12th February 1907,
Today the cabinet made the following short statement:
"The Kingdom of the Netherlands will remain neutral in the war between the Middle Kingdom and the Republic of New Switzerland."
The newspaper has consulted with political analysts at the Tilburg University about the practical effects of this statment.
The effects of the statement of neutrality is:
- Any attempt by the belligerents to attack, search or size any ships in the territorial sea of the Netherlands is a violation of neutrality, if it occur the Netherlands will do its outmost to get the ship returned its proper crew and captain. If that is not possible, compensation is to be paid.
- Belligerents are forbidden to use Dutch ports or territorial sea as basing for operations.
- Belligerents will not be supplied with any kind of warships, arms, ammunition or any other kind of war material.
- Warships of the belligerents may not remain more then 24h in any Dutch port or water (with some exception concerning transit in some areas), longer stay will result in the ship being interned.
However, any warships from the belligerents will no be allowed to leave port less then 24h after a warship or merchantman from the other belligerent power (a warships that stays longer then 24h in port due to this will not be interned).
- Any armed ships will be considered a warship when it comes to the matter of staying in port (and any ships claiming status as merchantman will have to undergo a search to confirm their status).
- Warships of the belligerent powers will only be allowed refuel once, after that a time period of at least three months must pass before they will be allowed to refuel in Dutch ports again.
Interesting development. If other powers with Pacific colonies take a similar position, it could really inhibit Swiss merchantile shipping in particular.
Quote from: The Rock Doctor on May 11, 2007, 07:22:46 AM
Interesting development. If other powers with Pacific colonies take a similar position, it could really inhibit Swiss merchantile shipping in particular.
Why? Merchants are not affected by this, they can continue as usual.
Unarmed merchants are unaffected, but are Swiss merchies unarmed?
All my merchants are armed and for a good reason. If they are not allowed into Dutch ports its going to cause some major problems.
Quote from: Desertfox on May 11, 2007, 03:14:16 PM
All my merchants are armed and for a good reason. If they are not allowed into Dutch ports its going to cause some major problems.
Why are you arming merchants (a ship having some small arms aboard does however not count as "armed")? if they encounter enemy warships, they are at a disadvantage unless they carry several guns.
And if they carry that sort of armament, they are most certainly to be considered AMCs (or, if they have no naval personal aboard, maybe pirates).
The main effect of arming all merchantmen is to put them and the crew at a greater risk, and increase the number of pirates around.
As the Netherlands now claim a 6nm limit to the territorial sea, it is not like it would be hard for a merchantman to keep within Dutch waters in any area within range if most MK ships.
Have teh Swiss defined 'armed" in relation to their merchantment? Ans in what types or wepaons and in general how many per ship?
Why am I arming them? First I was only arming those merchants operating near China however there was the "Rustbucket' Affair which led to all my merchants being armed.
Armament is probably no more than a couple of 3" guns, a couple of pom poms (40mm), and small arms. Its not alot but its enough to detter most pirates, torpedo boats, and to cripple protected cruisers that get too close (Kormoran vs Sydney).
New Switzerland right now does not recognize the 6nm limit.
I doubt you have the technology to mount 1923 guns onto your ships. :D
Actually the original 'Pom Pom' made its apperance during the Boer War in 1899.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pom-Pom_(gun)
Quote from: Desertfox on May 13, 2007, 09:02:12 AM
Why am I arming them? First I was only arming those merchants operating near China however there was the "Rustbucket' Affair which led to all my merchants being armed.
Armament is probably no more than a couple of 3" guns, a couple of pom poms (40mm), and small arms. Its not alot but its enough to detter most pirates, torpedo boats, and to cripple protected cruisers that get too close (Kormoran vs Sydney).
New Switzerland right now does not recognize the 6nm limit.
There is no way i will consider a ship that heavily armed as anything other then a AMC.
If i understand the rustbucket business correctly, it was a NSwiss "merchantman" that refused to be stopped by a Spanish warship, and when warned by a shot over the bow, returned fire?
I know for certain, that if a Warship of the Netherlands find a ship on the high sea that is suspected of either running false colours or of being a pirate, it will make a stop and search. Returning fire is a good way for a ship to declare themselves of being pirates...
QuoteActually the original 'Pom Pom' made its apperance during the Boer War in 1899.
... which is why I put the smiley there. :)
... still the first
naval Pom Pom was the QF 1.5-pdr Mark I, which entered service in 1914 so I would guess that those Pom Poms you'll be using on those merchants would probably be a bunch of surplus or even obsolete Army guns.
QuoteReturning fire is a good way for a ship to declare themselves of being pirates...
.. and it gives your captain an excellent excuse to test the guns of his ship. Korpen. :)
Well it depends on your definition of heavily armed. For NS an AMC carries at least 4x4" or 2x6".
Yes Walter the merchants use sulprus Army guns, the Navy however...
The 'Rustbucket' was going from Korea to Japan (close to warzone) with a cargo of cattle. It was no more than a hundred miles from NS waters and more then 1,500 miles from the nearest Spanish land. It was clearly flying a Swiss flag and not carrying concealed weapons (it was armed with 1x3", 1x40mm, plus 2 MGs). There was no logical reason for a Spanish warship to stop a Swiss merchant in those waters unless it was trying to take it for a prize.
Quote from: Desertfox on May 13, 2007, 11:20:54 AM
Well it depends on your definition of heavily armed. For NS an AMC carries at least 4x4" or 2x6".
Yes Walter the merchants use sulprus Army guns, the Navy however...
The 'Rustbucket' was going from Korea to Japan (close to warzone) with a cargo of cattle. It was no more than a hundred miles from NS waters and more then 1,500 miles from the nearest Spanish land. It was clearly flying a Swiss flag and not carrying concealed weapons (it was armed with 1x3", 1x40mm, plus 2 MGs). There was no logical reason for a Spanish warship to stop a Swiss merchant in those waters unless it was trying to take it for a prize.
Still i can think of several reason for a ship to demand a stop and visit (were an officer is sent over to inspect the ships papers), piracy is just one.
And if the merchanman had not fired, would the crew have been worse of then they were now, or would you lost more cargo then you did?
However name one good reason for a lets say French warship to stop a British merchant traveling from Ireland to Great Britain.
Im pretty sure the crew would not have survived the encounter had they not fired. Deadmen tell no tales and the Spanish where after more than just an 'inspection'. The cows surprisingly survived the encounter (but a Spanish cruiser, a Swiss cruiser, and a Chinese TB did not!).
Sometimes a good steak is worth the trouble.
Heh.
Actually I would take a more extreme example than Foxy since France is still close to Great Britian.
However name one good reason for a lets say Columbian warship to stop an Italian merchant traveling from Italy to Tunis.
Quote from: Desertfox on May 13, 2007, 12:18:24 PM
However name one good reason for a lets say French warship to stop a British merchant traveling from Ireland to Great Britain.
Im pretty sure the crew would not have survived the encounter had they not fired. Deadmen tell no tales and the Spanish where after more than just an 'inspection'. The cows surprisingly survived the encounter (but a Spanish cruiser, a Swiss cruiser, and a Chinese TB did not!).
Well, they suspect one of the following:
(a) That the ship is engaged in piracy; or
(b) That the ship is engaged in the slave trade; or
(c) That though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship.
However if the ground for stoping is found to be unjustified, then the state should compensate for any cost the stop might have created.
Well if I recall the Swiss were in an active war with the Middle Kingdom at that time. It it not usual to arm freighters lightly in times of war to discourage opportunistic raiders? Of course the Middle Kingdom Navy was not know to be able to actually go forth and attack Swiss shipping, but at that point in the war it could not be ruled out.
One thing of note. The Swiss mentality seems geared towards a 1700s mindset. That may help others in figuring out their reasoning for doing things.
Quote from: Ithekro on May 13, 2007, 12:50:08 PM
Well if I recall the Swiss were in an active war with the Middle Kingdom at that time. It it not usual to arm freighters lightly in times of war to discourage opportunistic raiders?
Not in this period it was not, there is really only against two threats that thare is any point in arming merchentmen, and that is against subs and aircrafts, neither witch applies here.
