In response to the recent call for action made by our colleague, the President of the Federal Republic of Belarum, Evan Burke, I would like to propose the members of this organisation that we establish an international EUSC-led military peacekeeping force to be deployed in Triera as soon as we can to make it easier for the creation of an estable and fully functional government on Triera. My idea is that, after entering in Triera, we divide the territory in 4 zones, to be controlled by an EUSC member each and with some additional international troop presence as well. What do you think?
I agree with the principle of "occupational zones" that each EUSC member state will be responsible for.
My best advice will be this: forget everything about what other EUSC missions have been like. This will be different. Triera has a population slightly lower than the Federal Republic of Belarum, and was until the recent events a highly developed nation with good living standards. They will be harder to pacify, and will most likely lash out if they perceive this operation to be the creation of a police state or the institution of martial law. We must make it clear that Prime Minister Cross will be returned to power legitimately and that the country will transfer over to parliamentary democracy.
We should divide regions based on accessibility to each quarter. As the Federal Republic and the Soviet Union both share large swaths of border territory with Triera, both of those nations should probably enter along those regions. Perhaps our two nations should serve as gathering points for all peacekeeping personnel, in addition to joint coastal landings.
We concur with the Belarian and German proposals. The Soviet Union is inquisitively positive to this proposal, but before saying a final "yes" we require more information as to the extent these zones will have, which territories will come under Soviet administration, and guarantees that the term "occupation zones" is not used as we find it to be insulting to the Trieran situation and people.
I think that the size of our zones should depend on the number of troops we were willing to deploy. The Reich will deploy up to 800.000 troops on Triera if necessary, but if it isn't needed we will deploy only 500.000 men.
_ooc: I need to cry foul at the figure due to realism. Even at the height of the Iraq occupation, a major overseas deployment for the United States comparable by proportion to what you are trying to achieve, they didn't deploy anywhere near as much.
In 31 August 2009 they had some 139.000 troops in place; in 2008 it cost them $390.000 per soldier per year, and $15 billion per month. By a simple mathematical equation, the equivalent number for your 800.000 large force would be $85,7 billion per month or $1.208,6 billion (yes, $1,21 trillion!) per year. Using your smaller, 500.000 man contingent, it's $53,6 billion a month or $642,9 billion per year, which is still more than enough to render a country bankrupt in less than a week at that pace!
Compare this to the total Iraq War cost: $691 billion and counting, with $229 billion for the Afghanistan war. That's a net $920,1 billion since 2001, vs. $640-$1210 billion per year for the above figures!
If you add the expected cost of zombie uprisings, damages and risks at the home front, etc., it would be no surprise if the very preparation for such a huge deployment made you go bankrupt. I would say that 20.000 to 50.000 troops (at $2,15 billion to $5,36 billion a month, or $25,8 billion to $64,32 billion a year) is a far more affordable means of deployment. And even these many troops could be an over-stretch, given that the zombies should still be a concern even if pre-emptively, "just in case.
Keep in mind the above figures would be smaller for a conscription-based military force, but even so, the figures should not change that much in terms of proportional expenditure._
The U.S.S.R. is planning the deployment of some 30.000 personnel initially, and we offer to scale it up to 120.000 in the event of unlikely and unforeseen resistance. In any case, our troops should be the only ones present in our administrative zone; we feel that our troops are capable enough to handle the situation as hard as it might be.
In our opinion we should go for a total force not exceeding 100.000 in initial numbers. As previously stated we are prepared to commit 30.000 of these, and the other 70.000 can be contributed by other EUSC and European Council member-states.
Then we will contribute with 30.000 troops with an additional 30.000 to be deployed if needed.
OOC: But SU, you have to remember that we're talking about Triera, a country that had more than 20 times the population Iraq has, not to say that Triera is by far more modern and advanced than Iraq so it will be harder to pacify and more troops will be required for this mission. Maybe not as much as 500.000 or 800.000 but maybe 200.000 troops in total (including mine, Belarum's and yours).
OOC: I believe that we need to take action very soon on the Triera matter, when GDR gets back I think we should organize for a peacekeeping mission.
Tactically, the Federal Republic would propose a foreward operation with aerial strikes and special forces units based on intelligence collected by the Belarian Intelligence Office and Military Intelligence that will be fully shared with Soviet and Grossdeutscher authorities. Although we will be creating separate occupation zones, we may encounter terrorist groups and insurgents that are organized across those zones. Which would mean that intelligence sharing should be a principle of our collective effort in Triera.
OOC: Okay, I'm back. We can start with the planning when you want so.
Bumpity bump. I needn't say I have already moved in do I?