1960's EU Emergency Meeting (Dawn of War Map Game)

If you are not part of the European Union you are not allowed to view this meeting under any circumstances.

This is the page for the first emergency meeting of the European Union in the Dawn of War Map Game. All current members of the European Union are invited to the meeting. The meeting is held in Rome. All members of the EU can vote on issues, discuss, and make proposals. This European Union meeting will last until 1970

Death to the Federation

British Proposal: The Federation of the Americas must be destroyed at once. It is time that this excuse for a democracy (that supports nationalism, may I add) is broken up once and for all. We think that now would be the best time to take them down since they are distracted in Southeast Asia and have lost a large amount of their armed forces.

• First we will take the Netherlands since that is our main priority at the moment.
• We will lead an invasion (along with the United States, NATO, and the British Commonwealth whom I am sure would be eager to join) of the east coast surrounding Brazil and Northern South America.
• The UK will continue to distract them with the war over British Borneo and the USA with Indonesia.
• Since no rules have been made for nuclear weapons we will each launch one at a designated time on key Federation areas.
• We will bomb and overthrow Federation forces in Cuba.
• Should Spain revolt and begin attacking us we will surround them and begin a naval blockade. French, Portuguese and Andorran armies will invade them until they surrender.
• It is unlikely that Turkey will attack but if it does we will bomb the country and send nuclear warheads via Israel.
• Israel will cut off Saudi Arabia's passage through to Europe.
• South Africa and India will most likely not attack since they are peaceful nations and part of the Commonwealth.
• Add more terms and talk about this in support and please think about it very carefully before you oppose and if you do give good logical reasons for doing so.
• Forget about all these terms for now since this operation has not been set in stone.

Voting: CLOSED

Support:

• The United Kingdom: Too long this beast has looked down on the European Powers and thought of us as nothing but weak, crumbling, empires. We refuse to allow this nation to condescend us any longer.
• Italy: Though reluctant to do so, we agree with the idea, though for different reasons. Italy was never one of the European powers, so if it was resentful to anyone for mocking its strength, it would probably be the very people it's currently allied with. However, there already is a world war going on, and the US and the Federation have already caused untold amounts of destruction throughout East Asia. This may lead to devastation to both sides, but that devastation has already become inevitable. We act now or we wait for this war to stop, which will take many more years and thousands more casualties. This ends here. The Federation stops its aggression or it feels the might of those it has threatened and mocked as weak. VIVA EUROPA!

Oppose:

• French Dip: The French warn that this will only lead to tragedy and put their foot down. Should the UK go to war with the Federation they are on their own. We should focus on bringing the rest of the Europe into the EU umbrella and from there project our power abroad like in the old days.
  • Italy Dip: If you want to prevent another world war, you're out of luck. The best we can hope for is to make it end as quickly as possible by forcing a Federation surrender now instead of in ten years.
• Germany: We don't want to be involved in a foreign war.
• British Diplomacy: We do agree with France that we should focus on the Netherlands foremost and the EU also but the Federation is a venom that is slowly eating away at our beautiful planet. Allowing it to continue its reign of terror is foolish. Everyone stands against whether they state it or not. North America hates them. (Most of) the Commonwealth hates them. And I know that we all hate them. The Federation has an army of only 400,000 (with half that in Indonesia currently suffering from casualties. Only around 200,000 are still in the mainland making this a perfect opportunity), only half that of the United Kingdom's, but facing the Federation alone is suicide. We can not sit back and continue to watch as they feed nationalism and separatists movements in perfectly stable colonies. Don't believe me? Just look at Southeast Asia! The Federation (and SDP for that matter) pushed and continues to push us out of the area leading to major instability. We admit it may have been ambitious to think that we could very easily take them down but please do consider embargoing and placing sanctions on them as a first step for now. Update: It has been confirmed that the USA will join the operation. This is pretty much what I told him (I'm only putting it up here to add some reasons as to why we should strike the FoA now):H ey I was wondering if you would be willing to help in a possible invasion of the Federation of the Americas. Before you say no hear me out. 1) The Federation currently has around 400,000 soldiers according to the nation page, half of which are currently in Indonesia and suffering from severe casualties. Meanwhile, we have about 800,000 troops and only about 50,000 are in Southeast Asia. We do not know how many soldiers you have but we do know that we already outnumber the remaining Federation forces in the mainland. 2) They are ultra-nationalists and think they are the superior superpower. This facade must end and true democracy needs to become dominant once again in South America. 3) International support. I am still trying to work on getting members of the EU to get on board (I am sure that Israel and Portugal would probably be eager to become involved in the conflict since the Federation and members of the SDP have wronged them). But I know for a fact that the British Commonwealth, Canada and Australia in particular, hate the Federation and are in extremely strategic locations. 4) We have the upper hand in nuclear weaponry although I hope and pray that this would not have to be used but since no one wishes to meet and make rules for the use of them we could possibly use them (but it is very doubtful). 5) If you are willing to do this we will help in rebuilding the nations after the Federation breaks up. 6) Cuba should be our first place to start. Once it is taken it can become a territory of the USA or an independent nation once again (after this we can begin an invasion of the East coast of the Federation while Australia secures Mexico since they most likely will join in the battle). We hope you consider this as this is the perfect time to attack them. They are at their weakest and currently distracted by us in Sabah and you in Indonesia. It is time we crushed the monster that is the Federation of the Americas.

Outcome: France went and told anybody so it's doubtful that this will ever happen but it needs to. The Federation needs to stop butting into European Affairs that it has no business being a part of.

Acting in the Best Interest of the European Union

French Proposal: Over the last decade or so the EU has become too aggressive to maintain a united front with so many different geopolitical goals. The French propose that each member state of the European Union be allowed to enact their own foreign policy independent of majority decisions but to maintain a common defence of Europe should it be threatened by external forces (i.e., one of the other major powers.) Paris also proposes that there be no distinction between founding nations and countries that joined the union later as this gives to much influence to the British. On a final note the The French propose that the European Union distance itself a bit from the greater conflicts occurring amongst democracies and focus more on bringing the Eastern European countries into the Euro sphere and away from Soviet oppression. 

Voting: CLOSED

Support

• France
• The United Kingdom: We think that your ideas are good but policies regarding the SDP should all be agreed upon and enacted by every EU member (i.e., ending trade between us and Saudi Arabia in order to crush them and the SDP). And we've had no higher influence in the EU but we have been acting like the de facto head of it so we apologise for that. Other than that we completely agree with your proposal. The European Union should stay out of any conflict that is not taking place in Europe but in order for us to do this we must end the conflict in the Indonesian area first, which we need help in doing so.
• Italy: We do agree with the idea that Europe should maintain a common defense in the face of a major power, though it should be agreed upon that all of Europe is threatened by said power and that all of Europe is willing to contribute (where all of Europe, in this case, pertains mostly to the EU).
• Germany

Oppose:

Outcome: Proposal Passed.

Support in Southeast Asia

British Diplomacy: We would like for every EU member to send a small amount of troops to the conflicts in Southeast Asia. 10,000 to the Americans in Indonesia and 5,000-10,000 to us in British Borneo. Honestly consider before saying no because if we allow the Federation and Philippines to win then their ego will grow dramatically and they will continue to think of the other powers as weak and incapable of stopping it.

Voting: CLOSED

Support:

• The United Kingdom
• Italy: Expect some Italians in Soviet uniforms within the year. Logistics for this will be a nightmare, but we will at least try.
  • Scratch that. We got our own thing going on.

Oppose:

• France: The French feel for their Anglo-American allies but with the growing tensions in Europe France must focus on the Warsaw pact. 
  • British Diplomacy: We ask you to please reconsider because if the Federation wins they will continue to think that they are better than the other superpowers (which includes you). May we also mention that this conflict could easily escalate to Indochina. If a nationalist party rises there the FoA would send their support and tear the land apart like they've done with Indonesia.
• Romania: As much as we'd like this, we cannot contribute, as we are currently threatened by the Warsaw Pact.
• British Diplomacy: We understand your situation and therefore exempt you from serving for the time being. We will still be willing to help you though if it is needed.

Outcome: WW-IV is over, I guess.

