I have mainly only played in the 4 through 6 era and have seen much about the Jedi before the prequels. I know the Jedi are suppose to mediate like Qui gonn does in episode one, but what to they have to negotiate with?

The republic has no army, they are not part of the Senate so they don't have the power to change laws. Beside just using the Force to manipulate people what else could they offer?

If you have thought of what Qui Gonn could have done to stop the blockade, minus using lightsaber.

Thanks!

Their role as negotiators/mediators was almost entirely driven by the Republic. When Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan went to Naboo, it was at the behest of the chancellor. The Jedi served as the leaders of the Grand Army of the Republic by request of the Senate. Virtually all the times we see the Jedi intercede in any affair, it's because a request was made by the government of the Republic to the Jedi Council.

So in that sense, they have the weight of the Republic behind them. They can't pass laws, authorize spending, or impose sanctions, but they're acting as the representatives of those who can. Jedi involvement is respected, in part because of their martial skill and their command over a mystical power no one else really understands. So when it seems like an official Republic delegation won't be respected, they call on the Jedi.

For what it's worth, recent stories—particularly in the comics—have indicated that the Jedi aren't entirely comfortable with this role. Not so much the "acting as good-faith mediators" part, but the "being used by the Senate for their own purposes" part.

You gotta remember, they're a millennia-old organization, largely responsible for connecting the Galaxy - solar-system to solar-system - the first intragalactic travelers were Jedi, their organization transcends states and planets and systems - it spans a Galaxy, and (before Order 66) they DO have an army.

Really all they ARE is an army. An army of space wizards that has done whatever they wanted for 1000s of years, because literally no one - except other space wizards (the Sith) - have ever proved that they can stop them.

An army that, again, has 10s of 1000s of years of history of using that militaristic might to push around many many many different galactic bodies and organizations (albeit for what they see as "moral reasons").

They are often not much different than any other diplomat or ambassador - someone with plenipotentiary power to negotiate. While the Republic can and does send regular old diplomats, the Jedi Order has a reputation for being mediators and fair-minded interlocutors, and tend to be pretty measured and, well, zen in their dealings.

So of course, not only do they have a diplomat's primary skillset in spades... they're also excellent at a diplomat's #2 skillset: espionage. They can sense emotion and intent, read between lines no one else can see, and get in and out of places a normal diplomat or spy would have trouble with. This in turn can not only provide leverage and information useful in negotiations (which is the purpose of a great deal of espionage in the first place, as opposed to nefarious poisonings or Mission Impossible heists), but also accomplish parallel goals or provide the Republic (and the Jedi diplomat) with more tools and options in a crisis. A Jedi Knight can simultaneously negotiate for the release of hostages while also acting as the guy to go in there and rescue them if things go bad.

As for Qui-Gon in TPM, that mission had a lot of things going on. It's possible that Valorum sent Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan in 100% good faith, but unlikely. Real-world international negotiations almost always have more going on than appears at first glance, and it's not just about purely transactional "this lifted sanction for that concession" dealmaking. Even the act of meeting for a negotiation can itself be a diplomatic victory for one side or the other, or a ploy or a feint never intended to be followed through with. Valorum and his advisors probably suspected that the Trade Federation would fold at the mere "shock and awe" of two Jedi Knights showing up, and thus sent the Jedi as a diplomatic show of force to intimidate the Federation into backing down. However, this is further complicated by all of this very likely being part of Palpatine's manipulations, even if not everything went exactly as he planned. Palpatine was nothing if not arrogant, but he was prepared for the eventuality that his Federation stooges would fail to kill the Jedi. He probably wanted Valorum to send the Jedi to further brew up a crisis for him to pin on Valorum and seize the chancellorship for himself.

19 hours ago, damnkid3 said:

I have mainly only played in the 4 through 6 era and have seen much about the Jedi before the prequels. I know the Jedi are suppose to mediate like Qui gonn does in episode one, but what to they have to negotiate with?

The republic has no army, they are not part of the Senate so they don't have the power to change laws. Beside just using the Force to manipulate people what else could they offer?

If you have thought of what Qui Gonn could have done to stop the blockade, minus using lightsaber.

Thanks!

It's never officially stated in the films, what the range and scope of their authority is, but since nobody seemed at all surprised by the idea of "sending 2 Jedi to act as mediators/negotiators" it's safe to assume they had some legal standing for their actions. Otherwise what would be the point. The ones most likely to be sent in such a capacity, are likely known to have significant knowledge in legal/cultural/republic matters, and would be able to suggest options in a tense situation. I mean, they were sent there to negotiate the end of the embargo on Naboo, and a negotiator tends to have some measure of autonomy in saying what they can/can't give in the negotiation. And if it was something much larger than they have the authority to approve, they can easily just call their representative and ask for approval of the proposal.

However in Phantom Menace, it's most likely they were sent as mediators, to facilitate the discussion between the Nabooians and the Trade Federation. The two organizations had full authority to speak for themselves, as they are the two involved parties. The Jedi would most likely have been there to try and keep things calm and civil, if tempers flared on either side. Also to try and provide a third party viewpoint in case of an impasse, which is pretty much what a mediator does. They would also be able to speak as a representative of the Republic, to give a thumbs up or down about how the Republic at large might view a certain point of the negotiations. For example if one party suggested a compromise that had something very outlandish in it, that pretty much all members of the Republic would say no to, they could voice that opinion. "I'm pretty sure the Republic would frown on the idea of forcibly relocating anyone indebted to the Trade Federation, for off-world labor camps, seeing as it's illegal on every planet. Perhaps something a bit more civil, such as, garnished wages for a fixed timeframe, based on debt owed?" etc etc.

There's two things one should consider:

1. The Trade Federation already know about their impending invasion, so they are acting as a guilty party might act towards otherwise unwitting peacekeepers, who have only been sent as mediators in a tense situation.
2. The Jedi are mysterious. There are precious few of them at the time of The Phantom Menace, and their powers are the stuff of legend. It is readily apparent in the fear that the Federation types have for the pair of Jedi, the trepidation with which they treat the situation, the bumbling nature of their defenses. "Gas! Ah...battle droids! Ah...close the doors! Ah...close the blast doors!! Ah...send in the droidekas! Ah, that worked! Ha ha! See, they're no match for droidekas!"

Problem is, Neimoidians are already cowardly and scheming, obsessed with wealth, politics, and intrigue. And these ones here are under direct command of a Sith lord, who is actively trying to start a galactic conflict! So it's not that Qui Gonn would have taken drastic actions to stop the blockade; rather, the Neimoidians have allowed themselves to jump to that conclusion and are taking drastic measures to preclude that eventuality.

The Phantom Menace is a complicated and very specific case, but I'll try and use it as an example framework to answer the question, which is what, if any, negotiating power the Jedi have in the framework of their role as diplomats and advisers.

At the start of the movie, we see Qui-Gon Jinn and Obi-Wan Kenobi sent to the Trade Federation as Ambassadors of the Chancellor himself. We know this from the holotransmission Queen Amidala shares with Nute Gunray in the subsequent scene. She refers to them specifically in this capacity, "I'm aware the Chancellor's Ambassadors are with you now" and this is further confirmed by Senator Palpatine later in her communications to him, "The negotiations haven't started because the Ambassadors aren't there? How could that be true? I have assurances from the Chancellor... his Ambassadors did arrive."

Furthermore, we also know that the Jedi were there specifically to force a settlement. This is again specifically referenced by the remainder of Queen Amidala's statement to Nute Gunray, "I'm aware the Chancellor's Ambassadors are with you now, and that you have been commanded to reach a settlement." This would indicate that Qui-Gon Jinn was specifically empowered by the Republic to demand the immediate beginnings of negotiations with the Naboo. What specifically refusal of this order would entail is open to debate, but I think the movie outlines the extreme boundary fairly well - that extreme boundary of violent refusal (which is exactly what Sidious orders them to do). In this instance, immediately the Jedi are authorized to use force to resist the refusal. Qui-Gon Jinn shows no hesitation in the commission of property destruction up to and including the destruction of the battleship if necessary when he storms the bridge. The end result of his assault on the bridge would be the arrest of Nute Gunray and immediate dissolution of the blockade by force. When instead he encounters an invasion army preparing to take the planetary capital, he immediately shifts priority to a search and rescue operation of the defending leadership for evacuation to Coruscant.

This shifting of the mission parameters is very telling; if the Jedi were only allowed certain sanctioned actions, and didn't have autonomy with their decisions, then Qui-Gon wouldn't be authorized to rescue Amidala from the invasion, instead with negotiations having failed, the Jedi would be responsible for coming back alone, with all due immediacy. Rescue of native rulers would fall outside the parameters of their mission. Instead, Qui-Gon engages in a military action under his own discretion, and this shows that the Senate will support a wide latitude of decisions in support of the Ambassador's decision. While the there may be back-channel political ramifications of poor decisions exercised by the Jedi (which was actually the case in The Phantom Menace) the official standpoint of the Senate will be to support the Jedi in their commission of their duties in the field. This implies that the Jedi is (with limited oversight) authorized to act formally on behalf of the Republic, and that provided they stick to the general policies in place (most likely handled during their brief of the situation) any deal or decision they make will be endorsed and honored by the Senate.

@Kyla

Not sure rescuing a residing member of the Repulican Senate from a hostile invasion is "outside" his scope of authority. As a representative of the Republic, especially a representative known to have martial skill of unsurpassed levels, that seems like something that would just be implied.