Considering that just a few minutes after the fighting started, between the "Rustbucket' and the Spanish warship, a couple of Chinese torpedo boats on just such a raiding mission appeared looking for Swiss ships, the arming of the merchant was fuly justified. The armament of the merchant (1x3", 1x40mm, 2xMGs) was sufficient with dealing with the Chinese threat as Chinese TBs where armed only with 1x3" and 1x25mm guns (no TB would waste valuable torpedoes on an old rusting merchant).
Quote from: Desertfox on May 13, 2007, 01:27:48 PM
Considering that just a few minutes after the fighting started, between the "Rustbucket' and the Spanish warship, a couple of Chinese torpedo boats on just such a raiding mission appeared looking for Swiss ships, the arming of the merchant was fuly justified. The armament of the merchant (1x3", 1x40mm, 2xMGs) was sufficient with dealing with the Chinese threat as Chinese TBs where armed only with 1x3" and 1x25mm guns (no TB would waste valuable torpedoes on an old rusting merchant).
I disagree it was justified, as there is no need for a tb to start shooting on an un-armed merchantman, and a merchantman while it CAN win such a figh,it is unlikley to do it (a less trained crew at older guns on a slower and much larger target). 4 times out of 5 it will only result in the ship sunk, and crew killed, something that they would not be if the ship was unarmed. Hurting the enemt is very fine and all, but for that is a job for the navy, not the poor merchant sailors.
Would the Chinese take prisoners or prizes with torpedo boats? Or just sink it anyway to deny the Swiss resources?
Den Telegraaf: From the Singapore office.
There is rumours about a team of Russian officers prospecting land at the mouth of the Pulai River for a potential naval base at Tanjung Pelepas. That land would in that case most likely be leased to the Russian empire.
Rules of engagement
Ships that enter combat under false flag, or fighting under a merchant flag, will have forfeited all their rights to be treated as prisoners of war. Captains are free to string any survivors from such a ship from the fighting tops if they so wish.
Captain and crew of civilian ships that is captured without resistance will be granted their share of the profit from the sale of the cargo if their contract so allows. If they in their contract have not grated them a share in the cargo, 5% of the profit will be shared out among the captain and crew.
This money could be used to improve their position in interment.
If the ship owner is aboard, he or she will have a right to 25% of the money from the prize auction as compensation..
INformation to civilian shipping:
The Kalimati, sunda, Lombok straits are all mined and closed to comercial traffic.
Key words:
Quote
Ships that enter combat under false flag,
Quote from: Borys on June 23, 2007, 02:05:45 PM
Key words:Quote
Ships that enter combat under false flag,
Defined as 60hm.
:)
Defined by whom?
Borys
Quote from: Borys on June 23, 2007, 02:36:04 PM
:)
Defined by whom?
Borys
By the Koninklijke Marine.
"Combat" is defined as a distance of 60hm, as that is the maximum effective range of the guns used by the kind of ships that can play merchant.
Ballplatz, 1str November
The Habsburg Auslaender Minsiterium considers the provisions of Dutch Rules of Engagement as being against the Vienna Protocols, as the definition of "combat" upon range is a one sided declaration. And novel!
In this regard the Habsburgs are content with the time honoured "before the shooting starts" defintion.
Enrico Di Rubio
Gran Colombia could complain about the strait closures, but it'd be pretty foolish to try and send merchant shipping through the area anyway. GC will instead just watch the price of commodities like rubber skyrocket and count the profits of its domestic producers.
QuoteThe Kalimati, sunda, Lombok straits are all mined and closed to comercial traffic.
Question, where is the Kalimati Str? Is it the Karimata Str? Or is it the Str on the other side of Bali from the Lombok Str?
Quote from: Desertfox on June 26, 2007, 10:42:58 AM
QuoteThe Kalimati, sunda, Lombok straits are all mined and closed to comercial traffic.
Question, where is the Kalimati Str? Is it the Karimata Str? Or is it the Str on the other side of Bali from the Lombok Str?
For some reason, the is New island between Java and Fanji was named Kalimati (And Borneo is Borneo).
So it is the strait between Franji and the Island. The passage between Java and Kalimati is part of the Lombok strait.
Ah OK, Looks like the Iberians are in a bad bind then as the only remaining open strait is the Strait of Malacca. Looks like traffic between the Pacific and Indian Ocean is going to come to a stand still.
