NukeNes XXV: The Berlin Conference

The American Empire supports the recent Belgium proposal and map. Of course the borders need cleaning up but the general thinking behind it is sound.
 
Denmark supports the idea of an independent Morocco, and supports the Belgian Congo proposal as the most fair one presented now.

Denmark notes that of the Four Great Powers, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and Italy, that the Morocco will be maintained as an independent nation, open to trade with all, and it is a non issue. We feel Spain should receive some territory, but Morocco will not be annexed.

Denmark notes that no nation has spoken against Abyssinian Independence, aside from Italy wanting to settle a border with them. As good Christians, we are sure Abyssinia will be more than willing to compromise.

Denmark feels that the Belgian Congo with French claims in the North is the most fair, as Belgium controlling the Congo allows all powers to trade there, not just at the mouth of the river, but in the interior as well.

However, claims may be needed to readjusted, as the British now control Zanzibar through their Omani proxy. Germany should be given compensation in a new claim.

Denmark feels that if the United Kingdom were willing to withdraw from Egypt, sans the Suez Canal, tensions could be lowered, though we do not feel a major issue should be made of it.

Denmark supports the Portuguese "Pink Map", due to the fact that Portugal has been using the land far before Britain had, and there are still two independent, white christian states between the United Kingdom and the territory. The dream of Mr. Rhodes is but that; a dream. It should not come at the expense of long standing claims of other European nations
 
Germany continues to claim Zanzibar and its costal areas in East Africa. However we are willing to allow the Omani to maintain their protection of Zanzibar proper so long as they remove their claim to the mainland as would, of course, Britain.
 
France would like to note to Denmark that under the proposal currently at hand, Spain would receive the land south of the Oued Drâa river. The Franco-Moroccan border of course needs to be settled, but most of the land we need would be rather useless to the rest of the conference anyway. However, we also would support the Danish proposal, which is essentially the same except France gains Casablanca and Spain gains Tangier.



Also, France has decided that, although we are unhappy with the latest Belgian proposal, we will support it.

Finally, we wouldn't mind seeing the Khedive restored in Egypt.
 
If the United Kingdom and Germany (who supported the French proposal but France now backs the Belgian proposal), can agree to the Belgian proposal, I do believe that the major issue of Congo can be resolved with the consent of all powers.
 
There is still the matter of Zanzibar. The UK has yet to comment on it. In fact the UK seems to have abandoned this conference and has sought out other treaties, behind the backs of those gathered here.
 
The United Kingdom would like to announce that, after significant work with the French and Italian governments, all the borders of British colonies beside French or Italian colonies have been finalized.

The following maps only apply to the borders between British colonies and French and/or Italian colonies.
Spoiler :




The United Kingdom supports the Italian plan for the division of the Horn of Africa.

In addition, the United Kingdom will renounce its claim to the Zambezi territories claimed by Portugal under the condition that Portugal accepts the following territories as British colonial possessions and sphere of influence. The map also shows a proposal for a border between German Southwest Africa and British Southern Africa

Spoiler :


The United Kingdom also supports the latest proposed division of the Congo presented by Belgium.
 
Denmark notes that all powers have accepted the Belgian Congo proposal.

Denmark notes that all powers have recognized the Portuguese claims

Does anyone reject Italian claims in the Horn? At this point it seems most are agreeable to them
 
The matters of the Horn of Africa are purely between Italy and Britain. Denmark needn't stick their nose in our business. The issue is settled.
 
When the East African question has been answered or ignored for a sufficiently long enough time, the Berlin Conference will be ready to conclude
 
Germany's claim to the lands between the Sultanate of Oman's Zanzibar territory and Lakes Victoria, Tanganyika, and Nyasa are unsupportable seeing as Germany has absolutely no ties to the land. The land is the business of the inland territory of Omani Zanzibar is that of Oman and Britain. We are more than willing to support Germany's legitimate claims in West and Central Africa, but we cannot support the East Africa claim.

With that said, we propose the following borders for the adjacent British and German colonies in West Africa.

Spoiler :

We also would like a response from Germany in regards to our proposal on West Africa. We believe the land designated is more than fair.
 
German explorers have been in the East African area for many years and have mapped it thoroughly. As to your claim through the Oman, this has only been recently procured and further more, been done so outside of the Conference. This treaty is not recognized by the German government and further more we do not recognize the "government" of Zanzibar as an entity. We will enforce our claim as is our right through the principle of effectivity.
 
Germany has no ability to access the lands it claims without moving through foreign lands. Additionally, Germany has no military forces in the region to police such a claim. Each of these two facts show Germany cannot uphold the principle of effectivity.

We remind Germany of Zanzibar's fealty to the Sultanate of Oman. Oman is a protectorate of the British Empire. Any attempt Germany makes to pry Zanzibar from Oman's hands would mean war between Britain and Germany. We suggest Germany try a more reasonable course of action.
 
I'm taking over Germany from Kentharu.

Germany has no ability to access the lands it claims without moving through foreign lands. Additionally, Germany has no military forces in the region to police such a claim. Each of these two facts show Germany cannot uphold the principle of effectivity.

And does Britain have ability to access the Sudan? If so why do they continue to let that vile little Muhammadan rebellion continue? If this is how Britain chooses to interpret the principle of effectivity than they have no business in the Sudan or farther south, or for that matter in many other of the areas they have claimed in Southern Africa.

We remind Germany of Zanzibar's fealty to the Sultanate of Oman. Oman is a protectorate of the British Empire. Any attempt Germany makes to pry Zanzibar from Oman's hands would mean war between Britain and Germany. We suggest Germany try a more reasonable course of action.

The British know as well as we do that Zanzibar's hold on the African coast is tenuous at best. Furthermore, it is common knowledge these holdings exist primarily as a means for the island sultanate to funnel slaves into the Middle East. Since one of the purposes of this conference is to stamp out the slave trade, we believe that it is only right that this land should be ceded to a modern, Christian nation. As German explorers have been exploring and mapping the region for years now and Britain has already received much more than it deserves as a result of this conference (*CoughEgyptCough*), it would be most prudent for this area to go to the Reich.
 
The reason why the Mahdists are still active is because they reside in a very large territory. If it were possible to deal with the entire territory since our war began, we would have done it. Sadly, it is impossible to push the limits of man in such a way. Know that the Mahdists will be done for in the very very near future, and our ability to adequately control the territory will be undeniable

Just because Oman controls Zanzibar does not mean it is used as an outpost for a slave trade. The United Kingdom was the first nation to declare slavery illegal and for Germany to claim we are supportive of the vile practice is the gravest of insults. We will make sure Oman does not practice slavery and ensure Zanzibar is not used as an outpost for collecting them.

The territory which Germany desires is unobtainable seeing as Britain has treaties with the peoples living there. If Germany wishes to discuss East Africa with Britain let it be through private channels. There is no need for our shouts to echo throughout this conference.
 
Can anyone summarise what has thus far been sorted?
 
The Ottomans support this claim

I, King Leopold, come to you first as the representative of the International Congo Society and International African Society, both private associations.

I would like to address the competing claims to the Congo River Basin first, and will try to speak plainly. From my perspective, the only entities with possible claims anywhere near the Basin are perhaps the Republic of France, the Kingdom of Portugal, and the International Congo Society.

The reality in the Congo is that the International Congo Society had explored and mapped the Congo River Basin in 1876, years before the French decided to create their outpost, Brazzaville, further up the Congo River from their colonies on the African coast. The reality in the Congo is that Portuguese claims have only ever been southeast of the river, but never far into the interior. The reality in the Congo is that many of the tribes in the interior Congo River Basin have already signed contracts with the International Congo Society and that outposts of the Society are throughout the interior.

I insist that the International Congo Society's claim to the interior of the Congo River Basin has legal precedence over claims by other nations. The first goal of the Society is for the Congo River Basin's waterways to be free to all traffic from all powers currently at this conference. Any party with access to any of the rivers in the basin would be able to transport their goods to the Atlantic without any tariff or toll on their shipping traffic. The rest of the Congo basin would remain under the International Congo Society's control. Companies from any of this current conference's powers would be able to lease 10-year monopoly rights to extract a particular product from a particular region of almost anywhere in Congo basin. Monies earned would be used to maintain, develop, and police the basin, as well as return as profit to the initial investors in the Congo Society. My scientific and humanitarian association, the International African Society would both provide missionaries to the interior, as well as support the scientific interests of the conference powers.

As King of Belgium, I know that I am right choice for this duty. As a small, neutral power in Europe, any significant interest or control on my part in the Congo will do little to unbalance Europe politically. Under my influence the Congo River Basin will remain as it needs to be for lasting peace; neutral, yet open to all.

I submit that my management of the Congo River Basin is both legal and sensible.

Provided is a map, with the area claimed for the International Congo Society in Belgium's colors for ease of identification. All other areas are what I deem appropriate for the other powers, as the representative of Belgium to this conference.

 
Top Bottom