Author Topic: The Steele Lectures  (Read 1104 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Achkaerin

  • Lord Chief Justice
  • Global Superpower
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,967
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: the Holy Empire of Achkaerin
The Steele Lectures
« on: January 03, 2022, 04:13:04 PM »

The Steele Lectures

Named after Doctor Donna Steele (Achkaerin's representative to the CETO), the Steele Lectures are explorations of thought, explanations of theory or events and discussions of ideas that don't find themselves in news reports, broadcast on television across Mundus. Taking something of a lecture format in the main though other formats have been used the Steele Conversations aim to inform and inspire people across Mundus.



OOC - A rip off/variation of the Dimbleby Lecture, I'm going to try for about one a month and see how it goes.

Online Achkaerin

  • Lord Chief Justice
  • Global Superpower
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,967
    • View Profile
  • Your Nation: the Holy Empire of Achkaerin
Re: The Steele Lectures
« Reply #1 on: January 03, 2022, 09:23:21 PM »


"Marrying War and Peace in the Laws of the Sea" by Admiral Lucas Harper, Jan 2022

"Good evening, tonights lecture was written before recent events in the Kyne took place and I'm aware that based on my topic for this lecture people will be curious of my opinion, so I will touch on recent events later. It's an honour to be invited to give a Steele Lecture. I am Lucas Harper, I'm a serving admiral in the Achkaerinese Navy, I have commanded warships for nearly twenty six years, both in peace time and during times of war and crisis. Tonight I hope to communicate through some of my personal experience how we marry war and peace time in respect of the Law of the Sea when the methodology employed is so different. There are many concepts to initially consider, the Law of the Sea as embodied in the Fair Seas Concordat is a treaty negotiated by political figures, I'm not a politician I'm an officer with a responsibility for the safety of my crew and there are plenty of means I have at my disposal to do that, the end goal is to be able to take sensible steps to protect those we're responsible while staying true to the FSC.

So a good starting point is perhaps to look at the maritime history of Mundus. The notions of freedom of navigation, of innocent passage didn't just spring up in 2013 when the FSC was put together they've existed for a very very long time, the FSC simply puts them into an international treaty, but they've been around for a while you can find references to the practice as far back in time as the twelfth century in relation to the journey of the Knights Hospitalier from Vanora to Seaforth, but it's not really a concern until we look at when it is challenged by the actions of others. In the main here we're talking about measures employed in a time of war in particular 'exclusion zones'. Let's be clear what an 'exclusion zone' is - it is a declared zone where in the flag state conducts military activity and wherein it usually endangers the safety of foreign vessels entering into it. One of the first examples of this kind of zone can be seen in the Fushiri Wars of the early 1700's, where Peninsular forces declared much of the Rokkenjiman Sea as such a zone with the apparent intent of keeping non combatants away from the war. Now such a zone was enforced with relative ease because the nations that would have been affected by it were the belligerents in that instance. Fast forward to the Great War and you have the Ardian Empire declaring much of the Krimeon as one of these zones, in that instance self defence was cited. The problem with such zones historically is that theory and practice don't line up a fair amount of the time, when you engage in warfare at sea you have three groups of vessels - friendly vessels, enemy vessels and neutral vessels the theoretical intent of an 'exclusion zone' is to keep the neutrals out thus allowing a war to be fought without endangering the non combatant but this doesn't work because it comes down to geography, if you declare an exclusion zone in the western area of the Kyne you are drastically hindering the passage of merchant shipping which has knock on effects for businesses. You also have an unfortunate tendency on the part of the belligerent to target indiscriminately any vessel in such a zone. So we have clear issues with what rules govern naval conduct in a war situation. Ye

So the question becomes how do we marry the war time practices with the peace time practices? In 2002 I reported to the Senate's Defence Committee a guide as it were on this the very question. My ambition was to present a way to guide officers during war time in their obligations, mindful of history the guide[1] included a list of recommendations to apply to 'Exclusion zones' firstly that the same body of law applies both inside and outside the zone - therefore if the FSC applies outside the zone it applies inside the zone which is a common sense point, secondly the extent, location and duration of the zone and the measures imposed shall not exceed what is strictly required by military necessity and the principles of proportionality, if declaring a zone for protection it need only extend a distance from the vessel to be able to say that a threat can be responded to and not in that instance a large swathe of ocean, thirdly due regard shall be given to the rights of neutral States to legitimate uses of the seas is self explanatory, fourthly necessary safe passage through the zone for neutral vessels and aircraft shall be provided where the geographical extent of the zone significantly impedes free and safe access to the ports and coasts of a neutral State and in other cases where normal navigation routes are affected, except where military requirements do not permit, again this is self explanatory and falls within the principles of the FSC. Fifth and finally the commencement, duration, location and extent of the zone, as well as the restrictions imposed, shall be publicly declared and appropriately notified. Again this is common sense if you don't announce a zone you can't be surprised when people don't comply through unawareness. These are reasonable steps that states seeking to establish such a zone can easily take.

I said I'd touch briefly on the current Kyne situation and here I go. Based on what I've just said Rokkenjima very nearly complies with the reasonable steps they just fall short at the last hurdle. However again I stress that this guide has no legal foundation it is at this point advisory, perhaps one day it will, who knows. Rokkenjima may choose to come visit me next time I get some shore leave and discuss this further, maybe we'll see international attempt to institute similar guidelines alongside the FSC because these measures are always going to be on the table, what needs to happen is establish an understanding of how they are to be implemented in a manner that inconveniences as few neutral nations as possible. But I would say this if you were to use this guide to establish justification for an 'exclusion zone' you would also be agreeing with a document that would arguably and I stress the word arguably justify the action taken by the Iwi that prompted this whole affair. For just as you cannot impose war time law on peace time law you cannot impose peace time law on war time law. There must be a marriage of the two achieved through balance. Thank you."
 1. 
« Last Edit: January 04, 2022, 01:12:04 AM by Achkaerin »