𝒩𝒜𝒜𝒞𝒩
›»»02.29.2024.««‹×›»»Issue:ℕ00100022912««‹
Table of Content:
- 1.1. ‘Joint Service for Foreign Interaction & Agreements of Nasphilitae’ to be launched
- 1.2. ‘Collective Security Document’ Outline publication
1.1. ‘Joint Service for Foreign Interaction & Agreements of Nasphilitae’ to be launched
The Heads of the HM Cabinets (for External Affairs, Armed Forces, and the intelligence Agency for Identification & Documentation), Earl Quinlan Emmerson, General Peer David Atkinsons, and Peerress Madison Edwards (respectively);
Have announced on the 28th of February a plan to launch the “Joint Service for Foreign Interaction & Agreements of Nasphilitae”(hereby known as the Joint Service).
It will include both the full texts of the “Collective Security Document” and its’ methodical (but separate) supportive files of “Collective Security Document:Economic Dimension” and “Collective Security Document:Security Dimension”.
It will also serve as the official channel for interaction with both Nasphilitae as a state actor and its’ private (business, cross-cultural) entities, with other international actors (state or business/cross-cultural alike).
It is safe to assume that the reason behind the decision of a Joint Service launching is to rationalise the systemic transition in matters related to external (or foreign) policies overall.
The given estimated date for Joint Service launch is 3rd to 5th of March.
1.2. ‘Collective Security Document’ Outline publication
The HM Cabinet for External Affairs shared with us the outline of “Collective Security Document” on the 27th of February.
PART I: ASSESSING THE PRESENT ORDER OF DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN SITUATIONS NATURALISTICALLY.
PART I SECTION A: DOMESTIC INDICATORS: ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES.
PART I SECTION B: FOREIGN INDICATORS: GLOBAL CHANGES AND CHALLENGES.
PART I SECTION C: EXAMINATION & COMPARATION OF REGIONAL SITUATIONS.
PART I SECTION D: EXAMINATION & COMPARATION OF REGIONAL & GLOBAL POWERS.
PART I SECTION E: DIMENSIONS OF CULTURAL, ECONOMIC AND SECURITY.
PART II: DEFINING DOMESTIC GOALS.
PART II SECTION A: DESIRED PROJECTION OF DOMESTIC VALUES ONTO FOREIGN
PART II SECTION B: INTERSECTING MAXIMAL DESIRES WITH NATURALIST SITUATIONS
PART II SECTION C: DOMESTIC GOALS & HIERARCHY OF IMPORTANCE.
PART II SECTION D: DOMESTIC GOALS & HIERARCHY OF THE THREE DIMENSIONS.
PART III: MANIFESTING DOMESTIC GOALS, DEFINING KEY STRATEGIC PARTNERS & THEIR CLASSIFICATION:
PART III SECTION A: KEY STRATEGIC PARTNERS IN THE REGION
PART III SECTION B: KEY STRATEGIC PARTNERS AMONG REGIONAL & GREAT POWERS
PART III SECTION C: CULTURAL DIMENSION KEY STRATEGIC PARTNERS
PART III SECTION D: ECONOMIC DIMENSION KEY STRATEGIC PARTNERS
PART III SECTION E: SECURITY DIMENSION KEY STRATEGIC PARTNERS
PART III SECTION F: MULTILATERAL ORGANISATIONS & PARTICIPATION
2.1. Domestic public opinions of other cultures & countries
The HM Cabinet for External Affairs, with the help of The National Registry, conducted between the 20th and the 27th February, a Plebiscite regarding the Domestic Public opinions of other countries or “lingo-cultural groups”.
The National Registry provided statistics on fluency of foreign languages among the domestic population.
Results of both are graphed below:
(Domestic Public Opinion of Other Countries & Fluent Speakers of Languages among the Domestic population in Percentages)
2.1.1. Top three countries
The citizens still have the highest rating for Austra (98%), followed by (a relatively new) high rating of U.S.I. (86%). The third place (82% positive) is shared by a collection of countries grouped into “Almanophonic group countries” which includes those whose primary official languages are either Alman or Cimbrian, though excludes the Friean-speaking countries. This includes countries from Frastinia (such as Eflad, Gianatla, Besern…) and other regions (such as Weisserstein, Tepertopia, Emerald…)
It is estimated that a leading factor in high ratings of the top three is the lingo-cultural connection and some historical, mercantile interactions after Nasphilitae received Home Rule in 1661.
2.1.2. Great power skepticism
Among other global countries, the citizens seem to view all of them positively but with high degree of skeptcism (ranging from 21% to 10%), with Karnetvor (76% positive to 21% negative) being the most controversial.
Following Karnetvor are: Sedunn (66% to 11%), Pelinai (64% to 11%), UPRAN (47% to 10%), Huawan (35% to 11%) and Ryccia (32% to 11%).
The noticed trend is that, lest for Karnetvor, the skepticism appears to be evenly shared. Another trend is that of physical distance and knowledge of the language. As such, the three key factors which can be observed in shaping the domestic public opinions are:
-
General skepticism towards Regional & Great powers.
-
Domestic knowledge of the culture and language of those countries.
-
Physical distance between Nasphilitae to those countries.
2.1.3. Crabry countries
Speaking of physical distance, the Plebiscite included a separate ballot concerning Nasphilitae’s neighbors and other countries on Crabry.
Regionally, Tepertopia (belonging to the aforementioned group at 82%), Esfalsa (74%) and Kliegme (72%) enjoy the highest ratings.
2.1.4. NAGB
Evidently, all countries have a higher positive than negative rating, with the single exception being the NAGB; standing at 82% negative and mere 11% positive rating among the domestic public.
This isn’t a surprise when factoring in the proximity & general political instability within NAGB, coupled with the contrasting high approval rating of U.S.I.
It is also worth mentioning that the general domestic public did support U.S.I. intervention in the NAGB.
Funded by the NSBB:North-South Bridge Briefs