Quote from: Borys on June 23, 2007, 03:11:55 PM
Ballplatz, 1str November
The Habsburg Auslaender Minsiterium considers the provisions of Dutch Rules of Engagement as being against the Vienna Protocols, as the definition of "combat" upon range is a one sided declaration. And novel!
In this regard the Habsburgs are content with the time honoured "before the shooting starts" defintion.
Enrico Di Rubio
The first shot is not the start of an attack, it is the final phase, so from the perspective of the Netherlands if the enemy ship manoeuvres into attack position under false flags, its crew will be treated for what they are, pirates. This means that will not be POWs, but civilians, and treated as such. Primary this means that they will be put in front of a regency court (the same as the indigenous population, as the new Swiss are not Europeans they are not put in front of Netherlands courts) as pirates.
And this is not in violation of the Wien convention as they are not fighting under a recognised sign.
As there seems to be a great heap of international misunderstanding about the Netherlands stance on neutral shipping, some clarifications are needed.
1: Neutral shipping of any country is free to conduct their business in Netherlands water as much as they like.
2: The restrictions placed on Iberian shipping was due to the fact that Iberian ports and bases was used as staging ground for Swiss forces. And with the Treaty of Madrid, Iberia could not be called Neutral (in the words usual meaning).
3: As is the custom in war, neutral ships found to be carrying cargo bound for New Switzerland will have that CARGO sized*. However, the ship itself cannot be sized and will be free to do whatever it wants.
In practice however, the warship making the seizure will charter the neutral merchantman, for at least the same sum it would be paid to carry the cargo to its final destination, so there should be no losses for the skipper and crew.
4: And Netherlands will not make or take any actions against any neutral countries trading with the Swiss, to trade with both parties is one of the many privileges neutral countries enjoy.
5: While the Netherlands are aware that some inconvenience has resulted from the closures of the some of the Asian-Indian straits, this was necessary from the perspective of safety and security, both for the Netherlands, but also for the crew of ships transiting those straits, as the Netherlands have prevented several attempts by swiss forces to place mines in them. And it is expected that it will happen again. Therefore commercial traffic were limited to areas that the Netherland felt it was in the beast position to protect.
But if some state feel it makes things too tricky, please contact the local Netherlands embassy, the Netherlands will do its outmost to accommodate the needs of Neutral trade.
* Humanitarian goods excepted
Quote2: The restrictions placed on Iberian shipping was due to the fact that Iberian ports and bases was used as staging ground for Swiss forces. And with the Treaty of Madrid, Iberia could not be called Neutral (in the words usual meaning).
The Netherlands Navy was offered the same treatment. The only reason the Swiss have any advantage with respect to the use of Iberian ports is because of the choice the Dutch Government made.
We attempted to come to an understanding with respect to contraband but we will not be treated as criminals and be forced to prove were every pound of coal or barrel of oil is going.
Iberia will not be slandered with accusations of supporting the Swiss. Iberia has done everything reasonable and more to try to end the war in the first place and since then be a good neighbor to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. We have said once already that we considered the issue closed. Bring the issue up again with this 'clarification' especially in its current tone is an affront to the Empire of Iberia and its people.
Quote4: And Netherlands will not make or take any actions against any neutral countries trading with the Swiss, to trade with both parties is one of the many privileges neutral countries enjoy.
Except for Iberia... The Netherlands government has made a fundamental error in not letting this matter rest and it will not be forgotten by Madrid.
Aside: The Ambassador of the Netherlands in Madrid is summoned by the Iberian Prime Minister and demands a formal apology be issued.
New Switzerland denies ever having layed mines in said areas.
OOC Question, did you lay mines in Farinj territorial waters (Kalimtan Str)?
Discrete Austrian Note to Middle Kingdom, Netherlands, Iberia and Deutcheskiaserreich Brandenenburg.
The Imperial and Royal Government repeats its position that it considers Dutch regulations concerning Neutral Shiping in Dutch Waters in general, and Iberian shipping in particular, as unreasonable. If Iberia and the Netherlands go to war, the Habsburg Monarchy will remain neutral, continuing the war against the Swiss on the side of the DKB and MK.
Quote from: Korpen on June 26, 2007, 04:23:12 PM
Quote from: Borys on June 23, 2007, 03:11:55 PM
Ballplatz, 1str November
The Habsburg Auslaender Minsiterium considers the provisions of Dutch Rules of Engagement as being against the Vienna Protocols, as the definition of "combat" upon range is a one sided declaration. And novel!
In this regard the Habsburgs are content with the time honoured "before the shooting starts" defintion.
Enrico Di Rubio
The first shot is not the start of an attack, it is the final phase, so from the perspective of the Netherlands if the enemy ship manoeuvres into attack position under false flags, its crew will be treated for what they are, pirates. This means that will not be POWs, but civilians, and treated as such. Primary this means that they will be put in front of a regency court (the same as the indigenous population, as the new Swiss are not Europeans they are not put in front of Netherlands courts) as pirates.
And this is not in violation of the Wien convention as they are not fighting under a recognised sign.
The "Dutch perspective" runs against the established custum. The "Austrian perspective" is that the Dutch have inept ship captains.
Quote from: Borys on June 26, 2007, 11:07:15 PM
The "Dutch perspective" runs against the established custum. The "Austrian perspective" is that the Dutch have inept ship captains.
Maybe, but then we are fighting an enemy who loves to try and sneak things past under false colours and routinely changing flags like there are no tomorrow.
So if they fight under false colours or false uniforms, or its something equal, expect no mercy.
Quote from: Borys on June 26, 2007, 10:51:46 PM
Discrete Austrian Note to Middle Kingdom, Netherlands, Iberia and Deutcheskiaserreich Brandenenburg.
The Imperial and Royal Government repeats its position that it considers Dutch regulations concerning Neutral Shiping in Dutch Waters in general, and Iberian shipping in particular, as unreasonable. If Iberia and the Netherlands go to war, the Habsburg Monarchy will remain neutral, continuing the war against the Swiss on the side of the DKB and MK.
What regualtion of neutral shipping, there is none?
That the Netherlands not want neutral shipping running around in Netherlands minefields, for everybody's sake?
Quote from: miketr on June 26, 2007, 05:16:59 PM
Iberia will not be slandered with accusations of supporting the Swiss. Iberia has done everything reasonable and more to try to end the war in the first place and since then be a good neighbor to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. We have said once already that we considered the issue closed. Bring the issue up again with this 'clarification' especially in its current tone is an affront to the Empire of Iberia and its people.
It is not slander to point out that you are treaty obliged to give the swiss support, nor was it intended as slander. The Netherlands also consider the matter closed.
And if Iberia took offence with the clarification, the Netherlands hereby offer its formal apology, as that was not the intention nor purpose of the declaration.
2nd November 1907
Today a agreement between the Empire of Russia and The Kingdom of the Netherlands was signed.
The agreement concerned a 8km2 large area at the east bank of the Pulai River, that the Russian empire now will lease for at least 30 years from the first of January 1908.
That'll make for an interesting change in regional politics. Hope the Russians have insurance against mines.
Yes. Do have. ;)
6 Dec 1907
Victory at Naturna!
Now after several weeks of fighting the last starving Swiss forces on Naturna have surrendered to the Netherlands forces who invaded the island in mid November.
During the two engagements in the initial sea fighting the joint Middle Kingdom and Netherlands forces destroyed nine Swiss destroyers (and on ex-Austrian destroyer) and a light cruiser for a loss of only three torpedoboots! Sveral Swiss ships was forced to flee the area, last seen heading for Siam. The New Swiss have now been forced out of the South China sea!
Merry Christmas!
And merry charismas it is, on the 24th of December Netherlands forces conquered the Swiss occupied island of Buru!
In a lighting strike the marines of the 4th division and naval vessels subdued the Swiss troops on the island, killing half before they surrendered. The 35 prisoners were very well treated, and this reporter last saw them sitting in the shade of a few pals on the beach eating fruit given to them by other native girls, they will be moved to a POW camp on the beaches of Bali.
And only hours after the invasion I witnessed how the bay was filled with ships, there were tenders, colliers, oilier and support ships of all other kinds. By evening, as charismas presents were handed out, Buru hade became a fully operational base for the NOI Navy!
This reporter would also take this opportunity to deny any rumours of serious losses to mines en route.