The Aleriona representative answers thirteen questions on 3V and flaunts his knowledge that thirteen is regarded as an unlucky number on Earth. He mentions the thirteenth who betrayed or the thirteenth who was killed. He does not mention that the Knights Templar were suppressed on Friday October 13 1307 but we know this from Anderson's "Death and the Knight."
The French representative in the World Parliament makes a thirteen point speech. Can I summarize it?
1. The Peace Control Authority, vested with sole military power, must prevent aggressive acts and the individuals responsible must be tried by the World Court.
2. Earth is a sovereign state because it has authorized the space naval branch of the PCA to act outside the Solar System and has negotiated agreements with alien races.
3. Alerion has committed territorial aggression by attacking and occupying the humanly colonized planet, New Europe.
4. If Alerion is not a sovereign state, then the PCA must act against Aleriona banditry.
5. If Alerion is a state, then either (a) it is obliged to refrain from territorial aggression or (b) it is not so obliged because it is not a member of the Federation.
6. If (a), then Alerion is subject to military sanctions by the PCA. If (b), then the PCA must protect the interests both of individual human beings and of Federation member states.
7. In either case, there is now an automatic state of war between Alerion and the Federation.
8. Member states are obliged to assist the PCA.
9. There is a duty to provide armed assistance to the New European colonists although no member state may make or own nuclear weapons.
10. Individuals may acquire such weapons outside the Solar System.
11. A member state may authorize a private military expedition. The banning in 1856 of letters of marque and reprisal is binding on signatories to that treaty but these do not include the Federation, which is a sovereign state (point 2), or some of its members, like the USA.
12. The Federation can issue letters of marque and reprisal.
13. In accordance with 7, 8 and 9, France can and should issue letters of marque and reprisal in the name of the Federation and has done so.
Points 4, 7 and 13 are greeted with uproar.
At some stage, we must cease to argue about what needs to be done and begin to do it. Anderson illustrates this point dramatically. The privateer is almost out of the Solar System by the time that Parliament is informed about it.
Is the argument valid? I would say that France has a duty to argue in Parliament that the Federation should either deploy the PCA or issue a letter of marque, not that France has a duty to issue a letter in the name of the Federation, knowing that most (all but one?) member states disagree with this or at least have not yet voted on it!
However, the argument is an excellent device for doing what must be done in the circumstances. It is all too easy to read through the argument quickly, then to move right on to the action-adventure passages. Every part of Anderson's text deserves to be studied (there is no other word for it) with equal care and attention.
3 comments:
Hi, Paul!
Yes, I would agree that as a matter of strict law the weakest part of Coquelin's speech in the Federation Parliament was Point 13. But, there was just enough doubt and uncertainty that Heim could argue that he was not a pirate but a lawful privateer. To say nothing, of course, that Coquelin's speech was designed to get the things that needed to be done in MOTION.
Sean
The situation in "Marque & Reprisal" is as if some country outside of NATO attacked a NATO country & the rest of NATO declined to defend the NATO country.
Since Ukraine is not a NATO country I suppose the support it is currently getting in repelling the Russian attack is about the most reasonable thing to do.
Kaor, Jim!
Unfortunately, that assistance may be inadequate, Putin is superior artillery and fire power to grind down the Ukrainians. The war has become one of attrition and the winner will be the one who doesn't collapse first.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment