The Problem with Haven

You couldn't sell a fiction book that was based on the 30 days before and after Hitler was appointed Chancellor, or the 45 days before and after on the start of WW1. They are the result of bizarre coincidences and large numbers of people making just really poor decisions.

kzt wrote:You couldn't sell a fiction book that was based on the 30 days before and after Hitler was appointed Chancellor, or the 45 days before and after on the start of WW1. They are the result of bizarre coincidences and large numbers of people making just really poor decisions.

Was just thinking something similar myself...

So much weird already DID happen for real that there´s little reason to question the probability of most fiction.

runsforcelery wrote:I haven’t previously gotten involved in the debate over whether or not Elizabeth should trust the Republic of Haven and of whether or not the Republic of Haven is worthy of her trust for a lot of reasons, including the fact that as the author I have control of what the various actors do. That means I can “demonstrate” whatever I want to demonstrate, which gives me what I suppose some people would consider an unfair advantage.

However, I’d like to point out a couple of things about Eloise Pritchart and the post-Saint-Just Republic of Haven.

(3) In regard to whether or not the restored Republic under Eloise Pritchart was acting “honorably” before the resumption of hostilities and in the decision to resume hostilities itself, I would make the following points.

(a) The restored Republic had committed to allowing any star system which wished to leave the Republic to do so, and had in fact honored that pledge. They weren’t just talking the talk in this case, they were actually walking the walk, and they’d demonstrated that they were.

(b) The Pritchart Administration had been negotiating in complete good faith in its attempts to secure an actual formal treaty of peace which would officially end hostilities. As far as Pritchart was concerned, the only really “core terms” were the status of the populated once-Havenite star systems still occupied by the Manticoran Alliance. In effect, she was insisting that those populations be allowed to choose their own futures, just as she had allowed the systems which wanted to leave the Republic to do so. This happened to be something that was a serious matter of principle for both her and Thomas Theisman.

(c) Eloise and her analysts were aware of the fact that the High Ridge Government was using the continued state of war as a cynical domestic political ploy, and there seemed little possibility of an impending change of government in the Star Kingdom. In other words, even before Giancola started playing with the diplomatic correspondence, they were aware that they were dealing with a dishonest man who could have cared less about anything resembling a principle and whose word could not be trusted.

(d) Although Eloise was aware that Shannon Foraker and Bolthole were producing an entirely new fleet which was much closer to the Royal Manticoran Navy in combat capability, she was also aware through most of the negotiating period that Manticore possessed the technological upper hand and that the completion of ships already under construction at places like Grendelsbane could quickly counterbalance much of the numerical superiority the RHN was building up at Bolthole. In other words, whatever High Ridge and Janacek had done to the Navy, the RMN remained a technologically superior threat with the capacity to rebound rapidly from its numerical inferiority once it realized that inferiority existed.

(e) There was no peace treaty. The two star nations were still legally in a state of war, which meant that either side was fully justified in resuming hostilities in the absence of genuine efforts to secure that final peace treaty.

Anyway, those of the points I wanted to offer for analysis.

Have fun.

One issue I have leading up to the initial resumption of war: Why didn't Elizabeth send Steadholder Harrington to negotiate Peace with the RoH? High Ridge was desperate to keep the war "going", so he could keep the taxes, and avoid an election. Solution: send Honor to negotiate a Peace Treaty that the Lords could not refuse. (i.e. Trevor's Star is Manticore's, plebiscites to be held on every conquered planet jointly supervised by Manticore and Haven with 2 choices on every ballot, and a third choice on the ballots of those planets that Manticore would let join.)

Done 2 - 3 years in to the false "peace" (during summer term, so High Ridge doesn't notice Honor's gone), "Grayson" sends "Steadholder Harrington" to negotiate a peace treaty, accepts it, then Honor announces it on the floor of the House of Lords. The Commons quickly approves, what are the Lords going to do? Are all the Liberal Party members really going to vote against a Peace Treaty? All the Independents?

