Fantasy Guide to International Relations
When writing fantasy, geopolitics is an element that shows up often. How nations interact with one another, how they create alliances or how they handle tense situations with each other. How nations behave with each other and communiticate with one another can effect your overall plot and character situations.
With any story, you have to go back to the beginning to understand any relationship. Kingdoms who have had past history of war or invasion or colonisation may act more wary around each other. Kingdoms who have aided each other in the past might tend to side with each other over matters. International Relations are not unlike interpersonal relations in the fact that if trust is a foundation, then much is possible in the ways of alliances and any betrayal is far more impactful. If trust was not there at the start, then an alliance will be difficult to form.
The thing about international politics especially in a fantasy setting is that there's no such thing as black and white. Countries deal with each other out of necessity even if they are ideologically removed from one another or have a history, one country will have something the other needs, be it military support, political support or resources.
Entering into a Political Alliance
A political alliance is when two or more nations agree to work together or support each other. An alliance is agreement like a contract, which lays out the demands of each nation when entering an agreement, what they expect of one another, rules of engagement between one another and instances where they would be compelled to act on the others behalf. However, on both sides, there are situations where it might compel them to be a bit more pragmatic. For example, if Kingdom A had an alliance with Kingdom B, they may demand military support on the threat of war from their neighbour Kingdom C but if Kingdom B has a fairly good relationship with C and doesn’t wish to cause a war but it will promise to stand up for them in a political sense, it isn’t exactly a great deal but it is better than nothing. Every political alliance is based on necessity rather than just need and or even on the basis that they even like each other. It is about survival or stability in the long run, protection from other nations. Political alliances shift over time and may be broken off for bigger or better things. It isn’t a friendship though it is framed like that in media. It is a contract, an agreed set of terms of how the nations behave with one other, how they behave with other nations and what both nations can get off one other.
In making a trade alliance, like I said above, it is all based on the idea of you scratch my back, I scratch yours. To make any set of trading agreements, one has to be prepared to get taken to the cleaners as well as strike gold. Trade is basically an exchange of goods and services, one person is getting something in return for giving another. If Country A has a wealth of forests such as oak to build ships, Country B might enter a trade deal to recieve the wood for a set price based on its market value however, if Country A suspects that the wood might be used to build ships or weapons that could be used against them or an ally, Country A might charge B a steeper price, akin to a tax. Trade alliances can occur between allies but also foes, though trade will be strictly limited in some situations, due to embargoes on certain items or higher tax on items and services. The need to generate wealth and trade often transcends little things like politics but the government would decide which nations its citizens will sell and buy from, who they will trade with and if they will enter into agreements. From a political standpoint point, trade agreements have to take into consideration of two things: need of the consumer and protection of national trade. If it is cheaper to purchase some goods such as silk abroad and Kingdom X has an industry in silk, Kingdom X would impose a higher tax and tarriff on foreign silk coming into the country.
Communication Between Nations
In another post, I spoke about the role of ambassadors as it corrolates to the communication between nations. Ambassadors are the main line of communication between nations, a physical being of go-betwee who is charged with the passing along of messages and dispatches. Ambassadors like I said can be seen as physical manifestations of the nation they serve and how they are treated and welcomed or if indeed they are at all, is a direct response to how one nation views its relationship with another. Ambassadors aren’t the only figures involved in diplomacy. Sometimes heads of state will communicate face to face on state visits or at summits or they will maintain communication through letters or telephone but this is sometimes dictated by the government though heads of state and even their families can maintain personal correspondence with one another (though in times of war or strife, it is not recommended). Gestures speak louder than words when communicating. Keeping a channel of communication between nations open is a gesture of “I’m willing to hear you “ whilst expelling ambassadors is the equivalent of slamming your flip phone closed during an argument. A smart nation would always keep communication open in order to remain informed even through times of tension. That isn’t to say all communication is official or even known to the parties. Letters, dispatches, reports, telephone calls, cables, telegrams and other ways of education might be opened or intercepted or tapped in order to gain information that usually would not be available or information that has been hidden for a sinister reason. Spies are not exactly seen as fair play but it would be a mistake to think that they don’t exist. Spies can be anybody from either trained individuals who are sent into nations to gather information or they can be people within the nation such as politicians or even staff paid or threatened or persuaded to pass along information.
If you look at today’s media and back to historical pamphlets and newspapers, you can glean clear as crystal who is a country’s ally, who is a foe and who is sort of on the fence. The media of nations who are at odds with each other will often lean into stereotypes of each other or they will outright slander each other or take stances against them because that is the status quo. The media may depict the citizens of that nation in unflattering light, exaggerating features or characteristics or propaganda highlighting past agressions or mistakes. Nations who are political allies might shape headlines of depictions of their allies in flattering lights in order to mould the hearts and minds of people so they will look favourably on that nation’s actions, say for example if an Invader/Occupier were slaughtering civilians in hospitals or in safe zones or systematically committing what can only be coined as an outright genocide than their allies would depict Invader/Occupier’s actions as justified or as mistakes while placing the blame on those civilians. It’s plain propaganda and bullshit but it feeds from the machine of alliances. This doesn’t even have to leak into media, it can manifest through a standpoint of civilians, they may view their allied nation in a better light then those that are their enemy and may even treat their enemy with hostility on the back of the political standpoint of their nations - this of course depends on individuals but it is safe to say that sometimes one can get swept up into the narratives peddled by the media and one’s government. Perception is a delicate balance between sculpted truth and the facts that are black and white. And even after things are made fine and dandy between nations, sometimes lingering resentments do remain.
To believe that one nation will always be friends with another or they will always hate each other would be nice and neat in theory but frankly impossible. The needs, desires, limitations and power of nations dwindles and rises like the sun and nobody knows what can happen over the course of centuries. Old enemies such as the French and English would never have been put on the same side of a major global war, but it happened in the 20th century sometimes on the same fields they fought the Hundred Years War. Allies cannot always remain friendly, this is not Ru Paul’ Best Friend Race, this is a struggle to survive and to build something everlasting, alliances will break due to betrayal or need to get the next best thing. Fair or unfair, it happens. It is the reality of life and politics. Nothing good or bad lasts. Nations have to keep moving to survive and if that is over the backs of former allies, handclasped with an old enemy in order to save themselves and protect their borders, it will have to be done.
ellievsbear
discoholicmusic
pixelskylines
vaporwave
theartofmadeline
yousharknotpass
snowghoul
s-u-f-j-a-n-s-t-e-v-e-n-s