Kicking France from the EU

British Proposal: France has leaked top secret information that was only meant to be known by EU members and the USA to everyone. They have become unpredictable and we fear that they may disclose more key information to the enemy so the only way to stop them from continuing this is to kick them out of the European Union.

Voting:

Support:

• The United Kingdom

Oppose:

• ​France: it is the British which have become unpredictable the whole point of the EU is to unite Europe and promote peace on the continent for this we must bring an end to the Communist Bloc instead of fighting against another democracy. despite tensions with the fed peace can be reached. 
• British Diplomacy: We will not go to war and focus more on Europe if you erase your message to the world about what we were planning. That foolish move could bring war to Europe and North America. We also would like for you to pull your weight in the invasion of the Netherlands.
• French Dip: The French will not withdraw its statement as it is time for the allies and the federation to come to terms and the French will be the key to this. On another note, the French demand that drastic reforms to the EU structure be put forward, this will be overseen by a table of British, French, German and Romanian delegates.
• British Diplomacy: Unfortunately that is never going to happen. We will never come to terms with the Federation. We've tried and tried and tried but now WW-IV is happening. They are not a democracy by the way, but an Ultra-Nationalist Democracy. And just what exactly are the reforms you think the EU needs?
• Romania: We say that everyone makes mistakes and that the French have a second chance. Plus, we are allied with the USA within NATO, so I don't see any problems in that.
• British Diplomacy: What does the USA have to do with anything? I'm sorry your message isn't making much sense to me ...
• Italy: While we have agreed to British decisions in the past, removing France from the EU is going too far. We do agree with the fact that they have leaked information about the planned invasion of the Federation (and especially the fact that they omitted our proposed contribution), because it has allowed for a peaceful solution, which was what we were looking for in the first place. (We as in Italy) We also agree that Britain is beginning to get out of hand.

Outcome:

EU War on Communism

French Dip: the fears we have held for so long have come true: the Soviets have launched a full scale invasion of an EU member in an effort to restore their declining fortunes. It is time for the EU to take a stand and fight back the Communist force with all its strength. The French propose that all EU members put forth a 2.5 million strength with French will provide the bulk of to liberate Eastern Europe from Communist oppression and put an end to Soviet pretensions of power in Europe. We also propose a united effort to aid our Romanian allies who now face the full brunt of Soviet aggression.  The time for Europe's resurgence as a united force has finally come.

Voting: CLOSED

Support:

• France
• The United Kingdom: Lately the members of the EU have grown apart and sound as if we are enemies rather than allies but this could be an event that will change all that. What we need now is unity. I retract my proposal to kick France since it is very foolish as they are one of our greatest allies and it was only made because we were angry. We are now glad that France made their announcement because peaceful talks have begun and if we had gone to war with the Federation we would now be divided on two fronts, fighting against two huge empires (I don't care if they say they are against imperialism they are an empire). We are providing support at the moment in Indonesia and the Netherlands although both these conflicts are drawing to an end soon. We will make a blockade of the North sea for now and begin sending more troops to Romania and through Germany.
• Italy: We'll meet you in Moscow after we liberate the Balkans. We have a score to settle, and an ally to protect, there.
• Germany

Oppose:

Outcome: Never happened I guess cause this got retconned or something ._.

Cutting Off Trade

British Proposal: Due to the terms of a previous proposal all EU nations are to cut off trade and invest in EU-friendly oil producing nations (i.e. Canada, USA, Libya, Kuwait, Kurdistan, Iran, Iraq, etc.). We would like to take that further and make it so we completely stop trading with all SDP members (with an exception of India and Turkey since they are pretty neutral and willing to negotiate with both parties). They offer very little that we want or should need and they've effectively added a tax of 20% to foreign trade. We will give them what they want: autarky, and watch them slowly crumble.

Voting:

Support:

• The United Kingdom

Oppose:

• Romania: We disagree, as we want to trade with any nation we want. Not to be opposed. The world needs peace, not war.
  • British Diplomacy: This is in no way a war. We simply would like everyone in the EU to cut off trade with the SDP since they are charging so high. We do not want anyone to be in debt to the Federation or any other members.
• France

Outcome:

Neutrality of the EU

British Proposal: I think that the EU should focus on Europe rather than global affairs. We are not the League of Nations nor the United Nations (two organisations which have become total failures). We are the European Union and will focus on what's going on in our continent. Not the Americas. Not Asia. Not Africa. But Europe. As Italy once stated, "Viva Europa!" Update: The EU should not become involved in a world war unless it takes place in Europe or the Middle-East.

Voting:

Support:

• The United Kingdom
• Italy: The second proposal is entirely different from the first. The second we can get behind, though might be updated to "unless it takes place in areas directly and provably important to Europe" or "to members of the European Union" to take into account such things as a nascent superpower invading most of Africa or Eastern Asia. Also, provisions might be taken to allow independent foreign policies, such as, say, Switzerland deciding it needs to invade the USSR on its own. (These might be ridiculous examples, but they are just that: examples.) (Watch as South Africa develops superweapons within the year because of this.)
• Germany: We support the idea that the EU should be focused specifically on Europe and there was a previous French proposal that passed that allows members to pursue their own geopolitical agenda. However, we would like the EU to be focused less on colonial conflicts and more on European issues like Communist Eastern Europe and SDP.

Oppose:

• Israel opposes this because it does not want to be forced to be neutral. Israel is an independent and sovereign country and it will decide its own foreign policy. It does not need the EU to do that for Israel.
• Romania opposes this as well for the same reasons as Israel.
• France: While we agree with the British that we should European affairs we should focus more on European interests such as those in Africa and Eurasia
  • British Diplomacy: We understand these points and have updated the proposal accordingly.
  • French Dip: Unless it occurs in Eurasia, or directly effects European interests. Also, the French have a vested interest in the African continent and will not pull out of it. 
• Bulgaria

Outcome:

Peace with the Federation

Israel: The State of Israel proposes peace with the Federation of America. The current tensions have the potential for a third world war, which is something no state should desire. Israel throws away the British hostility towards the Federation and instead chooses for peace. FYI: WW-III hasn't happened yet. That little thing with the Soviets wasn't WW-III, Feud confirmed it on chat.

Voting:

Support:

• Israel
• Romania
• France
• The United Kingdom: WW-III already happened. We tried to negotiate terms of peace but the London Peace Conference got ignored because the USSR invasion was retconned. If you can create another peace conference and invite us then we will be able to hammer out some terms and (possibly) end the feud between us and the Federation.
• Italy: This idea is very appealing to us, though the third world war already happened and we are currently in the middle of a fourth, according to some. What we should do is attempt to limit the scope of conflicts, not getting involved unnecessarily, but being prepared to use the threat of war if it would bring peace. We should hope that four is the highest number in a world war's title. (This may sound odd coming from the only other member of the EU to support the invasion, but just roll with it.)
• Germany

Oppose:

Outcome

Aliens

Italy: It has come to our attention, and can no longer be ignored, that large swaths of what we thought we knew was a lie. This artificial comet is the culmination of our suspicions, and we must have some sort of response. We have yet to meet an extraterrestrial, but if we do, we should establish guidelines for interacting with it, which shall have a baseline as follows:

• We should initially act peacefully toward the alien, unless it displays hostile intent.
• If the alien does not understand us, we shall make every effort to make ourselves and our intentions understood.
• Any alien discovered shall be given ample time to prove that it is alive before it is dissected for study.
  • As an extension: any alien that fails to prove itself to be alive will be given a last chance in the form of a sudden and painful stimulus before being dissected. If it does not react, either it is dead or it will not react to being dissected. In the latter case, if the alien later wakes up and objects to dissection, it will be told that it was given ample opportunity to object, and the procedure will continue, unless it is already finished, at which point it stops mattering.
    • These only apply if the intent is to dissect aliens for study, which hopefully will not be necessary.
• Aliens will be communicated with where they are found and nowhere else, unless said alien is obviously suffering in the location where it is found. In the case of the latter situation, it will be taken to a location where it will not suffer, and not a secret government facility.
• The press shall not be informed of the discovery of aliens until they are established as non-threatening. Threatening aliens will not be reported so that unnecessary mass hysteria can be avoided.
  • As a corollary: if an alien proves that it is completely inert, it is considered non-threatening until it proves otherwise.
• Any fraudulent alien stories will be left untouched, but will receive a response from the government of the country of origin. Attempting to censor false alien coverage is strictly forbidden. It will not stop mass hysteria. It will only make it worse.
• All of the above laws are rendered moot if the alien has features that would make it impossible to determine whether or not it is "alive" by the standards of humans, except the dissection ones and the ones about the press.