Grayson has no more authority to negotiate a peace for the entire Alliance than Manticore. That was the huge sticking point which caused the friction between the Alliance. High Ridge unilaterally halted operations, without consulting any of his allies. Since the RMN was the vast bulk of the fighting forces, he foisted the ceasefire on everyone else. The only thing Grayson is authorized to do is negotiate for itself, which would be a de facto abandonment of the Alliance. We all saw how well the Alliance took Erewhon leaving, so Grayson getting out would pretty much resulted in the dissolution of the entire Alliance.

Second, Queen Elizabeth had no clue the war would resume. She deduced, correctly, that the philosophical differences between the coalition party would tear them apart, at which point her Centrists and Crown Loyalists would be there to pick up the pieces. She was simply playing for time until that event happened, and it was working. If not for Giancola and his shenanigans with the diplomatic correspondences, she would have accomplished her goal, at which point Manticore would have started negotiating seriously.

I suspect that it would also have kicked off exactly the kind of constitutional crisis Elizabeth was trying to avoid when she allowed High Ridge to form a government in the first place. Even if there was no truth in it and Grayson was in fact acting independently, the High Ridge government's allies in the Manticoran media could, and likely would, have cried foul in such a way as to imply that the Protector was acting with the Queen's blessing, thereby presenting her as doing an end run around her own legally-appointed Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary.

crewdude48 wrote:I suspect, what this comes down to, is that there are some people who will never fully trust their former enemies. There is still a bit of a divide between the northern and southern states. I am sure there are Manties who would rather spit on Theisman than walk away from him. Even the most logical, well thought out arguments couldn't convince them to like the other side. Even with the Queen telling them to sit on it, the best you could get from them is "I won't start nothing if they don't start nothing.".

You have a very good point. And I'd love to see some individuals of this type make appearances in future novels/short stories and see Elizabeth and Co effectively deal with them. And this may be another instance where prolong has a significant effect on society. Imagine how much worse the US north/south divide would be now if civil war era people were still alive.

biochem wrote:...
And this may be another instance where prolong has a significant effect on society. Imagine how much worse the US north/south divide would be now if civil war era people were still alive.

Actually, that might have the opposite effect.
Because they would KNOW what happened, and would know exactly why it happened.

A huge chunk of romanticising about especially the "independent south" or stuff like that would be completely run over by those who knows it´s rubbish.

Duckk wrote:Grayson has no more authority to negotiate a peace for the entire Alliance than Manticore. That was the huge sticking point which caused the friction between the Alliance. High Ridge unilaterally halted operations, without consulting any of his allies. Since the RMN was the vast bulk of the fighting forces, he foisted the ceasefire on everyone else. The only thing Grayson is authorized to do is negotiate for itself, which would be a de facto abandonment of the Alliance. We all saw how well the Alliance took Erewhon leaving, so Grayson getting out would pretty much resulted in the dissolution of the entire Alliance.

Second, Queen Elizabeth had no clue the war would resume. She deduced, correctly, that the philosophical differences between the coalition party would tear them apart, at which point her Centrists and Crown Loyalists would be there to pick up the pieces. She was simply playing for time until that event happened, and it was working. If not for Giancola and his shenanigans with the diplomatic correspondences, she would have accomplished her goal, at which point Manticore would have started negotiating seriously.

For your first point: so what?

1: High Ridge already established that Star Nations can act unilaterally, no one not already his partisan is going to care that Grayson went around his back unilaterally.

2: 2 years into the cease-fire, Steadholder Harrington comes before the House of Lords, announcing that Grayson, Erewhon, and the rest of the worlds of the Alliance have negotiated a peace treaty with the Republic of Haven, said Treaty to go into effect in 6 months, or when Manticore signs, whichever comes first. She then plays a video from Queen Elizabeth saying that she's seen the terms of the treaty, finds it quite fair, and calls on Parliament to end the war with Haven. Then she reads the Treaty.

