation in 20 years.
  • German Dip: We agree to accept the ultimatum in order to end the war.

Germany clearly agreed to cede New Mecklenburg, in which case Germany should be the one attempting negoiations, not Borealia. Furthermore Germany's mobliziation clearly shows that Germany anticipates war, and there refusal to consider the terms of this treaty continue to show a hostile Germany. #PraiseRoosevelt. 15:40, July 16, 2015 (UTC)

I'm with edge here. I've been nice enough to bend as far as I have.

I have no issue with Australia reunifying with New Mecklenburg, seeing as the lease on it expires in about a decade. The only thing I don't agree with is the reparations. If the reparations provision is taken out, I'd be happy to sign. I am that guy (talk) 20:58, July 16, 2015 (UTC)

As guy said, there is absolutely no need for reparations. And secondly, I'm not going to allow a document to be signed that allows New Mecklenburg to be absorbed literally two years after it goes independent. Sorry that IATG said otherwise, but myself and Cal would not have New Mecklenburg be absorbed after only two years of independence.

I'm proposing a new treaty:

  • Germany will release New Mecklenburg as a totally independent state by 1938
  • Both Germany and Borealia will reserve special rights for oil drilling and military basing in New Mecklenburg
  • Germany will protect New Mecklenburg's independence for thirty years, until 1968. Germany will thus be obligated to defend New Mecklenburg if it comes under threat of annexation or exterior influence. 
  • The signatories of this treaty may vote at any time proposed on whether any of the proposed time tables be altered

I was Normandy in PM2. It was great. (talk) 21:16, July 16, 2015 (UTC)

This is preposterous. You're just extending control over New Mecklenburg another 30 years. You can't change the agreement you yourself proposed. Regardless, Borealia will be returning Australia to New Mecklenburg when the lease expires, regardless of whether it's in the treaty. Nathan1123 (talk) 21:24, July 16, 2015 (UTC)

Tbh, there is a difference between protecting the independence of a state, and directly controlling it. With the former, there's none of the interfering with its internal politics, and the state in question is able to make independent domestic and foreign policy decisions. All the while, the state who is guarding its independence would be obliged to defend it in the event a threat to it arises. Nevertheless, 30 years is quite a long time, what do you two say to roughly ten or fifteen years before the obliged protection expires?

Also Cookie, as clarification, Australia would be absorbed by New Mecklenburg, not the other way around. The land currently administered by Borealia is on lease from the government of New Mecklenburg, and that lease is due to expire in about a decade, so the State of Australia would revert back to New Mecklenburgs jurisdiction.

I am that guy (talk) 21:35, July 16, 2015 (UTC)

Revised Treaty

So, since we discussed on chat:

  • Germany will release New Mecklenburg as a totally independent state by 1938
  • Borealia's lease on the State of Australia will be set to expire in 1940.
  • After above lease expires, the independent New Mecklenburg will absorb the independent State of Australia.
  • Germany and Borealia will protect New Mecklenburg's independence for ten years, until 1948. Germany and Borealia will thus be obligated to defend New Mecklenburg if it comes under threat of annexation or exterior influence. 


So what you're saying is that in 1940, an independent Neu Mecklenburg will gain the territory of the State of Australia, rather than the other way round? If that was the original meaning of the words in the above treaty I apologise, I interpreted it as being Australia annexing Neu Mecklenburg. Perhaps we might change the wording of the relevant section to something like "the territories of the State of Australia will be ceded to Neu Mecklenburg in 1940", just to make it less ambiguous. I also agree that safeguarding an independent Neu Mecklenburg's independence is very different from maintaining control (think the guarantors of Belgium's independence from 1830-1914). Callumthered (talk) 22:05, July 16, 2015 (UTC) Okay, well what I just said became redundant very quickly. Callumthered (talk) 22:09, July 16, 2015 (UTC) 

Borealia will not bend to Germany's will any further. Either accept the original terms of the treaty or we will be forced to take action. Nathan1123 (talk) 22:36, July 16, 2015 (UTC)

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki