Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.
I'll have to look through everything (both here and on the net) but having quickly looked at wiki, it mentions fortifications and a military installation does not nesessarily have to be fortifications so they could be legal if that is right.
What wiki says is "However, in every case the Mandatory power was forbidden to construct fortifications or raise an army within the territory of the mandate, and was required to present an annual report on the territory to the League of Nations." Of course it is wiki and we all know how reliable wiki is. But like I said, I'll have to look through everything.
Quoted
Oh really? Two can play at that game. This being the case, the Republic of France wishes to lodge their own complaint against the Royal Australian Air Force for conducting underhanded and invasive surveillance of territory not belonging to them - evidence for which the French government could produce in spades. Certainly more evidence by far than Australia can produce to support their claim that German aircraft violated their airspace.
Quoted
However, the answer may lie in the fact that the territories that Germany has admitted to conducting reconnaissance overflights of, where once German territories. It is now clear to the Australian Government that Germany has designs on these territories. Recent German re-armament has focused on long-range naval operations and amphibious warfare, two military requirements incompatible for a nation with limited coastlines and no external territories. Clearly Germany intends to reclaim her lost territories and has begun preparations to do so, including basing rights in nearby nations and military reconnaissances of the areas. The calls by Germany for the revocation of the Australian mandate clearly demonstrate Germany's intentions.
Quoted
No, actually - it doesn't. Not technically. It does demand "well-being and development", however. While you can argue that well-being and development comes as a penumbra of 'defense and protection', the treaty clearly does not say that anywhere.
Quoted
I haven't read the Treaty in depth, but does it define what a military establishment is?
Quoted
Also that installation would have been/ is protected by radar and that plot would prove conclusively where the German planes were. Of course, Australia might not be able to use that evidence publicly, unless some civil use was claimed for the radar - civil airfield etc.
Quoted
The under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles Germany formally renounced its former colonies; it has no intention or desire to recover them.
Quoted
Germany is quite dependent on its alliance partners or other friendly nations for its activities in the Far East. Indeed the squadron in question was sailing from one French base to another, and does so under sufferance of that nation.
Quoted
In the real world, Russian aircraft operate in international airspace near the United States and other NATO nations all the time, sometimes provocatively. They do so legally, though the nations involved don’t like it. They may protest, but they don’t demand apologies at the United Nations and call for sanctions for just those actions.
Quoted
With respect to the Australian 'strategic facility', well, my own reading of Article 22 is that it's mute on the point of military facilities in South Pacific mandates such as New Guinea. Only the paragraph on Central African mandates appear to have a specific reference about prohibition of military bases...
Quoted
Certain communities formerly belonging to the Turkish Empire have reached a stage of development where their
existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognised subject to the rendering of administrative advice and
assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a
principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory.
Quoted
Other peoples, especially those of Central Africa, are at such a stage that the
Mandatory must be responsible for the administration of the territory under conditions which will guarantee freedom of
conscience and religion, subject only
to the maintenance of public order and morals, the prohibition of abuses such as
the slave trade, the arms traffic, and the liquor traffic, and the prevention of
the establishment of fortifications or military and naval bases and of military
training of the natives for other than police purposes and the defence of
territory, and will also secure equal opportunities for the trade and commerce
of other Members of the League.
Quoted
There are territories, such as South-West Africa and certain of the South Pacific Islands, which, owing to the sparseness
of their population, or their small size, or their remoteness from the centres of civilisation, or their geographical
contiguity to the territory of the Mandatory, and other circumstances, can be best administered under the laws of the
Mandatory as integral portions of its territory, subject to the safeguards above mentioned in the interests of the
indigenous population.
Quoted
in order for the German flights to have confidence in their finds of little or none military activity they had to have been flight very close to the 3 mile limit, and while that can be done from international airspace for Seedler Harbor, the same can not be said for Rabaul as the waters surrounding Rabaul are internal waters.
Quoted
The concept of the Archipelagic State has not yet been formed or accepted by the International Community of Wesworld.
Quoted
As an OOC note - historically, the Pacific mandates were viewed by most nations to be included in that reference.
Quoted
If this is taking place at the General Assembly, then fine; if it's taking place at the League Council, then Hedjaz and Iberia ended their terms as rotating members the previous day and I actually have no in-character voice here.
Quoted
Quoted
If this is taking place at the General Assembly, then fine; if it's taking place at the League Council, then Hedjaz and Iberia ended their terms as rotating members the previous day and I actually have no in-character voice here.
Looking at a few things, it probably is being handled by the League Council, but I could be wrong about that.
Quoted
Netherlands - probably would seek to have a definitive proof presented but would not probably believe claims of wider German neo-colonial actions at this time, would agree that Australian installations are defensive and thus allowable
Argentina - neutral, wants its resolved quickly and peacefully but takes no side, does not read installations as being offensive and thus allowed for security
Quoted
I will not make any IC comment for the UKN nations or Argentina until we're clear whether its the Council or Assembly being addressed.
OOC I am not sure if the technology of the time allowed for directly recording radar tracks.
... so unless someone has other ideas about it, I think we should assume that it is being handled by the Council.
Quoted
If there should arise between Members of the League any dispute likely to lead to a rupture, which is not submitted to arbitration or judicial settlement in accordance with Article 13, the Members of the League agree that they will submit the matter to the Council.
Quoted
The Members of the League agree that whenever any dispute shall arise between them which they recognise to be suitable for submission to arbitration or judicial settlement and which cannot be satisfactorily settled by diplomacy, they will submit the whole subject-matter to arbitration or judicial settlement.[] For the consideration of any such dispute, the court to which the case is referred shall be the Permanent Court of International Justice, established in accordance with Article 14, or any tribunal agreed on by the parties to the dispute or stipulated in any convention existing between them.
OOC I am not sure if the technology of the time allowed for directly recording radar tracks. That said, revealing radar tracks would both reveal the capabilities of Commonwealth radar systems and the specific locations of the radars. So no radar tracks will be available to anyone other than allied countries. Properly sanitized and annotated maps will be available for the council members.
OOC: You've confused me there.
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH