WesWorld

Britain would join any international inspection party of POW camps etc. but its official viewpoint is both sides need to come to some agreement and seek a ceasefire. Britain has no desire to become 'involved' in this war and would frown upon any nation actively sending military aid (probably by now Mexican and Japanese involvement is going to be hard to hide or deny). A peacekeeping force seems unlikely given the full-scale total war hostilities which were somewhat missing in Lithuania, Afghanistan and Bolivia.

Quoted from "Daidalos"

Quoted from "snip"

Quoted from "Brockpaine"

We really need to get more of the players together in the right time period, rather than being strung out across nearly a year and a half.

This

Then stop rushing into the future....

I can't come up with a non-aggressive way to respond to this.

The American delegate stands:

"Friends, with the admission by the Chinese government that they have violated the Geneva Protocol signed and ratified by all nations in 1925, it seems clear that sending unarmed inspectors into China to inspect POW camps may be unwise. After all, do we trust that harm will not come to these brave men whom we send into harms way? I therefore propose we await further developments. As well, I wish to chastise the Japanese government for allowing such a deplorable situation to occur. The Japanese government has long wished to be seen as an equal to the Great Powers, yet cannot control two former allies. Japan quite clearly cannot be taken seriously as the leader of the Asian powers, or as anything more than a regional power, and should not be a permanent member on the League Council if it cannot control affairs in its own front yard."

...okay...

I'll be honest. While I am of the opinion Japan should be controlling the situation more, there's no way France will support that sort of stance, unless we want to turn the League into a new Euro-club.

Quoted from "Brockpaine"

...okay...

I'll be honest. While I am of the opinion Japan should be controlling the situation more, there's no way France will support that sort of stance, unless we want to turn the League into a new Euro-club.

I would have to agree. Japan could have, or perhaps should have, acted to moderate the situation, but that only goes so far. It seems that China and Chosen decided to pursue their present course despite all outside influence. This is the decision of the two players involved. Germany would not support such a call.

But Japan is already "moderating" the situation. Almost 40.000 men in the Donggang area (with Chosen uniforms). Furthermore I am getting a decent amount of arms from Japan. What else do you expect?

Quoted from "Daidalos"

But Japan is already "moderating" the situation. Almost 40.000 men in the Donggang area (with Chosen uniforms). Furthermore I am getting a decent amount of arms from Japan. What else do you expect?

Adding fuel to a fire - for whatever reason - is hardly moderating. Japan has apparently made the best of a bad situation and decided to back one side against another.

"Personally, Japan believes that such a disgusting, disrespectful and distasteful statement and attitude by a League of Nations member towards another League of Nations member should result in an immediate ban from the League of Nations... but that is just our opinion which most likely isn't shared by other [non-US] nations. Still, the americans should get a slap on the wrist for that since it is this kind of talk that may drive wedges into the League of Nations and destroy its credibility and perhaps even lead to the destrution of the League of Nations itself.

"The americans also like to think that all nations ratified the Geneva Protocol in 1925 which is a clear indication of their ignorance and arrogance rather than their lack of information and intelligence. It should be noted that Japan ratified nothing in 1925. What makes you think that China and Chosen have done so?"

Mumblings to aide: "Go fetch a ruler just in case the other nations agree to give the americans a slap on the wrist."

(Note: Normally I would write 'Americans' but the use of 'americans' without a capital 'A' here is an indication that Japan has currently lost all the respect it had for the US (well the tiny bit that still existed))

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoted

Adding fuel to a fire - for whatever reason - is hardly moderating.

That is probably why he said "moderating" and not moderating.

Even so, given Japan, Chosen and China are part of the same treaty bloc, it might have been expected as the leader of that bloc Japan would have attempted to keep the peace within SATSUMA.
This seems not to be the case (though I see no clause in the Treaty that prevents a signatory invading a fellow signatory) and indeed Japan has taken sides with its Chosen puppet/appendix nation over China.

Perhaps it could be clarified if China is still considered a member of the SATSUMA treaty?

Britain does not back Japan losing its seat. Britain never saw Japan as a reliable Asian lead nation and indeed has so often been indifferent towards its own allies. Even so, Asia must be represented and substitution would not be easy or desirable. Had China remained part of this body then perhaps the war could have been discussed here and prevented from spiralling out of control.

Speaking out of character here:

It is important to distinguish between the players and the country being played. It is my opinion that Parador and Daidalos desired to conduct the conflict now being played out; whether Walter was consulted before or during is an open question - but in either case the combatant players are in no way obligated to obey the senior partner of the alliance.

That said, I believe that Japan has tried to subtly influence the thinking on Pyongyang and in Beijing, without much success. It's apparent decision to intervene on behalf of Chosen is logical given the strategic situation and the far longer historical ties between Japan and Chosen. Trying to blame the conflict on Japan's inaction is quite inappropriate, and attempting to toss Japan from the League unrealistic.

Seconding the above.

OOC: Your taking what was said and taking it out of context. Read what the American said rather than what you think he said. The US never anything about kicking Japan from the League. Nor did it make a formal proposal to remove Japan from anything. The representative is voicing the opinion of the US government regarding Japan's handling of this situation. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the opinion of the United States is entirely up to you. If one cannot voice the view of one's government in this area then what is the point of having this sort of body?

OOC: The US statement was a subtle suggestion that the LoN should consider doing that and not actually stating directly that the LoN should do that. At least that is how I read it.

OOC: No, not quite. To provide some clarification here is a line by line analysis of what the American representative was actually saying;

"Friends, with the admission by the Chinese government that they have violated the Geneva Protocol signed and ratified by all nations in 1925, it seems clear that sending unarmed inspectors into China to inspect POW camps may be unwise. After all, do we trust that harm will not come to these brave men whom we send into harms way? I therefore propose we await further developments."

This is fairly self-explanatory. The US government notes that the original note from China said that the Chinese government is complying with the Geneva Convention which prohibited the use of gas in warfare. It is the viewpoint of the US government that one cannot cherry-pick the articles of war and still claim to be in compliance. The American view is that awaiting further developments is the wiser course.

As well, I wish to chastise the Japanese government for allowing such a deplorable situation to occur. The Japanese government has long wished to be seen as an equal to the Great Powers, yet cannot control two former allies. Japan quite clearly cannot be taken seriously as the leader of the Asian powers, or as anything more than a regional power, and should not be a permanent member on the League Council if it cannot control affairs in its own front yard."

This was written in an inflammatory way deliberately to instigate discussion, and was in fact toned down from the original draft. What the Americans are really saying if one puts aside the inflammatory rhetoric is "Japan, we expected more from you seeing as this is happening right next door, and you've come up wanting in our view."

IC:

The American representative rolls his eyes at the Japanese member's antics.

"Disrespectful it may have been, but it did serve its purpose. Japan is hardly innocent when it comes to inflammatory rhetoric either. The point still stands, and a more productive question could be asked perhaps. What has Japan done with its substantial influence in the region, its economic and military might, its alliance system to prevent this conflict from happening, and to keep it from escalating to its present point? There are after all numerous options Japan has to maintain the status quo in the region, which from the view of the United States would seem to be advantageous to Japan. And therein perhaps is the real charge to be laid at the feet of Japan; in your nations inaction what has transpired is to embolden those who perpetrated this conflict whomever they may be, thereby disrupting trade and economic activity in the region, and getting a lot of people killed needlessly. Japan in the past has sought to be a leader, and by its past accomplishments has however grudgingly gained the respect of the other Great Powers. Yet one does not lead sitting on one's hands."

As the debate on the Manchurian situation continued the Philippine delegate, Don Luis Varela, received a note from an attaché; he scanned it and raised an eyebrow. He raised a hand and waited for the President of the Council to recognize him.

"I have received a report from my Government's consular authorities in Japan that indicates that the Government of Chosen has transferred the flag of one of its major naval vessels, the aircraft carrier Chosen, to that of Japan while in Japanese territorial waters. I call upon the Chosenian and Japanese representatives to address this flagrant breach of neutrality."

"I also call upon the League to consider Japan to be a disputant party in this matter."