A: You really think Erewhon wouldn't sign on?
B: You really think Pritchard wouldn't agree to a fair treaty?
C: You really think the House of Lords will reject a Peace Treaty with Haven just because Grayson negotiated it?

You've got all the Crown Loyalists and Centrists supporting it. All you need are enough Independents and (people who would have become Cathy M's) New Liberals to get to a majority, and the war is over.

If Manticore stays at war because essentially every single Liberal in the Lords voted against a Peace Treaty, the Liberals would be utterly destroyed in the Commons for a generation. a Prolong generation.

Not going to happen. It passes, the war's over, all the wartime taxes are repealed, the government is forced to call an election, and after it's over all the San Martino Lords get to join.

Game over, High Ridge government.


As for your second point, go reread the beginning of War of Honor. Note how pissed Honor, and everyone else on her side, is about how long things are dragging on. Those people should have been willing to do anything they needed to do to cut short the corruption and disaster of the High Ridge government.

And Grayson negotiating a separate Peace Treaty does not spark a Manticorian Constitutional fight. The Queen "didn't do anything." This isn't the Queen's Treaty, it's Grayson's. Now, the Queen thinks it's a really good treaty, and hopes Parliament will ratify it quickly, but that's not a Constitutional problem.

Now, will anyone on the other side believe that? Of course not. Who cares? Elizabeth wants to strangle every single one of them with her own hands. Pissing them off mightily, when there's nothing they can do about it, and harming, if not completely destroying, all their plans in the bargain?

Priceless.

Dafmeister wrote:I suspect that it would also have kicked off exactly the kind of constitutional crisis Elizabeth was trying to avoid when she allowed High Ridge to form a government in the first place. Even if there was no truth in it and Grayson was in fact acting independently, the High Ridge government's allies in the Manticoran media could, and likely would, have cried foul in such a way as to imply that the Protector was acting with the Queen's blessing, thereby presenting her as doing an end run around her own legally-appointed Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary.

So what?

Unless virtually every single Independent and Liberal (you know, the pacifist party) member of the House of Lords is willing to vote against a good Peace Treaty because they're upset with the Queen, there's no crisis, just a lot of hurt feelings among people Elizabeth is already at war with.

Are the voters going to say "well, my taxes are going down, my freedom is going up, life is safer, the war is over, and we won, but I'm really pissed off that the Queen went around the back of the corrupt High Ridge Government and made this happen"?

Or are they going to say "I'm so happy the war is over. Yay Queen Elizabeth! Yay Honor Harrington!"

GregD wrote:

Duckk wrote:Grayson has no more authority to negotiate a peace for the entire Alliance than Manticore. That was the huge sticking point which caused the friction between the Alliance. High Ridge unilaterally halted operations, without consulting any of his allies. Since the RMN was the vast bulk of the fighting forces, he foisted the ceasefire on everyone else. The only thing Grayson is authorized to do is negotiate for itself, which would be a de facto abandonment of the Alliance. We all saw how well the Alliance took Erewhon leaving, so Grayson getting out would pretty much resulted in the dissolution of the entire Alliance.

Second, Queen Elizabeth had no clue the war would resume. She deduced, correctly, that the philosophical differences between the coalition party would tear them apart, at which point her Centrists and Crown Loyalists would be there to pick up the pieces. She was simply playing for time until that event happened, and it was working. If not for Giancola and his shenanigans with the diplomatic correspondences, she would have accomplished her goal, at which point Manticore would have started negotiating seriously.

For your first point: so what?

1: High Ridge already established that Star Nations can act unilaterally, no one not already his partisan is going to care that Grayson went around his back unilaterally.

2: 2 years into the cease-fire, Steadholder Harrington comes before the House of Lords, announcing that Grayson, Erewhon, and the rest of the worlds of the Alliance have negotiated a peace treaty with the Republic of Haven, said Treaty to go into effect in 6 months, or when Manticore signs, whichever comes first. She then plays a video from Queen Elizabeth saying that she's seen the terms of the treaty, finds it quite fair, and calls on Parliament to end the war with Haven. Then she reads the Treaty.

A: You really think Erewhon wouldn't sign on?
B: You really think Pritchard wouldn't agree to a fair treaty?
C: You really think the House of Lords will reject a Peace Treaty with Haven just because Grayson negotiated it?

You've got all the Crown Loyalists and Centrists supporting it. All you need are enough Independents and (people who would have become Cathy M's) New Liberals to get to a majority, and the war is over.

If Manticore stays at war because essentially every single Liberal in the Lords voted against a Peace Treaty, the Liberals would be utterly destroyed in the Commons for a generation. a Prolong generation.

Not going to happen. It passes, the war's over, all the wartime taxes are repealed, the government is forced to call an election, and after it's over all the San Martino Lords get to join.

Game over, High Ridge government.


As for your second point, go reread the beginning of War of Honor. Note how pissed Honor, and everyone else on her side, is about how long things are dragging on. Those people should have been willing to do anything they needed to do to cut short the corruption and disaster of the High Ridge government.

And Grayson negotiating a separate Peace Treaty does not spark a Manticorian Constitutional fight. The Queen "didn't do anything." This isn't the Queen's Treaty, it's Grayson's. Now, the Queen thinks it's a really good treaty, and hopes Parliament will ratify it quickly, but that's not a Constitutional problem.

Now, will anyone on the other side believe that? Of course not. Who cares? Elizabeth wants to strangle every single one of them with her own hands. Pissing them off mightily, when there's nothing they can do about it, and harming, if not completely destroying, all their plans in the bargain?

Priceless.

1. High Ridge was running in dangerous ground,m but since Manticore ran the Manticore Alliance, there was little other nations and people could do.

2. Steadholder Harrington would not have any authority to present anything to the House of Lords. It would have to be presented to the High Ridge government. As far as I know, Steadholder is not a rank that has any right to appear or present anything before the Manticoran House of Lords since it's not a Manticoran rank. If she did it as Duchess Harington, then she runs into the problem of going around the legal governments back, or doing it illegally. It's the same reasoning why Elizabeth couldn't do it. Legally the Prime Minister has to be the one to do stuff like that. The Manticore royalty is limited in what it could do and as long as High Ridge was still 'negotiating' with Haven, there was little she could do without breaking her own constitutional limitations. Hence the real possibility of provoking a constitutional crisis. A crisis that no one would know who the judges would rule for.

A. Possibly.
B. Possibly, but with severe reservations*.
C. Not a chance since it would have been done -outside- of established governmental bounds. It had to come through the High Ridge government to be legal (more or less). Honor doing an end run would be seen as the Queen and Honor (as Duchess Harrington) trying to sidestep or go beyond her constitutional boundaries. And as much as those two women might like to have done that, they respect the rule of law too much to do it, since if you bend the laws to do something like that once, you might do it again, and again and again. At what point do you say you can't bend/break the law just because it's in the way of what you want to do? It's a damned slippery slope to start down and they would have been on very thin ice if someone did that to them and they got angry and huffy about it. They did it, so they couldn't really complain if someone did it to them.

Grayson negotiating a treaty would break the Alliance because Grayson doesn't have that authority in the Alliance. High Ridge's mistakes were, if I remember right, of not informing the other members what he was doing. He just did it without consulting them. Grayson negotiating a peace treaty would be essentially doing the same thing.

It's nowhere near as easy and slamdunk as you're making it appear. There was by no means a guarantee that such a peace treaty would have sailed past the House of Lords if it had been presented for it to have succeeded, it would have had to have the government's stamp of approval.

* Her reservations would likely be that it wouldn't the official government negotiators that got the treaty. That would cast a large shadow of illegitimacy on the entire proceedings. It would be like the Secretary of the US Commerce Department bypassing the State Department to present the President with a negotiated treaty a nation the US would have been at war with; say China or Russia for some reason. It might be an option the President likes and supports, but it would not be an accepted venue to get said treaty because it didn't come through official channels, ie the State Department. That's not the function of the Commerce Department.