If his authority includes open conflict and the arrest of the instigating party in said conflict is within his scope, I think "saving the government of a planetary member of the Senate" would also fall under that broad scope.

Personally though, I don't think they were "authorized" in their capacity as Ambassadors to do all the combat stuff they were doing. I think they were just doing that under the "self-defense" rule that most sentients have in sci-fi settings.

They showed up in good faith to have a simple conversation, something Qui-Gon even points out when they are served drinks, about all this drama over a simple trade dispute. They were trapped, held against their will and exposed to lethal gas in the hopes of killing them, and were under constant assault at every corner while on the ship. So yeah, they were doing what they could to stop everything as quickly, and efficiently as possible. If that meant storming the bridge and taking the commanders under arrest, that would be reasonable.

Again though, this is all really fuzzy, we actually don't see them do ANYTHING in their capacity as Ambassadors, because it's an action movie, and people want to see laser swords and judo flips to John Williams' music. So this is all really just speculation. Plus, the real life comparisons don't hold up well either, since most Ambassadors are not mystical ninja-wizards with laser swords and magic powers. They are bureaucrats who have spent years training on how to talk and negotiate. So sending in someone like that, expecting them to go all John McClain on a bunch of badguys is just not feasible. They would have a security detail for that, who wouldn't have the authority to negotiate, because that's not what THEY do.

Bottom line: The Jedi have whatever authority the GM needs them to have. We can infer some general ideas of what they could do on behalf of the Republic, but it's hardly a codified thing, and is subject to a lot of interpretation.

I’ve always viewed the Republic using the Jedi as the proverbial nuclear option when it comes to negotiations. The Jedi are sent to dictate the Republic’s terms moreso than to negotiate a compromise.

1 minute ago, AnomalousAuthor said:

I’ve always viewed the Republic using the Jedi as the proverbial nuclear option when it comes to negotiations. The Jedi are sent to dictate the Republic’s terms moreso than to negotiate a compromise.

Considering the way Qui-Gon behaved up to the point they tried to kill him, I would disagree. He was clearly taking the non-aggression route. For all they knew at that time, it was a simple trade dispute, and no need to "go nuclear".

3 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:

Considering the way Qui-Gon behaved up to the point they tried to kill him, I would disagree. He was clearly taking the non-aggression route. For all they knew at that time, it was a simple trade dispute, and no need to "go nuclear".

I’m not saying that the Jedi themselves feel this way, but just the way the politicians within the Republic used them. There’s no doubt that the Trade Federation felt threatened by their presence. The mere presence of two Jedi makes a rather large impression.

1 minute ago, AnomalousAuthor said:

I’m not saying that the Jedi themselves feel this way, but just the way the politicians within the Republic used them. There’s no doubt that the Trade Federation felt threatened by their presence. The mere presence of two Jedi makes a rather large impression.

Yes, but when Padme meets the Jedi, her first response isn't something like "Did you make them pay? Did you force them to set us free?" She asked if the negotiations didn't go well, to which Qui-Gon said "they never took place." So she clearly assumed that the attempt would be made to try and talk, when meeting the representatives from the Republic.

I agree that the Trade Fed felt threatened, but they felt threatened by Sidious too. They were just nervous people.

1 hour ago, KungFuFerret said:

Yes, but when Padme meets the Jedi, her first response isn't something like "Did you make them pay? Did you force them to set us free?" She asked if the negotiations didn't go well, to which Qui-Gon said "they never took place." So she clearly assumed that the attempt would be made to try and talk, when meeting the representatives from the Republic.

I agree that the Trade Fed felt threatened, but they felt threatened by Sidious too. They were just nervous people.

I don’t disagree with you on those points. However, Padme was told that the Chancellor ordered the Jedi to demand a settlement. She told the Trade Federation as much.

The Jedi are dispatched to negotiations that are vital to the interests of the Republic. They are authorized to do what they need to do in order to get the job done. If that means negotiate, sure. If that means taking a more aggressive line of action, then that is an option that Jedi are supremely capable of accomplishing.

The Jedi don’t view themselves as the Republic’s enforcers, but you gotta believe that some senators/chancellors aren’t beyond the implication. They’re politicians afterall. Heck, Valorum sent the Jedi to demand the Trade Federation cease their blockade.

The Jedi don’t much like being used in this manner but they do it in order to keep the peace. Although, to be honest, Qui-Gon didn’t seem too bothered by the task.

Just the impression that the prequels always gave me.

That's just it really. I am also one who believes the Jedi are the enforcers of the republic, whether they see themselves as such is irrelevant. If the Jedi are being sent then that indicates that the matter is being taken really seriously; if you deny the Jedi the opportunity to force negations between the two parties then you are denying the will of the Republic itself and there will be consequences, including potentially war/sanctions. In that regard, the Jedi are the ultimate nuclear option, since otherwise the debates would be handled within the senate itself. The Jedi even have the authority to act with the full authority of the republic to carry out that edic with force (hehe) if needs be; it's the only explanation that they felt the need to storm the bridge of the trade federation ship because up to that point they believed that the planet was only being blockaded and only later found out that the Trade Federation were also invading Naboo.

The issue was that the trade Federation called Valorum's bluff; they tried to have the negators executed and invaded the world forcefully to attempt to force Naboo to ceed to it's authority before the Republic could decide it's next move. It almost worked as the Republic had no standing military effectively and Valorum couldn't convince the republic to take a stance against the trade union quickly enough to matter; millions would have starved to death by then. This slowness to act and lack of a follow up was exploited in the no-confidence call from Naboo. It basically had no follow up action to the Jedi being sent as they had relied on them to act as the ultimate diplomatic deterrent.

Put bluntly, the Jedi in this era didn't serve the people, they served the republic as their diplomatic enforcers and their ultimate weapon to bring factions back into line. It was that contrast between their duty between the republic and the apathic distance from the galaxy and it's people that resulted in the clone wars and their systematic destruction. I mean the council meeting said it all; they intended to do absolutely nothing about Naboo's plight because it wasn't their duty, they only act when the Republic required them to. So to me they were a very long way off being the protectors of the galaxy that they once were, they had become as complacent as the politicians who really didn't care as long as the doodoo wasn't on their turf.

Funnily enough, it wasn't even the C.I.S alliance that declared war on the Republic, the Republic via proxy of the Jedi order had declared war on the seperatists. Food for thought really.

I think this thread has thought through things more than Lucas did. Or Republic laws are extremely complex and Byzantine so much so that he cannot quickly explain it via dialog or have it make natural sense.

Phantom Menace has a great example: Padme takes her case to the senate and declares that Naboo has been invaded and the Trade Federation disputes it and off it goes into the bureaucratic weeds. She can't say, "Hey I can produce 2 Jedi Knights who saw it happen. And the trade federation tried to kill them too. They can testify to the senate" for some unexplained reason. I get that part of TPM is that the bureaucracy really ran things and was corrupt so there was only so much Valorum could do (though this is also inconsistent with Palpatine's rise to power, certainly he accrued more power to the Chancellors office in the name of expediency/war/security/etc at the end of Attack of the Clones, but we really don't see a chancellor this crippled again). I could go on and on and fans love to fill in all the blanks left in the story.

It's safe to say the Jedi had some civil police/paramilitary authority, and in TPM's case they were also ambassadors (deputized to represent the Chancellor) which gave them some political clout (which it appears they don't have by default but were likely given when needed). There was also probably a widespread public belief that the Jedi were neutral and trustworthy arbiters (who could read thoughts/intent) so they were likely sought out by conflicting parties for resolution.

But this is also epic space opera so if your group needs a more detailed outline of their authority then make it explicit by getting requests from civil authorities or the Jedi High Council or even move an adventure outside the bounds of typical civil authority like a village in the outer rim where the Jedi/Party is being asked by villagers/village elders to deal with some issue and then it's up to them to use charm, negotiation, coerceion, violence, etc to resolve things as they see fit.

7 hours ago, LordBritish said:

That's just it really. I am also one who believes the Jedi are the enforcers of the republic, whether they see themselves as such is irrelevant. If the Jedi are being sent then that indicates that the matter is being taken really seriously; if you deny the Jedi the opportunity to force negations between the two parties then you are denying the will of the Republic itself and there will be consequences, including potentially war/sanctions. In that regard, the Jedi are the ultimate nuclear option, since otherwise the debates would be handled within the senate itself. The Jedi even have the authority to act with the full authority of the republic to carry out that edic with force (hehe) if needs be; it's the only explanation that they felt the need to storm the bridge of the trade federation ship because up to that point they believed that the planet was only being blockaded and only later found out that the Trade Federation were also invading Naboo.

The issue was that the trade Federation called Valorum's bluff; they tried to have the negators executed and invaded the world forcefully to attempt to force Naboo to ceed to it's authority before the Republic could decide it's next move. It almost worked as the Republic had no standing military effectively and Valorum couldn't convince the republic to take a stance against the trade union quickly enough to matter; millions would have starved to death by then. This slowness to act and lack of a follow up was exploited in the no-confidence call from Naboo. It basically had no follow up action to the Jedi being sent as they had relied on them to act as the ultimate diplomatic deterrent.

