WesWorld

June 27th 1940 Both the Afghani and Bharati delegations presented a motion to the League of Nations asking for their approval to support a Peace Keeping Force for Afghanistan and asked for neutral European Nations to pledge troops for this force if approved.

Both parties have agreed that something needs to be done to eradicate Persian bandits inside Afghanistan but the Afghani refusal to allow Bharati troops inside their territory forced both sides to seek external aide. Their initial choice of Germany and Turkey rejected approaches to police Afghanistan and that was the reason both delegations jointly addresed the League.

Should the League of Nations officially sanction a mission, the Republic of Ireland will offer a brigade to spearhead an Afghanistan Field Force.

[SIZE=1]Due to Irish neutrality laws, Ireland will only deploy troops with the approval of the Dail and the approval of the League of Nations.[/SIZE]

The Dominion of Canada wishes to know, in the event this request is granted....who will be paying for such a 'peacekeeping' force? International deployments are not cheap to arrange and sustain, as we have learned in Bolivia and Lithuania, and it seems hard pressed to ask nations from across the globe to conduct what sounds like policeman's work, rounding up some unruly thugs and bandits.

The Kingdom of Greece inquires as to why exactly Afghanistan requires outside military units to stop a band of outlaws? Is your own military and police so feeble that they can not handle this? Or are you saying these criminals are better equipped, trained, and led then your own forces?

You say these outlaws are Persians, yet you make no request of Persia to deal with them? We are to believe that they are ruthless criminals only on the Afghan side of the border, and on the Persian side they are angels?

Greece sees no reason to place itself in a position such as you are asking. We would recommend finding better leaders for YOUR army, perhaps then they can deal with these bandits.

To respond to the points so far:

1) Both Afghanistan and Bharat gives their thanks to Ireland for their offer.

2) In response the the Canadian inquiry the paying of the operation will be up to the League. Is either an International Force to end the presence in Afghani soil of the remaining forces of the War Criminal General Parwiz or Bharati troops having to intervene. Knowing the sensibilities of certain nations Bharat is trying to have a hands off approach.

3) To answer Greece concerns; the so-called bandits are the remaining forces of the War Criminal Parwiz. But the approach of Greece will not make a lot of friends in Afghanistan. Pretty much call them inept in front of the assembly.

OOC: Bharat is enjoying this. Afghanistan is pretty much being told you're not in the same class as Bolivia or even Lithuania. Another peach into the Empire perhaps, with the better leaders being Bharati soldiers?

permanent (10 Countries):
SAE => Player (HoomAn)
US => Player (Canis) Aye
Nordmark => Player (RB)
Atlantis => Player (Smily) Aye
UK => Player (Hood) Aye
Italy => Player (RedAdmiral)
Japan => Player (Rooijen)
France => Player (Agent148 )
Russia => Player (AdmKuznet) Abstain
Germany => Player (Bruce) Nay

non-permanent (10 Countries):
Argentina => Player (Hood) Nay
Australlia => Player (Desert) Aye
Chile => Player (Brock) Aye
Denmark => Player (CG)
Iberia => Player (CG)
Mexico => Player (Desert) Nay
Poland => Player (Marek)
India => Player (perdedor) Aye
China => Player (parador)
Canada => Player (ShinRa)

OOC; Well, perhaps you should make a more detailed presentation of the issue, and why it's before the league. We hear "Persian Bandits" and the logical response is "Why are Persian bandits in Afghanistan a concern for India, let alone the League? There's been bandits in Afghanistan since time immemorial and there will continue to be bandits in Afghanistan for as far as the future can be seen." Witout sufficient context and details, it seems like India has strong-armed Afghanistan into requesting foreign occupation for dubious purposes; The League is not a global law-enforcement agency, it is a forum for international mediation.

Comparing this request (as it currently stands) does not seem to meet the same criteria as Bolivia and Lithuania did, as both of those cases involved intervening and settling the outcome of shooting wars taking place between nations and armies in the cities and towns of those locations...rather than bandits roving the Afghani desert. Afghanistan is being told that it's internal affairs are it's own internal affairs, and 'bandits' are not within the League's purview, any more than the New York Five Families, Sicilian Mafioso, or Japanese Yakuza would be.

In short, the Indian request currently comes off as "We've told the Afghanis to beg you for troops, or else we're going to invade. For no particular reason." I don't see India gaining any support for that position.

OOC: Case is presented. Nations do their own research and vote after their own research. and if the League is not the World Police why half Europe got their ass in Lithuania?

Quoted

Originally posted by perdedor99
permanent (10 Countries):
SAE => Player (HoomAn)
US => Player (Canis)
Nordmark => Player (RB)
Atlantis => Player (Smily)
UK => Player (Hood)
Italy => Player (RedAdmiral)
Japan => Player (Rooijen)
France => Player (Agent148 )
Russia => Player (AdmKuznet)
Germany => Player (Bruce)

non-permanent (10 Countries):
Argentina => Player (Hood)
Australlia => Player (Desert)
Chile => Player (Brock)
Denmark => Player (CG)
Iberia => Player (CG)
Mexico => Player (Desert)
Poland => Player (Marek)
India => Player (perdedor) Aye
China => Player (parador)
Canada => Player (ShinRa)

I am curious as to the logic of the nations included or excluded in the list; there are several nations, with players, who are not cited.

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan

Quoted

Originally posted by perdedor99
permanent (10 Countries):
SAE => Player (HoomAn)
US => Player (Canis)
Nordmark => Player (RB)
Atlantis => Player (Smily)
UK => Player (Hood)
Italy => Player (RedAdmiral)
Japan => Player (Rooijen)
France => Player (Agent148 )
Russia => Player (AdmKuznet)
Germany => Player (Bruce)

non-permanent (10 Countries):
Argentina => Player (Hood)
Australlia => Player (Desert)
Chile => Player (Brock)
Denmark => Player (CG)
Iberia => Player (CG)
Mexico => Player (Desert)
Poland => Player (Marek)
India => Player (perdedor) Aye
China => Player (parador)
Canada => Player (ShinRa)

I am curious as to the logic of the nations included or excluded in the list; there are several nations, with players, who are not cited.

It was decided a while ago to expand RL League of Nations Council to 20. Ten permanent and ten rotating memebers.

The Government of Atlantis would like to see examples of why these "Persian" bandits warrent a policing action before voting on sending a force.
In short evidence is needed to show that these bandits are indeed a threat or if they are merely Persians who choose to live outside their native homeland which is under Indian rule.

Evidence of war crimes, cross border raids, surrectionist activity's ect. would go a long way towards painting a picture of the situation, to which the league could then discuss further.

January 21st 1940
The continued unrest in Persia caused by bandits crossing the Afghan border is a continued concern of the Persian and our own Government. In the latest atrociity a small humanitarian convoy carrying medicines east of Mashhed was attacked with heavy casualties. Both the Persian and our own Government have lodged a protest to Afghanistan asking them to stop giving refuge to those bandits.

March 12th 1940 Our government presented today an official protest to the Afghani Court for their continued sheltering of the War Criminal Parwiz. The Spokeman for the Foreign Office indicated that "the continued protection of the Afghani nation to that criminal will not be tolerated for long."

March 16th 1940 The barracks of our own 3rd Cavalry Brigade in Mashhed, Persia were attacked today by partisans that caused some damage to the installation. Casualties are unknown at this time but are considered to be light. However, the attack inside a city that was considered secure was a surprise to the Persian leadership and the BRA commanders. Suspected partisan sympathizers were rounded up for interrogation.

April 22nd 1940 With the increased Afghanistan based-partisan activity against the Persian Government it was announced today that more troops will be sent to Persia to increase the size of the BRA in the near future. This contradicts earlier news of a reduction in size of the force but the latest events have caused this decision.

May 31st 1940 Meeting between Afghani and Bharati ends with no agreement. Both sides agree the presence of the bandit leader Parwiz in Western Afghanistan is a problem but both sides will not find a middle ground in how to deal with him.

June 19th 1940 Afghanistan and Bharat agreed to cooperate to end bandit activity attacking Persia but Afghanistan requested neutral help to hunt Persian War Criminasl inside their borders instead of allowing Bharati forces to enter their territory.

Germany has long noted with concern the rising level of tensions in Central Asia occasioned by Bharati intervention in Persia. That elements of Persian society do not appreciate the tutelage of Bharat should come as a surprise to no one, nor should it be a surprise to anyone that to escape the iron sandal of Bharat they should find a home in Afghanistan.

The evidence presented to this assembly suggests that one nation has put a pistol to the head of another and given the latter the option of crying for assistance or be swallowed by invasion. If Bharat were truly interested in re-establishing peace in Persia it should remove its troops and advisors and allow the Persian people to work out a political solution acceptable to all parties; instead we see continuing Bharati occupation of key points, subservience of Persian policy to Bharati needs and Bharati threats against the sovereignty of another independent state.

To the current proposal before the League, Germany is unalterably opposed.

The delegate of the Republic of Ireland addresses the League.

"Gentlemen. As you are all well aware, the remains of the Nationalist forces in the Persian Civil War fled into Afghanistan following their defeat, and have since been re-crossing the border to attack both Indian expeditionary troops and Persian troops. These rebel forces then return to Afghan territory where they are supported by friendly tribesmen, permitting them to rest, refit, and train in encampments in western Afghanistan, particularly near the cities of Herat and Farah. While many Afghani tribes support them, the Afghan government - as I have learned from private discussions with my counterpart from Kabul - views the Persian Nationalist rebels as invaders. The Afghan government has, over the past few months, initiated some few skirmishes against the guerrilla forces but does not have the forces necessary - in quality or quantity - to ensure the successful destruction of the Persian Nationalist guerrillas.

"The legitimately recognized governments of Afghanistan, Persia, and India have stated their request for neutral forces to help the Afghan Army campaign against the Persian Nationalists entrenched in western Afghanistan. As ought to be brutally clear, the situation is clearly untenable, as Persia cannot ignore border violations from former rebel forces, nor can Afghanistan ignore the lawless use of their territory as the base for forces invading neighboring nations. I ask the members of the League what response has been the custom of European nations throughout recorded history. Would it not be viewed - with good reason - as a legitimate causus belli?

"For the past few years, as a result of the Lithuanian crisis, the Irish government has stated its willingness to participate as part of a neutral peacekeeping force, provided that force meets the neutrality laws of our government. Therefore, we request an official League sanction as the League of Nations Afghanistan Field Force, or LONAFF.

"After private discussions with both the Afghan government and others, the Irish government would like to propose a plan of operations, in conjunction with the Czech government. This plan has been proposed privately to the Afghan, Indian, and Persian governments, and has been tentatively approved, awaiting the blessing of the League.

"The Irish Army and the Czech Army have both pledged to organize a force of troops, to serve in two main roles in the LONAFF. First, our forces will help re-train the Afghan Army. Second, we intend to spearhead a campaign to push the Persian Nationalist guerrillas out of Afghanistan. Several of the involved local governments have agreed to assist with financial considerations, particularly relating to supply of the LONAFF. The Irish government, since 1936, has additionally maintained a savings fund to support a potential peacekeeping force as is proposed here, and this fund should be mostly sufficient to support the Irish force currently being considered. The Czech government is similarly willing to contribute financial resources necessary for the support of their troops.

"We request that the League members affirm the formation of the LONAFF. Please vote aye if you affirm this proposal, or nay if you oppose the formation of this unit."

Quoted

Proposed Order of Battle (LONAFF)

Irish Brigade:
- 4-6 infantry, mounted infantry, or motorized infantry battalions
- 1 artillery battalion
- 1 tank/armoured car company
- 2 air squadrons (Hurribombers, Hs129s, Avro Ansons, and Westland Lysanders)
- 1 training battalion

Czech Brigade:
- 1 dragoon regiment
- 1 motorized infantry battalion
- 2 AT companies
- 2 AA companies
- 2 artillery battalions
- 1 tank battalion

The Republic of Chile votes aye to approve the creation of the LONAFF, and will donate some supplies, but will not contribute any troops at this present time.

The Kingdom of Bulgaria expresses its approval and the Tsar offers to donate some money and supplies. (And will consider offering a company of supply and engineering troops and a field hospital, as they did in Lithuania.)

The Kingdom of Yugoslavia can appreciate the situation in which Afghanistan now finds itself. Its appeal to the League is in consonance with the purpose and spirit of the League's principles, and should be heeded.

The Irish proposal for creation of a League Afghan Field Force is well founded. The Kingdom of Yugoslavia offers to participate - providing a composite force of light infantry, security, engineer and logistics troops, and a detachment of transport aircraft.

The Irish and Czechs are amenable to Yugoslav company.

Quoted

Originally posted by perdedor99
OOC: Case is presented. Nations do their own research and vote after their own research

If you want other nations to do something, the onus is on you to convince them to cooperate. India has not presented much of a case, and not a very compelling one.

Refer to Irish Proposal. Compelling enough?

RF government have long experience of raids criminality emanating from Afghanistan, and have found that bribery, directed at local officials and tribal leaders in border areas, coupled with occasional punitive expeditions, is an efficatious method of dealing with such lawlessness.

Permanent foreign presence there strike RF government as a singularly Bad Idea.

Should other countries nevertheless deploy their armed forces to Northwestern Afghanistan, RF Armed Forces will "bail them out" if need arises.

Foreign forces deployed to other areas of Afghanistan will, unfortunately, be beyond Russia's ability to assist.