Voting:

Support:

• Italy
• The United Kingdom

Oppose:

• Federation of the Levant
• France
• Bulgaria

Outcome: Unless someone else votes on this, it fails by slim majority. If aliens invade, don't come crying to Italy about it. (Though why would you?)

This one fails to pass. and either way there are better ways to respond to an alien invasion. 

• This was less about dealing with an invasion than attempting to prevent extremely advanced aliens from using callous actions on the part of humans as a casus belli. 

Yugoslavia application

Yugoslav Proposal: It has been a terrible year for Yugoslavia, first the assassination of our Communist leader, then a military coup. Now we are democratic and we wish you to forgive us for our previous errors and allow me to join the EU.

Voting:

Support:

• The United Kingdom: By the way you shouldn't be making proposals since you aren't a member of the EU yet but we'll let this one go just this once. We hope that other nations in the EU will support this proposal.
• Italy: We gladly welcome the changes in Yugoslavia, and would be happy to welcome you to the European Union. We hope that this will also persuade what countries still lie behind the iron curtain to reform.
• Germany
• Bulgaria: Welcome, brothers!

Oppose:

Outcome: Proposal is passed.

Reform of EU trade and Borders

The French propose a set of new reforms to the European union to make the organization more democratic in its nature and to secure the protection of our shared values and history. First of we propose the complete opening of borders to those who belong to an EU member state with the restriction of a quick background check, and to the creation of a free trade zone amongst the member states.

Voting:

Support:

• France
• Germany
• Federation of the Levant
• Italy
• Bulgaria
• Kingdom of Romania
• The United Kingdom: We propose Hong Kong (and possibly Macau, if Portugal agrees) as one of the free trade zones because it offers a direct route to French Indochina, British Borneo and the EU State of Sabah.

Oppose:

Outcome:

passed by complete majority.

Special Members Status

The French propose a redefining of the status of special members. These are states that are not a part of continental Europe that have shared values and ties with Europe. As such we propose that they be allowed to retain their vote, but are not necessarily required to follow binding resolutions of the EU, the primary example of this being The Federation of the Levant, with this they will be able to benefit from the union without being forced into policies that might be negative against their development with the exception of coming to the defense of the union which would be mandatory for all member states. 

In Favor:

• France
• The United Kingdom: We agree but ask if states under the Union such as Sabah and the Netherlands be considered special members?
• ​Germany
• Sabah would be considered a state under British control so it would not receive votes. 

Against

Outcome:

passed.

EU Defense Structure

Paris proposes that the entire Eu defense structure be reformed to better suit a changing era. Paris proposes the Following:

• All member states within the union (except for special status members), established a linked command structure of their armed forces to better coordinate the defense of the continent. 
• That all forces establish a dual-language guide to better coordinate between member states and armed forces. Paris proposes that French be the secondary language of all armed forces due to its universal application and history in Europe, and due to the widespread knowledge of the language. 
• All member states are to defend the European union in the case of a war of aggression by an enemy state on the Union members. Though a war of aggression carried out by a member of the EU will not be backed by the other member states unless it is deemed to be in favor of EU interests. 
• EU defense policies will be reviewed and carried out by a common council of Europe made up of delegates from each member state under the following structure: France three seats (due to the extensive efforts of the French to promote European defense over the years), Britain three seats (for similar reasons), Germany three seats (for their growing position within European politics), Romania two seats (for their geopolitical importance to the EU survival and their military importance within the structure.), The Federation of the Levant two seats, Italy two seats, Portugal one seat, Switzerland one seat, The Netherlands one seat, Poland two seats, and all other member states one seat. It should be noted that all decisions will be binding in nature though not for special status members. 
• Germany will be stripped of all military and industrial restrictions to will be granted greater responsibilities within the defense of European interests. 
• The adoption of European standard munitions size to better coordinate supplies and improve logistics. 
• Common stockpiles spread throughout Europe to improve logistics and supply lines. 
• Finally, the elections every four years of a military commander and head of the defence community. 