Put bluntly, the Jedi in this era didn't serve the people, they served the republic as their diplomatic enforcers and their ultimate weapon to bring factions back into line. It was that contrast between their duty between the republic and the apathic distance from the galaxy and it's people that resulted in the clone wars and their systematic destruction. I mean the council meeting said it all; they intended to do absolutely nothing about Naboo's plight because it wasn't their duty, they only act when the Republic required them to. So to me they were a very long way off being the protectors of the galaxy that they once were, they had become as complacent as the politicians who really didn't care as long as the doodoo wasn't on their turf.

Funnily enough, it wasn't even the C.I.S alliance that declared war on the Republic, the Republic via proxy of the Jedi order had declared war on the seperatists. Food for thought really.

This is interesting food for thought.

I do think you've hit on something that the Jedi were dealing with - their attachment to the Republic. I don't know that it came into conflict with being protectors of the galaxy and serving the people (as opposed the Republic/Senate). Unilaterally (without Senate 'approval') going to war with the Trade Federation would have serious consequences. It could very well have meant that the Republic would severely sanction the Jedi and harmed the Jedi Order's ability to be protectors in the future. But maybe the Jedi shouldn't have cared about that, but on the other hand maybe they didn't want to get into the declaring/waging war business because that would lead them in a very bad direction too (but they went to war in the Clone Wars because galactic civilization was on the line).

Another scenario, one we don't know much about (in canon), is the Jedi's destruction of the Zygerrian (slavers) Empire. We don't know if the Jedi took it upon themselves or if the Republic was invovled. It could be that in days of yore the Jedi were large enough (and had a will to) to do such things in such circumstances. Maybe that's how they become the protectors of the Republic - they were the most powerful military force in the galaxy and the Republic's basic philosophy was compatible (e.g., the Republic was worth defending).

1 hour ago, Jedi Ronin said:

I think this thread has thought through things more than Lucas did. Or Republic laws are extremely complex and Byzantine so much so that he cannot quickly explain it via dialog or have it make natural sense.

Given the complications inherent in real world politics, simply on the level of a single country, and then the layered complexity above that for our global level of government, yes I think it's safe to say that a galaxy spanning Republic, with thousands of planets as members would likely be "extremely complex"

And yes we've thought this out more than Lucas did, that goes without saying, this is a Star Wars fansite for gamer nerds. Every detail will be over-analyzed to the point of absurdity. I do think it's kind of fun to try and actually flesh out the laws and authorities of a government of that scale. But yeah Lucas just came up with whatever reason made the tiniest of sense to justify having 2 Jedi there so he could start blowing stuff up. And we know this, by the fact that he proceeded to do exactly that without ever bothering to have any political talks take place. "Asplody stuff on Naboo! Need reason for Jedi there. Why Jedi there? Trade dispute! They negotiators! Go there stop dispute! Things go boom! Laser swords and boomy things!"

I am 100% confident that that is the level of care and consideration that went through Lucas' brain when thinking out that plot element.

I think you guys are selling Lucas short. Near the top of any prequel hater's list of things to hate about the prequels is "Too much space politics! Wah!" One of the most underappreciated things about the prequels is that parallel to the central character arc of Anakin Skywalker's fall is also a broader moral tale about the corruption and collapse of democracy itself. That tale starts, very deliberately, in TPM even if one can (justifiably) argue that Jar-Jar hogged a little too much screen time instead (but then the "Wah, space politics!" people would complain about that too, so you can't win, really).

While Anakin's story is personal and emotional in many respects, he also serves as an on-going barometer for the health of the Republic (or, more allegorically, democracy and republicanism in the abstract). The Padme-Anakin scenes on Naboo in AotC are admittedly insufferable, but one of the key discussions they have is about the role of the democratic process and the rule of law, with Anakin clearly and blatantly supporting an authoritarian vision. Despite his good intentions at the time, the theme of a huge part of his arc throughout the prequels is the inherent corruptibility and inevitable descent into tyranny he represents through his views, in parallel with the more immediately salient metaphor of the Dark Side. Just as he becomes twisted into an evil Sith Lord in a personal sense, so too does his Republic turn into an evil Empire, and I cannot praise Lucas enough for giving us a trilogy of movies exploring a far, far too neglected facet of civic philosophy. A significant amount of thought very clearly went into the backstory of the collapse of the Republic.

Say what you will about his ability to direct an actor (nonexistent, by all accounts), but the man can craft a beautifully relevant fairy tale world and the prequels don't miss a beat on this note.

Indeed. . . I found it very, very interesting that, when Revenge of the Sith came out, so many people accused Lucas of taking shots at the George W. Bush administration, when it was clearly inspired by the fall of the Roman Republic and its transformation into the Roman Empire. If that parallel scares you. . . well, it should.

And yes, there are absolutely many subtle layers of politics in the Prequels, and lot of it makes more sense the more pull back those layers (and account for Palpatine's chessmastering). Why do we never see Palpatine as hidebound as Valorum? Well, he'd arranged behind the scenes for Valorum to be that bureaucratically overwhelmed in the first place, partly, and partly he was deemed a "safe" candidate who wouldn't really interfere in everyone else's agenda. Because he honestly didn't care what the Senate got up to between him becoming Chancellor and the start of the Clone Wars, because once that happened he'd have all the Emergency Powers he needed.

As for the Jedi's role in the Republic. . . that's a bit harder, and it doesn't really have a real-world analogue, in part because it evolved and adapted over the Republic and Jedi's thousand-plus year history. Their job, at its most fundamental, is to just try and keep the Republic running. Mediations and negotiations are certainly part of that, and if you think about it, the Trade Federation blockade of Naboo was probably the biggest deal they'd had to deal with in a long time. Most of their job is probably relatively small things that can be sorted out just by getting the two sides talking, figuring out what they want, and reaching an accommodation acceptable to both parties. Something the size of the Republic can't micromanage every planet, so a Jedi doesn't necessarily need Senatorial backing to resolve Planet A being peeved because they feel Planet B stiffed them in a trade deal.

I think a great example of the kind of day-to-day stuff a Jedi might deal with actually comes from The Thrawn Trilogy. A Rodian and a Barabel are having an argument, and the Barabel (whose species has a deep respect for Jedi) asks Luke to settle the dispute. The Rodian had been hired by the Empire to do a job, the Rodian subcontracted part of it to the Barabel, and the Empire paid the Rodian in Imperial scrip, only usable on Imperial worlds and stations (the Barabel calls this being paid "in no-good money.") Luke manages to resolve it (partly through some luck), getting fringer-type Niles Ferrier to change the Barabel's scrip for New Republic credits. Unfortunately, the Barabel had blasted a cantina droid during the argument, and Luke tells the Barabel he's responsible for paying for that. . . no matter what the Rodian said or did, he's not the one who shot the droid. The Barabel accepts this as fair, as well.

Now, this might seem like a very small-scale problem (and, yeah, it is), and Luke only got involved because he just happened to be in that cantina waiting to meet up with Han and Lando. But its still being a guardian of peace and justice, resolving a conflict without (much) violence and reaching an agreement that works for both parties (or, at least, one they can live with). And it just doesn't require anyone in government authority getting involved. Even if you blow it up into a clan of Rodians and a clan of Barabels and their dispute over payment for services rendered, it's nothing that the Senate needs to get involved in.

Even if a dispute is big enough that Senate-level concessions need to be made, before going in a Jedi should be aware of what the Senate is and is not prepared to offer in exchange for resolving the situation. Or, in the case of The Phantom Menace, since the Jedi were dispatched by the Chancellor while the Senate was endlessly debating, what the Chancellor is willing (and able to convince the Senate) to concede. So they can offer pre-agreed-upon terms going into the negotiations, and if those are insufficient, then a long process involving getting the Senate into the negotiations proceeds. And here's a key point about the Jedi in this kind of a situation. . . they aren't strictly part of the Senate. If they Senate tries to say "We'll give them nothing, and they have to life the blockade and pay reparations and a fine for illegal parking," the Jedi can turn right around and say "That offer is stupid, they have a legitimate grievance and you need to do something to address that." Not that the Jedi can turn against the Senate and the Republic on a whim, but that they can call out the Senate for being jerks and, if not force, then strongly recommend the Senate at least meet the other party partway.

At least, in theory. In practice, how much control and authority the Senate has over the Jedi and vice versa is a tricky issue, and the Jedi certainly don't want to exercise whatever ability they have to bring the Senate to heel, since they don't want to be, or be seen as, secretly controlling the Republic government.

There's also the question of how creative the Jedi can be in solving a dispute. I'm reminded of an episode of Babylon 5, in which EarthForce is insisting Sheridan and Ivanova pay an extra 5 credits a month for their senior officer's quarters or move to smaller quarters. Sheridan refuses, and they're shortly locked out of their rooms until they pay. Sheridan resolves the situation by taking ten credits a month from the station's budget for military preparedness and applying it against the rent, on the grounds that "I'm not prepared to fight anybody until I've had a decent night's sleep in my own **** bed." The Jedi might not be able to force the Senate to concede something, but the Jedi might be able to use some of their resources (funding supplied by the Senate) to resolve the situation. Or, another episode of Babylon 5, where Sinclair is ordered invoke The Rush Act, which allows him to end a dockworker's strike "by any means necessary," including using station security to break up the strike by force and make the workers go back to work. Instead, Sinclair takes money from the station's military budget to hire extra workers, repair and replace equipment, and increase dockworker wages, meeting the demands that caused the strike in the first place (which he couldn't do until the EarthGov representative, clearly wanting to see the dockworkers put in their place by the station's military personnel, forced the invocation of The Rush Act). Being a Rules Lawyer in-universe can provide unexpected and awesome solutions.

