WesWorld

[size=5]The Naval Treaty of Constantinople[/size]
[size=3]Article I - Preamble[/size]
1.1 - The nations of Bulgaria and Romania, desiring to expand further upon the terms expressed in the previous Treaty of Dobrich, do hereby state their intent to enter into a treaty for the limitation of naval armaments.
1.2 - This treaty shall run from the exchange of instruments of ratification, or from January 1st, 1936, to January 1st, 1941, whereupon it shall be renegotiated or abandoned.

[size=3]Article II - Limitations[/size]
2.1 - Romania and Bulgaria agree to follow the outlines expressed in Annex A (for Romania) and Annex B (for Bulgaria).
2.2 - Both powers agree to construct vessels compliant to the text of Annex C.
2.3 - The construction of a vessel for foreign clients is not covered under this treaty, provided that adequate communication is provided to the other contracting power about the nature of the construction.
2.4 - In the event of one of the contracting parties becoming involved in a war with a non-signatory power, the treaty shall be viewed as suspended for the duration of hostilities. Upon the ending of hostilities, the belligerent will be required to make its forces compliant with the relevant limitations, or abrogate the treaty if it cannot.
2.5 - Definitions shall be found in Annex F of this treaty.

[size=3]Article III - Enforcement[/size]
3.1 - The contracting powers will endeavor to maintain transparent communications necessary for ensuring the continuation of this treaty.
3.2 - In the occasion either contracting party wishes to denounce the treaty, then it shall deliver a formal statement to the other contracting party to that effect.
3.3 - If a party withdraws from this treaty, the party responsible will be required to paint on their vessels an identification symbol known as "Mr. Frowny Face" in the popular parlence, colored #FF00AA in the hexidecimal color system. The symbol must be painted on bows, decks, and turret tops, large enough to be easily visible and recognizable from aircraft.
3.4 - This treaty shall be published in Bulgarian, Romanian, and English, the texts of which shall be viewed as equally authentic. In the event of a dispute the English version shall be used to settle the dispute.

[size=3]Article IV - Other Articles[/size]
4.1 - Bulgaria and Romania agree to share information regarding marine search-and-rescue, weather information, and navigational hazards in the region of the Black Sea.

Quoted

[size=3]Annex A - Romania[/size]
Romania may possess:
Capital ships: Unlimited capital ship tonnage (light tonnage)
Heavy/Armoured Cruisers: 34,000 tons (light tonnage)
Light Cruisers: 32,000 tons (light tonnage)
Destroyers: 32,000 tons (light tonnage)
Torpedo Boats: 15,000 tons (light tonnage)
Coast Defense Ships/Monitors: 6,250 tons (light tonnage)
Submarines: 6,250 tons (light tonnage)

Quoted

[size=3]Annex B - Bulgaria[/size]
Bulgaria may possess:
Capital ships: 50,000 tons (light tonnage)
Heavy/Armoured Cruisers: 27,000 tons (light tonnage)
Light Cruisers: 25,000 tons (light tonnage)
Destroyers: 25,000 tons (light tonnage)
Torpedo Boats: 10,000 tons (light tonnage)
Coast Defense Ships: 5,000 tons (light tonnage)
Submarines: 5,000 tons (light tonnage)

Quoted

[size=3]Annex C - Vessel Restrictions[/size]
C.1 - Neither side will build or buy a capital ship of over 25,000 tons light, or with guns larger than 15".
C.2 - Neither side will build or buy a coast-defense ship larger than 2,000 tons light.
C.3 - There will be no limit on:
------ Craft of under 700t light
------ Minesweepers of under 1,000t light
------ Sail-training vessels of any size
------ Unarmed freighters, tugboats, lighters, trawlers, lightships, or any other vessel or craft armed with any gun smaller than 20mm.
------ Any Landing Craft or Landing Ships not covered by the above.

Quoted

[size=3]Annex D - Current Romanian Navy, 1935[/size]
Capital ships: 14,986 tons (41,506 tons building)
Heavy/Armoured Cruisers: 25,720 tons
Light Cruisers: 3,549 tons
Destroyers: 19,268 tons
Torpedo Boats: 2,655 tons
Coast Defense Ships: 0 tons
Submarines: 1,520 tons[/b]

Quoted

[size=3]Annex E - Current Bulgarian Navy, 1935[/size]
Capital ships: 23,022 tons
Heavy/Armoured Cruisers: 0 tons
Light Cruisers: 3,349 tons (13,886 building)
Destroyers: 0 tons
Torpedo Boats: 11,369 tons
Coast Defense Ships: 0 tons
Submarines: 0 tons

Quoted

[size=3]Annex F - Definitions[/size]
For purposes of this treaty, measurements are made by Light Tonnage only.

With out Turkey participating this treaty has no gains for Romania

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
With out Turkey participating this treaty has no gains for Romania

Actually there is a yet-to-be-announced bit that will address that.

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
With out Turkey participating this treaty has no gains for Romania

Your correct, the treaty as it stands does not impede Turkey in any way shape or form. Curiously enough, Turkey and Romania both have 6 IP factories (though that will probably eventually change). However, I never set out to impede Turkish shipbuilding in any way, realizing such a path would get me nowhere without also trying to impede Greek shipbuilding (and thats probably out of the question). Though the Treaty of Dodrich is very popular in Romania, Bulgaria does remain the #2 potential enemy due to the fact that they are militarily stronger than any other potential enemy except Russia. Therefore, this treaty is one step closer to good ties with the Bulgarians.

As I understand it, Turkey has been trying to come to a 5:4 or a 5:3 ratio with Greece for some time, but the Greeks are a bit cagey on such limitations (per the recent Greek news). As part of the discussions, there was a suggestion that Turkey not deploy anything above a 5:4 ratio to Romania to the Black Sea, which is already met AFAIK. That treaty/gentleman's agreement is outside my purview; I simply wrote the treaty Bulgaria's involved in.

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
With out Turkey participating this treaty has no gains for Romania

Your correct, the treaty as it stands does not impede Turkey in any way shape or form. Curiously enough, Turkey and Romania both have 6 IP factories (though that will probably eventually change). However, I never set out to impede Turkish shipbuilding in any way, realizing such a path would get me nowhere without also trying to impede Greek shipbuilding (and thats probably out of the question). Though the Treaty of Dodrich is very popular in Romania, Bulgaria does remain the #2 potential enemy due to the fact that they are militarily stronger than any other potential enemy except Russia. Therefore, this treaty is one step closer to good ties with the Bulgarians.

I have ofcourse very limited interest in what is going on in the Black Sea but if I were Romania I wouldnt sign an agreement that doesnt include Turkey or at least limits the Turkish tonnage in the Black Sea (this of course is of dubious value)

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
With out Turkey participating this treaty has no gains for Romania

Your correct, the treaty as it stands does not impede Turkey in any way shape or form. Curiously enough, Turkey and Romania both have 6 IP factories (though that will probably eventually change). However, I never set out to impede Turkish shipbuilding in any way, realizing such a path would get me nowhere without also trying to impede Greek shipbuilding (and thats probably out of the question). Though the Treaty of Dodrich is very popular in Romania, Bulgaria does remain the #2 potential enemy due to the fact that they are militarily stronger than any other potential enemy except Russia. Therefore, this treaty is one step closer to good ties with the Bulgarians.

I have ofcourse very limited interest in what is going on in the Black Sea but if I were Romania I wouldnt sign an agreement that doesnt include Turkey or at least limits the Turkish tonnage in the Black Sea (this of course is of dubious value)

Why not?

If your referring to the Turkey/Bulgarian alliance, as of right now, the alliance in question is more of a gussied up mutual defence pact. If Bulgaria breaks Dodrich and DOW on me, technically according to Part III, article 2 of the Turkish-Bulgarian alliance, this does not mean Turkey is at war with Romania as well. However, Poland, and the Yugoslavs automatically are. The same goes in reverse, if I DOW on Bulgaria. Poland and Yugoslavia are not necessarily involved, but Turkey is.

The word to pay attention to here is "technically", remember that Turkey has NO agreement with Armenia/Axerbaijan and yet is willing to go to war for them (but not for Smyrna..). So if they are willing to war for nations that they have no ties to, do you think they will turn their back on an ally?

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
The word to pay attention to here is "technically", remember that Turkey has NO agreement with Armenia/Axerbaijan and yet is willing to go to war for them (but not for Smyrna..). So if they are willing to war for nations that they have no ties to, do you think they will turn their back on an ally?

In my opinion its a question of who's stronger. While I am sure the Turks would like Smyrna back, then they'd have to fight the Greeks who are stronger in this timeline. However, while I am sure that Turkey would offer full military support if Romania were to invade Bulgaria, Im not so sure that if Bulgaria is the aggressor they would be so eager to support them, remembering the stance they took on Romania's support for an aggressor (Poland) six WW months ago. Not to mention the international condemnation aimed at Romania would I suspect be then aimed at them. This is all hypothetical however, Romania is NOT going to break Dodrich, unless attacked, and the Bulgarians no longer have any reason to.

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
I have ofcourse very limited interest in what is going on in the Black Sea but if I were Romania I wouldnt sign an agreement that doesnt include Turkey or at least limits the Turkish tonnage in the Black Sea (this of course is of dubious value)

Romania is not Persia, they have come to an amicable agreement with their neighbour Bulgaria with reguards to territorial borders. That removes any fears of war for Turkey. Also Turkey has no interests in Romanian territory.

We've explained this to Romania after lengthy talks between all three nations and their fears have been adressed, dispite efforts by Persia to paint Turkey as a backstabing nation.

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
The word to pay attention to here is "technically", remember that Turkey has NO agreement with Armenia/Axerbaijan and yet is willing to go to war for them (but not for Smyrna..). So if they are willing to war for nations that they have no ties to, do you think they will turn their back on an ally?

Smyrna's a losing battle, Turkey simply recognises it lacks the military strength to attack Greece with possible help from GB. Armenia and Azerbaijan are a different story. Turkey assumes that Atlantis and Russia wouldn't be too pleased if Persia decided to "Anex" Armenia and/or Azerbaijan so its a much more winnable war, even without their help.

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
This is all hypothetical however, Romania is NOT going to break Dodrich, unless attacked, and the Bulgarians no longer have any reason to.

Exactly. The peaceful return of Southern Dobruja has removed any need for Bulgaria to fight Romania, and Bulgaria is set on keeping its part of a treaty.