One of the first things that the new Prime Minister wanted to do is reach out to the Union of Cordellia. Cordellia, a country which has reverted to an older name to harken back to a more peaceful time, seems to be stabilizing under the leadership of James Hedger. As such, the Northern Union has seen fit to discuss a matter of extreme importance - the future of the relationship between the states and economy of the Arctic Union and Cordellia.

To bring Mr. Hedger up to speed, the Northern Union is in a loose EU-style union with Iceland and Norway, who have been working closely together in recent years. The union, titled the Arctic Union (AU) emphasizes an Arctic identity and steps are always being taken to bring members of the union closer together both culturally and politically. Most importantly, however, it functions as a single market with freedom of movement for goods, capital, and people. The nations within the union have seen their economies bolstered by their membership in the union.

Today we want to discuss the possibility of Cordellian membership in the Arctic Union. Cordellian Alaska, especially, contains one end of the Northwest Passage. This waterway is strategically the most important in the Arctic Union as its thawing allows for more trade to pass within our borders and allows the necessary investment to permit increased settlement in the thawing north. While the waterway is contained within the borders of Cordellia and the Northern Union, all member states of the Arctic Union benefit from it being safe and open. This combined with the extensive trade along our rather long border means that there is a lot to gain from Cordellian membership in the Arctic Union.

However, this is not without its drawbacks. Cordellian participation in the core single market aspect of the AU requires them to withdraw from Columbian currency union and single market, which undoubtedly will sting a bit even with trade from the south and west being replaced with trade from the north.

While we would love to see Cordellia in the Arctic Union someday, we understand that due to the aforementioned drawbacks this may not happen. To that end, we would like to also propose an alternative arrangement:

• Maintaining the current trade arrangement facilitating economic activity between the NU and Alaska and allowing for an open border at Alaska and Point Roberts

• Working to reduce border cross-times elsewhere and explore alternate means of promoting business between our two states without free trade

• Cordellian cooperation in keeping the Northwest Passage open and safe, which reaps benefits for us both.

We look forward to a delightful and productive discussion.