New Warsaw Pact RMB

WA Delegate: The Nomadic Peoples of Damanucus (elected )

Founder: The Golden Democratic Judgeship of Nullarni

BoardActivity History Admin Rank

Most Nations: 35th Most World Assembly Endorsements: 94th Greatest Rich-Poor Divides: 1,840th
World Factbook Entry

The NEW WARSAW PACT (NWP) is a loosely affiliated region where creativity and diversity are encouraged and rewarded, and national sovereignty is valued above all else. We welcome all who wish to join, regardless of political, social, or cultural ideals and beliefs... Except Nazis. We don't like them.

WA members, please endorse our WA Delegate.

Any regions interested in diplomatic relations, please contact our Minister of Foreign Affairs. Any region desiring an embassy MUST fill out an Linkapplication PRIOR to putting in an embassy request.


LinkRegional Forum
LinkRegional IRC
LinkMap of the Region


Re-founded: February 3, 2010



  1. 38

    QuickStart Guide to NationStates and the NWP

    MetaReference by Nullarni . 2,383 reads.

  2. 80

    Roleplay 101

    MetaReference by Damanucus . 3,552 reads.

  3. 1,215

    Useful NS sites and Utilities (updated: 5/31/2015)

    MetaReference by Nullarni . 33,226 reads.

  4. 376

    NationStates Guide

    MetaReference by Amerion . 11,853 reads.

  5. 31

    So You Want To Write A Resolution?

    MetaReference by Damanucus . 918 reads.

▼ 2 More

Embassies: The New Warsaw Pact, Wintreath, The Allied States, The Allied Republics, Spiritus, Glass Gallows, Global Right Alliance, Antarctic Alliance, Africa, United Empire of Islam, Valhalla, the West Pacific, Antarctic Oasis, Confederacy of Allied States, NWO, Starways Congress, and 5 others.The Second Warsaw Pact, Warzone Africa, The Great Conservative Alliance, Osiris, and United Kingdom.

Tags: Enormous, National Sovereigntist, Offsite Forums, Social, Casual, Independent, Map, Modern Tech, Regional Government, and Serious.

Regional Power: Very High

New Warsaw Pact contains 389 nations, the 35th most in the world.

Today's World Census Report

The Highest Average Incomes in New Warsaw Pact

The World Census carefully compared the average spending power of citizens in each nation.

As a region, New Warsaw Pact is ranked 5,796th in the world for Highest Average Incomes.

NationWA CategoryMotto
1.The Relentless Progress of AdaiaCorporate Police State“2.71828182845904523536028747135266249775724709369995957”
2.The Totalitarian Dictatorship of ZebelIron Fist Consumerists“Ave Imperator, morituri te salutant!”
3.The Golden Democratic Judgeship of NullarniAnarchy“We are civilizers.”
4.The Aristocratic Regime of Lowell LeberInoffensive Centrist Democracy“Max mit Uns”
5.The Corporate Conglomerate of ArestrisCorporate Police State“Your future, in our hands.”
6.The University of ZeyadInoffensive Centrist Democracy“ Sic Itur Ad Astra”
7.The Holy Violetist Empire of The Tempest of TaubateIron Fist Consumerists“Only in Violet do we trust”
8.The Jingoistic States of VioletnamInoffensive Centrist Democracy“Aut inveniam viam aut faciam”
9.The Democratic Republic of The ClarionNew York Times Democracy“Success comes after hard work”
10.The Feudal Oligarchy of TriuviaCompulsory Consumerist State“Propriety, Property, Prosperity”
1234. . .3839»

Last poll: “Coffee or tea?”

Regional Happenings

More...

New Warsaw Pact Regional Message Board

The National People's Union of Sordica wrote:I did hear that Trump want to dismantle NATO, which I hope he does because the pain suffered in Libya and Yugoslavia and other nations will never be forgotten.

To try and clarify this, I remember hearing a while ago that he alternatively wanted to "renegotiate" the US's assorted defence alliances due to other countries (paraphrasing here, I can't remember specifics) "not paying enough". Although this is generally interpreted as "he wants to cancel said agreement"(Tbh I'm guilty of doing this myself). My guess is this would mean a few possibilities.
1. He's just straight up bullshitting in regards to this(If you don't believe this is a possibility then... I'd probably call you fairly naive...,he may be a populist establishing a strong sense of going against the political class and so on but he is still a "politician"(as in engaging actively in politics)

2. Will attempt to setup something akin to a client state, with the member of NATO having to pay the US to remain. This could backfire with countries deciding it's better to go with Russia, refusing to negotiate,etc. Could end up with US losing power projection too due to countries no longer permitting it'd bases and it's troops(For example Australia currently has US forces deployed in it's North(I think out of Darwin, not 100%, these troops are making China understandably anxt'd but the trade off makes it worthwhile for Aus, however if ANZUS was to go it'd almost be certain these troops would follow, essentially meaning the US loses a bunch of close hand troops in the region alongside what essentially amounts to a giant stationary aircraft carrier) so on.

3. Maybe just cancelling payment for renting it's assorted oversea's military bases(not even sure if it currently has to rent...) alongside decreasing it's military spending and simultaneously forcing the european countries to increase their own.Could also see this backfiring if countries would prefer to leave than do it/ countries just booting out the US but in my mind the disincentive of doing that far outweigh the disincentive of having to raise ones military budget. For example ik ANZUS(Aus's alliance with the US, their used to be SEATO but that sorta died at some point)is projected to decrease Australia's required military spending from 4-6% to 2%(What we're currently at, although it was recently untied to GDP so...)

Ampia, Sordica, and Sunthreit

The Tribal Federation of Harkain wrote:To try and clarify this, I remember hearing a while ago that he alternatively wanted to "renegotiate" the US's assorted defence alliances due to other countries (paraphrasing here, I can't remember specifics) "not paying enough". Although this is generally interpreted as "he wants to cancel said agreement"(Tbh I'm guilty of doing this myself). My guess is this would mean a few possibilities.
1. He's just straight up bullshitting in regards to this(If you don't believe this is a possibility then... I'd probably call you fairly naive...,he may be a populist establishing a strong sense of going against the political class and so on but he is still a "politician"(as in engaging actively in politics)
2. Will attempt to setup something akin to a client state, with the member of NATO having to pay the US to remain. This could backfire with countries deciding it's better to go with Russia, refusing to negotiate,etc. Could end up with US losing power projection too due to countries no longer permitting it'd bases and it's troops(For example Australia currently has US forces deployed in it's North(I think out of Darwin, not 100%, these troops are making China understandably anxt'd but the trade off makes it worthwhile for Aus, however if ANZUS was to go it'd almost be certain these troops would follow, essentially meaning the US loses a bunch of close hand troops in the region alongside what essentially amounts to a giant stationary aircraft carrier) so on.
3. Maybe just cancelling payment for renting it's assorted oversea's military bases(not even sure if it currently has to rent...) alongside decreasing it's military spending and simultaneously forcing the european countries to increase their own.Could also see this backfiring if countries would prefer to leave than do it/ countries just booting out the US but in my mind the disincentive of doing that far outweigh the disincentive of having to raise ones military budget. For example ik ANZUS(Aus's alliance with the US, their used to be SEATO but that sorta died at some point)is projected to decrease Australia's required military spending from 4-6% to 2%(What we're currently at, although it was recently untied to GDP so...)

Or it could mean that in all these alliances ( which I support if other members increase their military spending) the US pays for the force projection capabilites while the other nations only pay for defensive force capabilities. I think the UK and Australia pay their fair share but others do not.

Ampia

The Aristocratic Regime of Lowell Leber wrote:Or it could mean that in all these alliances ( which I support if other members increase their military spending) the US pays for the force projection capabilites while the other nations only pay for defensive force capabilities. I think the UK and Australia pay their fair share but others do not.

Sorta what I meant in regards to the third option. Although I can't really foresee that large of a need for the US to raise it's military spending, particularly if it's strong arming it's allies into doing so. Times are fairly stable for them, they aren't stuck being near the growing tension of the South China Sea nor the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, while they are involved in the various terrorism incidents the ultimate defence of having an ocean between you and your enemy alongside having a capable intelligence agency both internal(FBI), external(CIA) and whatever the NSA is(could be internal, not sure if the FBI just acts as an interstate police force or has a wider function beyond that)) seems to have kept you relatively safe. That and how as recent events have unfortunately shown, Europe appears to be the main target.

Another side note I forgot to mention is that it could potentially destroy the goodwill the US has from a lot of nations. It may not be apparent but it sure as well is over here, friendship and goodwill towards the US is basically the only thing stopping the "Lets turn Australia into Switzerland" movement from kicking off and tbh with you, their were grumbles as soon as Trump appeared to be winning the race(From what I can tell the views that have made it to Australia conflict with the majority of the Australian public), if he were to win, then turn around and attempt to renegotiate ANZUS and or force another country to increase it's military spending(and therefore lower all it's other spending) it'd probably get a good few people worried(and probably piss the people off in said countries(and probs some Aussies as well considering how surprisingly strong our ties with Europe Culturally still are(For some reason we're in the Eurovision... I really don't know why...))), definitely be interesting to see if it's enough to start an active movement to move Australia towards a more neutral position and so forth.

Ampia

Hey guys! This is my first "puppet" state. What's a good idea for its history?

-the Meritocratic Union of Eastern States.

Ampia

The Borderlands of Meritocratic Autonomous Zone wrote:Hey guys! This is my first "puppet" state. What's a good idea for its history?
-the Meritocratic Union of Eastern States.

That depends on what role your nation plays in its history. Was it a territory of your main nation at some point?

Ampia

What do you guys think of my new flag?

Ampia, Mikoyansk, and The Meritocratic Union of Eastern States

The National People's Union of Sordica wrote:What do you guys think of my new flag?

I like the looks of it, is there any significance to the imagery of the flag?

Ampia

The Federated Island Republics of Mikoyansk wrote:That depends on what role your nation plays in its history. Was it a territory of your main nation at some point?

Yes, due to its ethnic minority, the puppet state has been an autonomous region for much of my nation's history.

Forum View

by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics