Osiris Fraternal Order

United Imperial Armed Forces Statement for the Osiris Fraternal Order

Thursday 5th June 2014

---

From Osiris Fraternal Order's origins, the United Imperial Armed Forces has consistently sought to uphold and protect the sovereignty and interests of Osiris. Accordingly, we are deeply concerned that a very senior government official of Osiris, Cormac, the Vizier and Scribe of Foreign Affairs, has made several remarks regarding the UIAF which are misleading and highly offensive.

We cannot allow such anti-UIAF remarks, regrettably spoken by the Foreign Minister of an ally to all three regions whose militaries compose the UIAF, to go unchallenged. As such, we must register our disappointment that Cormac has chosen to deploy anti-UIAF rhetoric in this way.

First, in order to justify a non-aggression pact with The Rejected Realms, Cormac claimed that Osiris looks 'like a client state of the UIAF'. The UIAF has never attempted to interfere in the internal affairs of Osiris. No reasonable and informed analysis could ever come to the conclusion that Osiris is a UIAF client state. Only those regions and individuals who are hostile to the UIAF and/or Osiris could ever perceive that Osiris is a UIAF client state. The idea that such views reflect mainstream opinion is as offensive and inaccurate as the remarks themselves.

By pandering to such absurd sentiments, which can exist only in the minds of enemies of the LKE, TNI and Albion, the effect is to needlessly promote them. Moreover, to invoke such sentiments as a justification for signing a treaty, with a region engaged in hostilities with the LKE and TNI, publicly suggests that the treaty represents an attempt to distance Osiris from the UIAF. In view of the alliances which exist between Osiris and the regions whose militaries compose the UIAF, seeking to undermine the UIAF in this way can only be described as inappropriate and disrespectful.

Second, Cormac made a point expressly stating he believed that the appointment of 'two UIAF commanders as the senior commanders of ISRA furthers the notion that we are a puppet state.' This comment is objectionable because it suggests that the presence of UIAF commanders within an organisation means that it can then be reasonably perceived as being a puppet of the UIAF. This suggestion represents a slur on the UIAF as a whole, as well as constituting unfair discrimination against the individuals concerned. Indeed, it was such prejudice which constituted the major motivation behind the Lazarus Purge of all individuals thought to be associated with the UIAF within Lazarus.

Third, on the subject of Lazarus, Cormac seriously misrepresented the situation prior to the purge of UIAF citizens, implying that he has accepted the total fabrications of that purge's perpetrator. Cormac stated that if Osiris did not change its current path, it would 'be isolated and restricted to relations only with the tiny minority of regions' that do not see it as a puppet of the 'raider-imperialist sphere', before continuing that it would, 'in essence, be Lazarus prior to the PRL.' In terms of GCRs, considering that Osiris has just signed a treaty with The East Pacific, as well as the fact that the regions whose militaries compose the UIAF between them have alliances with The North Pacific, The South Pacific, Balder and The West Pacific (as well as Osiris), the underlying comment is obviously utterly spurious and bizarre. Yet the suggestion that Lazarus was prior to the purge as being 'isolated' from everyone other than a 'tiny minority of regions that did not believe that' it was a puppet is similarly absurd: prior to the purge, the allies of Lazarus included, for example, The Rejected Realms. Even when Griffin was Delegate, well before the purge, no one saw Lazarus, whose other members included many senior FRA associates, as an imperialist puppet.

The combination of these remarks, aimed at creating the impression that the UIAF is unduly influencing the internal affairs of Osiris, reflects a disturbing pattern. Granting credibility to smears against the UIAF to justify the making of a treaty, as well as deriding people due to their association with the UIAF, is entirely unacceptable. We hope that the remarks mentioned will be swiftly withdrawn and, if not, that the Osiris Fraternal Order will repudiate them.

We emphasise that it is for Osiris to determine whether or not it makes a non-aggression pact with TRR. It is the use of anti-UIAF rhetoric, not the making of such a treaty itself, which is causing concern. Both UIAF Imperial Command and the regional governments whose militaries compose the UIAF wholeheartedly support the Sovereignty of Osiris. Likewise, we will extend our full support to the Sekhmet Legion in all their future raiding activities. As per the treaties Osiris enjoys with the LKE, TNI and Albion, at any time we can be of assistance in the future, we will endeavour to help.

OnderKelkia wrote:Thu Jun 05, 2014 10:41 amWe cannot allow such anti-UIAF remarks, regrettably spoken by the Foreign Minister of an ally to all three regions whose militaries compose the UIAF, to go unchallenged.

To be clear, my comments were not spoken to all three regions, but rather to members of the Deshret of Osiris on the floor of the Deshret of Osiris. I sincerely apologize if my comments caused offense to United Imperial Armed Forces member regions, but the content of candid discussions in the Deshret of Osiris will not be dictated to us by any other region, ally or otherwise, and I will not withdraw my comments on the floor of the Deshret at the behest of any other region. Internal matters of Osiris are not the concern of any other region, again, including allied regions.

I will say that my comments have been misunderstood to a great degree and that it is unequivocally not my view that the Osiris Fraternal Order is either a client state or puppet of the UIAF or any of its member regions. I agree that this false perception is being propagated by ideological enemies of both the Osiris Fraternal Order and UIAF member regions, though I do not agree that those who have been persuaded to accept this false perception are necessarily our enemies but simply those who are misinformed and do not understand our regions and the relationship between them. It is my responsibility as Scribe of Foreign Affairs to dispel such false perceptions in relation to the Osiris Fraternal Order and that is what I have been attempting to do, but again, I will unequivocally state that I do not subscribe to this false perception and that it is in fact a false perception.

I hope this clarification will prove satisfactory to our allies in UIAF member regions, with which the Osiris Fraternal Order has enjoyed a close bond since its inception in December and indeed, with which Osiris has had a close bond since last July when I served as Pharaoh of Osiris and unequivocally repudiated the ideological and diplomatic barriers that had been constructed between our regions by my predecessors. If a withdrawal of my comments is necessary to satisfactorily settle this matter, however, I'm afraid that will not be forthcoming, as again we will not have our ability to speak candidly on the floor of our own legislature limited by other regions, again, even allied regions.

I do not propose to enter into a back and forth, but Cormac's response requires two points of clarification, firstly relating to the question of the UIAF's right to comment on this matter; secondly, reiterating what our criticism above actually related to (as his response focuses on the issue of whether he actually believes Osiris is a UIAF client state).

Cormac wrote:

OnderKelkia wrote:We cannot allow such anti-UIAF remarks, regrettably spoken by the Foreign Minister of an ally to all three regions whose militaries compose the UIAF, to go unchallenged.

To be clear, my comments were not spoken to all three regions, but rather to members of the Deshret of Osiris on the floor of the Deshret of Osiris. I sincerely apologize if my comments caused offense to United Imperial Armed Forces member regions, but the content of candid discussions in the Deshret of Osiris will not be dictated to us by any other region, ally or otherwise, and I will not withdraw my comments on the floor of the Deshret at the behest of any other region. Internal matters of Osiris are not the concern of any other region, again, including allied regions.

Our statement did not make any claim that that the remarks were 'spoken to' (as you put it) all three regions concerned. It stated the remarks were 'spoken by the Foreign Minister of an ally to all three regions (emphasis added).

Regardless of to whom you were speaking, it is inappropriate for a Foreign Minister make offensive and misleading remarks about an ally. If your remarks refer to the UIAF, then the UIAF is entirely entitled to challenge them.

No one is seeking to dictate to the Deshret, indeed we are quite clear that the decision on the treaty is for them alone, but just because comments are made in a legislative chamber does not grant license to senior government officials to disparage allies. If the Foreign Minister of TNI said in the TNI Diet that TNI looked like an Osiris client state and advanced the need to rebut such a ludicrous impression as a justification for making a treaty with an enemy of Osiris, that would be equally disrespectful.

If anything the fact that these particular remarks were rendered in an official context, that is when advocating for a treaty as Foreign Minister, rather than solely in a personal capacity, is an aggravating factor.

---

As for the remainder of your comments, our statement's arguments were not about whether you personally believed that Osiris is a UIAF client state (although it is clear that you apparently believed in a highly distorted version of the history of Lazarus and then presented this history in a way unfavourable to the UIAF). Rather, our statement pointed out that through your unqualified comments, for instance saying that Osiris looks 'like a UIAF client state', you needlessly lent credence to such views. You do not rebutt what you acknowledge amounts to enemy disinformation by saying that such information actually 'looks like' it is the case; that would be a laughable strategy.

Moreover, you grossly exaggerated the degree to which these views are held, claiming that only a 'tiny minority of regions' do not think that Osiris is a UIAF puppet and, worst still even, stated that 'The rest of NationStates already think we are puppets'. That is simply not the case, whether it is measured in terms of non-hostile UCRs who are active in gameplay. or in terms of GCRs (where the regions which compose the UIAF and Osiris, combining each of their alliances together, have treaties with all regions other than Lazarus, the NPO and as it stands TRR - the governments of TWP, TNP, TSP, TEP and Balder evidently do not think that Osiris is some UIAF puppet or else they would not each be in alliance with at least one of us).

Exaggerating the extent to which these views are common does not constitute an attempt to dispel myths; the consequence, intended or not, is to build up this nonsense. That applies whether or not you personally profess to accept the premise of the myth.

That this myth is then advanced in order to justify allying with an enemy of two of the regions which compose the UIAF is concerning. Osiris making a non-aggression pact with TRR is none of the UIAF's business; on the other hand, Osiris making a non-aggression pact with the stated intent of creating an impression of moving away from the UIAF in the public mind based on absurd myths is rightly of concern to us because that is not respectful behaviour within alliance. Similarly, utilising this myth to advocate discrimination against people solely due to their association with the UIAF reflects a slur on the UIAF as a whole given that the implication of this idea is that we are plotting to control Osiris. Given that the myth in question is highly insulting for the UIAF, that is a significant problem for us, hence the statement.

I am disappointed that you do not recognise that your statements were erroneous and should be withdrawn. However, it is nonetheless positive that you are expressly rejecting the underlying opinion.

Thank you for your clarifying statement. I apologize for the misunderstanding related to the language of the statement, and I apologize, again, for any offense that my comments in the Deshret caused to UIAF member regions.

I acknowledge that I should have clarified my comments in such a way as to make clear that I was not seeking to lend credence to false perceptions propagated or espoused by others, and in such a way as to make clear that the Osiris Fraternal Order has no interest in moving away from UIAF member regions. Our interest is only in correcting false perceptions by seeking closer relations with other regions of diverse ideological, political, and military backgrounds. We have no desire to create distance between the Osiris Fraternal Order and her established allies in pursuing closer relations with other regions.

I hope that our regions can move on, together, from this unfortunate misunderstanding caused by my lack of clarity, and that our regions will continue to be close allies.