Realpolitik of the Smoky Skies - The Reboot

Editor's note: Due to the extensive travel times between the capital and Haven of Peace this interview may appear slightly out of date. It was conducted prior to any Prime Ministerial candidacies made in the Senate.

I was surprised and intrigued to receive a request from Senator Albert Bazil, newly elected Senator for Pulias representing the Pulian Imperial Party. Apparently he had acquired a copy of the Haven Herald all the way in the capital and was impressed with my interview with Senator Melda. Having interviewed one side of the controversial Coventry campaign affair I was eager to talk to a party on the other side and so was more than happy to travel all the way to the capital for the story.

After my arduous and lengthy journey across lands under development but not conducive to travel it was by comparison extremely pleasant to find myself sitting across from the Senator in a café in the outskirts of the capital city, sipping away as we sampled the crisp late afternoon air of the nearby fields and Pulian River.

H. Godwin: Before we begin today, Senator, congratulations on winning your seat in the Senate and thank you for taking the time to speak with me.

A. Bazil: Thank you for your time too, Mister Godwin, I'm glad to stir up some interest. It's a nice change from all the time researching and my theories.

H.G.: I'm sure. This is certainly a lovely spot you've chosen.

A.B.: Thank you.

H.G.: Can you tell me what it was exactly that originally attracted you to the Pulian Imperial Party?

A.B.: Well, at the start, I was like most people: Augustus can look like a cold man and that doesn't exactly generate trust, and so does the party's image. But once I started talking to him, I understood how different things are. Mainly, what interested me is that the party follows a more middle of the road approach. Science taught me personally that sometimes we need to make tough decisions, and this party was not afraid to discuss them. And while I can disagree with some things, the simple fact that they're open to such discussions in the first place attracted me to it.

H.G.: What are your personal thoughts on the 'national railway project' which was proposed in the recent election campaign?

A.B.: I think it's a need for the future. Maybe it will require some sacrifice at some point; money doesn't grow on trees. But we have to look at what it will bring back: trade, communication --- it would even have helped you on your journey to reach me.


The Senator laughed and smiled, and his eyes flashed as he asked me:


A.B.: Was it a perilous journey to get to the capital? I've heard there have been some robberies in the wilds. I hope nothing like that has happened to you.

H.G.: Nothing quite like that, but it was definitely long and difficult. I see now firsthand why railway proponents are so vociferous.

A.B.: I'm sure.

H.G.: But moving on, the Pulias People's Party Senator for Haven of Peace, Senator William Melda, promised he would hold a town hall meeting during the duration of the Third Senate. Do you think this is likely to occur? Also, is your party likely to hold any similar kinds of meetings in Coventry and Pulias?

A.B.: Well, I still don't know Senator Melda that well; I'm still a bit new to this whole world, so it's hard to say. But since he seems passionate enough defending his views, I really hope he follows up on that. As for my party, it's something that can happen, yes, if time allows it. As seen before, sometimes time is not on our side and there are situations that demand our attention. But a town hall meeting sounds like a really good idea.

H.G.: What are your thoughts about the Pulian Advancement Union as a party, and their proposals?

A.B.: They seem very aligned with the PPP's view, but they were less inclined to speeches this campaign, more under the radar. At least that was only my feeling, of course. But I won't form an opinion until I have had some meetings with them. Their proposals seem solid.

H.G.: Very well. How about the Pulias People's Party? I think everyone in the whole of Pulias knows about the rivalry between yourself and Senator William Melda, but if you take away the personalities and just look at the policies what are your thoughts about the party and their proposed policy platform?

A.B.: "Rivalry" is not exactly the word I'd use, but yes, apart from our personal differences their base is also solid; they have some good ideas. In fact, a good part of what they defend is what we want as well: peace, work for everyone, and a happy society.

H.G.: I see. Given that the Pulian Advancement Union and the Pulian People's Party appear to have policy platforms more similar to each other they do to your party, how likely do you think it is that you'll form government?

A.B.: Well, the truth is that the differences will work against us on that point, I have to admit. It's easier to form a coalition with people that are similar to you rather than different. But that doesn't make me quit; I like a good challenge.

H.G.: In that case, who do you think is most likely to be the next Prime Minister of Pulias?

A.B.: Hmm, tough to say, but the Honourable Heerlo seems to be very likely; he has done a good job in the past and my general feeling is that everyone wants him to continue. People trust those who they see doing a good job; it's only natural.

H.G.: Yes, I suppose that's true. So do you have any idea as to which parties will form government? Have you been in contact with the Pulian Advancement Union? Or the Pulian People's Party?

A.B.: As of now I have not been in contact with the other parties, but I'd like to say I'm open and available to discussing with them.

H.G.: If your party does not form government what will you and your party do then?

A.B.: We will continue to make our proposals in the Senate. We will continue defending our views. We will continue to be available to support, or oppose, the government as a representative of those that want the same things we want. It would not make sense to get the people's trust and then just throw it away.

H.G.: Fair enough. In the recent election you polled more highly than the former Prime Minister, Senator the Honourable Gurra. Why do you think that is?

A.B.: First, I'd like to say I admire the Honourable Gurra; he is a great man. I was shocked to poll slightly higher than him as I'm very new to the political scene and he has already proved his ability before. Why did it happen? Well, maybe it's because I'm new and made an impact; maybe the people like what I bring to the table. But I'd say that, objectively, my debate with Sir William Melda was something that helped as I was put on the spot and faced a fiery candidate and held my own despite being inexperienced.

H.G.: Fiery indeed. With regard to the yet-to-be-formed government, do you have any preferred ministerial portfolios? What would you like to do personally if you win government?

A.B.: Well, science is a good part of my life, so that always catches my eye. If I win government? I'd say it's too soon to even think about it. I've won my first seat, and for now I only think about doing my best to serve the people.

H.G.: I see. Why do you think there has been such a delay between the release of the election results and the formation of government?

A.B.: Well, government doesn't form out of thin air. I believe there must be a good reason as to why, but I do not know it. For now, everyone is busy preparing their proposals, and I'm sure there will be news soon.

H.G.: Are you aware of any negotiations taking place?

A.B.: I am not aware at the moment.

H.G.: In the campaign you and Senator Melda engaged in a spirited debate out in Coventry. Do you seriously believe he is a warmonger in pacifist clothing, or was that just a rhetorical flourish?


It was at this point I noticed the Senator's mood darkened considerably as he considered his response.


A.B.: I believe that Senator Melda is not as "pure" he claims to be, that's for sure. I won't call it "rhetorical flourish" as it's completely diminishing to what I intended to show, but it doesn't mean he is a complete warmonger either.

He may not be a warmonger in it's "pure" form, but he isn't a pacifist in its pure form either. I think that his decision to do personal attacks show that he is not as much of a pacifist as he claims to be. I have nothing against a fiery opponent, as it shows he has spirit and dedication, but one can't start with personal attacks and then just say "but it's not attacking".

There is a proper way to do everything and I believe that a burn campaign is not the way to do it. If he had some issues with Senator Augustus, he should bring them forward in a manner that would focus on the facts, as that is caring about the truth, and it would've gained his party more support in my view. Using it as leverage on a campaign, as an open attack on one person, rather than discussing the matters that concern the people, as one campaign should be, might I add? That is what worries me. We've seen in the past how unproductive such campaigns are, it worries me that we haven't learned that lesson yet.

I don't have any hostilities towards Senator William, but I have been impressed negatively by the way he chose to run his campaign, especially when he's the leader of a pacific party. He has big visibility and responsibility, and in my view he's not honouring the pacific part. Of course, he is free to do as he pleases; I have no hand or say in his party, but my impressions are not positive so far.

H.G.: I see. On a similar note, you argued publicly against your party representing war and imperialist ambitions. Given that your party leader himself, Senator the Honourable Augustus has defended the use of war as a matter of statecraft, and made allusions to the type of 'peace by conquest' typified by ancient imperial regimes, do you believe your arguments were false or does this represent a clear policy divide within the party?

A.B.: I think that we should split things a bit to understand what you are asking. First of all, seeking peace by conquest is something that should not be desirable. I don't think that's the way it should be, and if Sir Augustus intends to follow that I will not agree with him. Is it a divide? Not necessarily; a party does not and should not be completely homogeneous, it requires different views in order to open space for discussion, and the fact that we can do that is something I like. So if, and only if, such an idea was proposed I would have to then properly discuss the issue. But at this point it's rather useless; it's no more than speculation in the end.

About the war as a matter of statecraft, I believe his intention --- while the form may have not been the best --- was more to remind everyone that it will be something used like that by others eventually. Whether we like it or not we are not the only nation formed after the past events [Editor's note: I believe people have taken to referring to the events as "The Fall" and "The Dawn", respectively], and I came to understand that not all of them will surely follow a peaceful way. And for such nations war will be a matter of statecraft. We should all be aware of it. Only by acknowledging this can we then move on to discussing what our position should be and how to deal with it.

But in the end I'm sure it will come a time when harsher decisions will have to be made. What if an alliance is forged, and someone attacks our allies? What if we get attacked? What about the Luddites, who claimed pure anarchy and a complete dedication to waging war on everything and everyone; what can we do about that? These are the type of decisions that will require us to at least acknowledge that war and fighting is something that cannot be ignored.

But we are open to admit that if it comes to it we are ready to discuss the difficult decisions, even if it concerns war. Should we make it a goal? Absolutely not! Should we pursue it actively as a form of empowerment? No way. Should we discuss it and be ready for it? Yes; we cannot ignore at least our own defence. Even if simply from the Luddites that populate this world.

H.G.: Given the animosity you and Senator Melda clearly bear toward each other, how do you think you will go working together in the new Senate when it sits?

A.B.: While it may not be easy, in the Senate I will discuss and decide based on the issues, not the Senator. If he makes a good proposal, I will support it. I represent people and ideas, and the only way to do that is to put my animosities apart and focus on what matters.

H.G.: Given that you spent some of your time in the recent campaign in Coventry, do you have any comment about the circumstances surrounding Senator Bouncy Mischa, specifically his party affiliation and his subsequent decision not to take up his seat in the Senate?

A.B.: I have no comments to make about his affiliation; I didn't stay long to get good information. I can tell you I enjoyed the cool air of the mountains; it was a welcome difference from the capital. About the Senator's decision, I think that if a candidate gets the great honour of being trusted by the people, but decides not to do it, it means surely he has a very strong reason. And I think that a man that does that has a great ability for self control, analysis, and surely a great dedication to the people. Recognising that he cannot do what's best for others because of his own personal problems is a hard decision, and I applaud him for that.

H.G.: Apart from your party leader, who among the next Senate are you most looking forward to working with?

A.B.: The Honourable Heerlo surely, I believe I may have a lot to learn from him.

H.G.: Given that I don't live in the capital, I have to admit not knowing much about your background beyond what I read in the papers during the recent campaign. Do you have any family, Senator Bazil?

A.B.: I am not married if that's what you are asking. I had my love adventures in the past and lost someone before. We wanted to marry a few years ago but a brutal murder caused by the Luddites took her away from me. I'm not sure if you heard of Maria Esther's murder?

H.G.: My dear fellow, you have my condolences; that story made headlines everywhere!

A.B.: Thank you. Yes, I thought it might be. My parents are also dead, so family-wise I'm alone. So now I dedicate myself to the people, and they are my family.


On that very sombre note the interview ended and the Senator and I finished our drinks and enjoyed the last rays of the Pulian sun.

I'm not sure what I was expecting, but Senator Bazil seemed very analytical and thoughtful; I supposed what you would expect from a man of science. As a representative of the Pulian Imperial Party, a party which has been publicly accused of fostering warlike tendencies, he did not come across as a warmonger at all.

Whether Senator Bazil and his party form government or not I firmly believe his career is one to watch with great interest.

Subscriptions and circulations for the Haven Herald have exploded recently, as the paper has broken out of its local home city market into the foreign markets of Coventry and the capital Pulias. The cause of this is widely believed to lay at the quill of political reporter Harland Godwin.

His interview with the new Senator for Haven of Peace, Senator William Melda has led to an explosion of interest in the genre of political reporting and has taken the establishment by storm.

Mister Godwin was not reachable for comment as he was in transit between the capital and the border city of Coventry, fresh from completing an interview with the Pulian Imperial Party Senator Albert Bazil and is rumoured to be heading to meet with the other elected Pulian Imperial Party Senator the Honourable Augustus for an interview.

One thing is for sure, though: if this type of reporting continues its increase in popularity there's no end to the heights the Haven Herald could reach now that it has achieved a national audience at the hand of Harland Godwin.