@BCGaius and @ErikModi, excellent and insightful comments about the politics in the prequels. Draw parallels to the issues we have today and we see that Lucas had a pretty firm grasp on the political maneuvers. In fact, Palpatine did so well that a good portion of the fandom today seem to be of the opinion that the largely democratic was so inefficient and corrupt that replacing it with oppressive authoritarianism wasn't perhaps that bad. Perhaps in part due to the empire's portrayal is patterned the german nazis' idealized image of themselves, we're all too quick to also assume that the myth of the nazis being super efficient (they were not) also applies to the empire, and that efficiency would somehow justify the loss of democracy. While we saw Vader running roughshod all over the hierarchy in the original trilogy, it's been the general assumption that that was just Vader being Vader, but then we got Rouge One, where Tarkin's and Krennic's infighting and political maneuvering were on full display. The infighting is more likely to be an inherent part of the system, just like in real fascism, where social darwinism through vicious infighting is supposed to yield superior results to democratic cooperation. Solo gives us never-ending brush wars in pointless places and bribery of officials as a matter of course (Han and Qi'ra never worry if it's possible to bribe their way through security, only if they have enough money. Compare that to trying to pass through customs in an international airport today, and, without any prior arrangement, handing security a wad of bills or a gold bar rather than your passport and visa. Then imagine in what kind of place that would actually work). But... I digress, as usual. Back to the topic at hand.

...

Oh right, the Jedi.

22 hours ago, ErikModi said:

I think a great example of the kind of day-to-day stuff a Jedi might deal with actually comes from The Thrawn Trilogy. A Rodian and a Barabel are having an argument, and the Barabel (whose species has a deep respect for Jedi) asks Luke to settle the dispute. The Rodian had been hired by the Empire to do a job, the Rodian subcontracted part of it to the Barabel, and the Empire paid the Rodian in Imperial scrip, only usable on Imperial worlds and stations (the Barabel calls this being paid "in no-good money.") Luke manages to resolve it (partly through some luck), getting fringer-type Niles Ferrier to change the Barabel's scrip for New Republic credits. Unfortunately, the Barabel had blasted a cantina droid during the argument, and Luke tells the Barabel he's responsible for paying for that. . . no matter what the Rodian said or did, he's not the one who shot the droid. The Barabel accepts this as fair, as well.

I think the Jedi started out as convenient go-betweens, as they had a reputation for being impartial and fair in their dealings. This could then have gradually codified and tied them closer to the republic and the senate, which too, as a medium of cooperation, should, at least in theory, be impartial and just regarding internal disputes, so no conflict of interest if the republic keeps them on retainer to mediate in internal disputes, right?

That sort of breaks down when the republic starts becoming an entity unto itself and get's embroiled in disputes with individual members, as the Jedi are then less seen as impartial mediators and more the senate's, or the even the chancellors attack dogs, sent as a strong statement to coerce member worlds to toe the line, whether this is justified or not.

Still, the Jedi have good rep, so if the Jedi show up and say that you're wrong, popular opinion might very well swing against you, because most people trust the Jedi to know the good guys from the bad guys. And maybe they do, but that's beside the point. Still, such public trust can be undermined by rhetoric. If the republic slaps you down for blockading your neighbors, you don't turn around and tell your people "turns out general consensus is that we're the bad guys, sorry about that". Nope, you fire back and call the republic unfair and corrupt and the once admired Jedi are now misled or even corrupted themselves. That blockade was completely justified and an internal matter anyway, and senators from distant worlds that have never set foot in the sector shouldn't have a say in the matter, much less send in their attack dogs.

Because the Jedi have another rep as well. Besides being fair and balanced (sorry, couldn't resist!), the Jedi are also known for being quite able to enforce their rulings. They are known to be able to read minds, predict the future, move things around with their minds and last but definitely not least, to take down opponents armed with blasters using just a fancy sword. You'd think twice before crossing someone like that, and if you still want to, how in the world would you try calculate how much of an actual physical threat they are when they can tell the laws of physics (such as they are in Star Wars ) to go and sit this one out? Do you need send an entire platoon of soldiers to deal with a Jedi? A company? An air strike? Take off and nuke the site from orbit? And even if you do succeed, killing a Jedi on a diplomatic mission is going to rub a lot of people the wrong way, like potentially his thousands of friends in the Jedi order (how many Jedi are there anyway? The republic says that they don't keep track as they're supposed to be as hands off with the order as possible, but they would say that, wouldn't they?). No, if the Jedi show up, it's best not to mess with them directly. Which of course further reinforces the idea that the Jedi are so powerful that no one dares challenge them.

I think that the Jedi themselves fell victim to believing the hype. When Mace Windu showed up with two hundred-odd Jedi on Geonosis, it's fair to assume that thought that such a show of force would have caused the separatists to back down and either underestimated the opposition they would be facing or overestimated the Jedi's capability to deal with it. Consider how they make their entrance, not tactically securing the area, but with a dramatic flair saying "there are Jedi everywhere, so be very afraid".

Of course, Dooku, being a Jedi himself, had a pretty good idea of what a Jedi is capable of and planned accordingly. Whoops.

So even if the battle of Geonosis turned out to be a loss for the separatists, the propaganda value of mowing down nearly two hundred Jedi was probably incalculable. The separatists made it damned clear to the galaxy that they did fear, and did not bow down to the Jedi.

When you think of it terms of reputation, it makes more sense to put Jedi in the position of generals in the clone wars. It seems like a valid argument that if you put people who are known to be fair and impartial in charge of your army, your war must truly be just, right? Except if the confidence in the Jedi has already been shattered, then it's just proof that they really are the attack dogs of the republic. Also, it's a good way to get the Jedi on board with the war ("Of course it'll be a just and limited war, in fact we want you to take command and make sure it is!").

You might also say that it's a good way to whittle their numbers down through battlefield casualties, but that's just crazy conspiracy talk.

Well, so that went a bit of the rails and pretty far into speculation (again!), so I'll just wrap it up here.

Bottom line, whatever actual legal/political power/authority the Jedi had, will be entirely up to the GM to decide. Because while it's alluded to in the films, it's never expressly stated one way or the other. Because Lucas didn't feel it was relevant to the story.

My rule on this is they would loosely fall into the Ambassador/Negotiator category, to speak for the Republic at large, but likely didn't have unilateral powers to just make blanket decisions on actions for the Republic, who would likely have to vote on things. As much as I recall the Clone Wars cartoon (which isn't much I admit), the few times I recall the Jedi doing anything political, they were going there with already stated instructions from the Republic. "Go to X Planet and Offer Leader Y our Z Proposal." Usually the episode would throw roadblocks in the way of that conversation, but that would usually end up being the long and short of what the Jedi would say. The Leader Y might be unconvinced unless the Jedi perform some favors for their people, and queue the rest of the episode and it's immediate conflicts. So I think if you wanted to play it safe, just stick to them acting as Messengers/Envoys for the Republic. And have their authority stop at offering stuff the Republic has already agreed upon, like trade deals, military support, whatever.

Another option would be to allow them some level of agency on offering things based on the situation, but it would have to be reported back, and approved by the Senate. Which would likely be impractical for an immediate issue, as it would have to be put on the docket, voted on, argued, etc.

On 3/15/2019 at 1:06 PM, Jedi Ronin said:

This is interesting food for thought.

I do think you've hit on something that the Jedi were dealing with - their attachment to the Republic. I don't know that it came into conflict with being protectors of the galaxy and serving the people (as opposed the Republic/Senate). Unilaterally (without Senate 'approval') going to war with the Trade Federation would have serious consequences. It could very well have meant that the Republic would severely sanction the Jedi and harmed the Jedi Order's ability to be protectors in the future. But maybe the Jedi shouldn't have cared about that, but on the other hand maybe they didn't want to get into the declaring/waging war business because that would lead them in a very bad direction too (but they went to war in the Clone Wars because galactic civilization was on the line).

Another scenario, one we don't know much about (in canon), is the Jedi's destruction of the Zygerrian (slavers) Empire. We don't know if the Jedi took it upon themselves or if the Republic was invovled. It could be that in days of yore the Jedi were large enough (and had a will to) to do such things in such circumstances. Maybe that's how they become the protectors of the Republic - they were the most powerful military force in the galaxy and the Republic's basic philosophy was compatible (e.g., the Republic was worth defending).

The EU material implies before the Ruusan reform the Jedi ran the Old Republic and maintained family linages who were basically force wielding oligarch's. They maintained their own military and literally acted as Knight's. Also the Old Republic was mostly a Republic of constituant member state monarchies many of whom which were force wielding Monarchs.

12 hours ago, Eoen said:

The EU material implies before the Ruusan reform the Jedi ran the Old Republic and maintained family linages who were basically force wielding oligarch's. They maintained their own military and literally acted as Knight's. Also the Old Republic was mostly a Republic of constituant member state monarchies many of whom which were force wielding Monarchs.

Bottom line though, it's all incredibly unclear, and varies from author to author, or is entirely ignored. And since most of the EU got dumped (rightly so in my opinion), it's hard to use that stuff as evidence for the Jedi authority. And in a governmental body as large and bloated as the Galactic Republic, well, just increase any single nations real world government entanglements by several orders of magnitude, and then spread it across light years, and it all becomes insanely unwieldy. The GM honestly can decide what authority they had, and leave it at that.