Support:

• France
• The United Kingdom
• Federation of the Levant accepts, but proposes that it receives two seats instead of Poland
• Romania
• ​Germany
• Bulgaria
• Italy

Opposition

Outcome: Passed by clear majority. as of now the EU will have a common defense structure and protect the common interests of the European continent.

EU Legislation:

France proposes that fundamental reforms be made to the EU legislation to improve coordination of union policies without infringing on the individual rights of its member states. France proposes the following:

• Two  kinds of resolutions be made, binding and non-binding (binding being those necessary for EU stability, and survival, and non-binding for policies that could benefit member states but not necessarily needed or are deemed invasive on their sovereignty.)
• Seats be granted based on population with those nations who have 70 million to 80 million people gaining what is equal to three votes (like 70 seats), 40 to 69 million people two votes, special status members gaining two votes, nations with less then 30 million gaining one vote, and those who have more then 80 million gaining four votes. 
• Special status members will be granted certain exemptions from resolutions should it be determined to infringe on their autonomy. 
• Resolutions will pass if supported by a simple majority. 
• Members will be allowed to vote in support of a resolution, against a resolution, or abstain from voting. 

In Support

• France
• The United Kingdom: We propose that all members of the EU use the same currency, it would bring us closer together and keep us from losing money when we trade with each other. We also propose that an EU passport is created. It will allow anyone with the passport to travel to any EU country but regular passports will still exist so, for example, if a British citizen wanted to travel to the USA they could still do so.
• The Levant
• Romania
• ​Germany
• Italy

Opposed:

Outcome:

Passed by clear majority. the new structure of voting on resolutions will be handled in the following way. France gets four votes due to their population standing at 93 million, Germany with a population of 72 million will hold three votes, the British hold three votes (population is almost 72 million), Italy holds two votes, all other members are granted one vote due to their population sizes being less then 40 million. however it is worth noting that the eastern EU members hold the balance of power when it comes to votes as they number eight votes in total. Though the Levant holding special status gets two votes. With a simple majority a resolution will pass. 

where did you get your numbers for 71 million britain? i have the population i do because i have integrated my north african lands into the homeland as departments they have voting rights(well some do) but your oversea colonies are are not part of the homeland. 

Division of the Netherlands

British Proposal: The Netherlands should be divided. The North Netherlands (OTL Netherlands) has a heavy Dutch population while the South (OTL Belgium) has a heavy French and German population. We think that once the Netherlands is self-governing again it should be split into the state of the Netherlands and Belgium.

Voting:

Support:

• The United Kingdom

Oppose:

• The Levant opposes this and instead proposes that Wallonia be part of France, with the rest of the country becoming one again (no silly Belgium)
• Romania: See discussion

Discussion:

• The French propose that southern Belgium due to its close cultural ties to the French become a part of the French State while the north become a full fledged member of the EU. 
• Romanian Dip: We propose that Wallonia goes to France, and the rest remains Dutch.
• French Dip: the French consider the need to include Flanders in the land ceded to the French as they also carry close ties to the French State based on historic grounds. 
• Germany: We would like to annex the German communities in the border region. Basically a return to the pre-WW1 German border.
• The French propose that the Netherlands be partitioned as followed the German border be restored to 1917 borders. Wallonia and Flanders be ceded to the French State with Flanders obtaining special status, and the North being established as the Netherlands along OTL borders, and be granted full membership to the outside of British occupation. 
• British Diplomacy: We think that Wallonia should go to the French but Flanders remain a part of the Netherlands. As for Germany's proposal, I seriously doubt it could happen. I do not want to enter into another world war because Germany is claimed as an imperialist (even though this is not imperialism in any form). The rest of the Netherlands will stay united since the rest is ethnically Dutch. Really our main concern is that the other nations would see this as French and German imperialism.
• French Proposal: The French can agree to the Netherlands retaining Flanders but will push for Wallonia to become French due to common heritage and language, and propose that the German areas - which are small to begin with - return to Germany as it would help mend past discrepancies committed by all European powers in the world wars. 

Outcome: