Admirals and Emperors: Gar Stazi, Roan Fel, and their actions (Legacy Spoilers)

I dedicate this thread to my good buddy Havac, whose comments in another thread inspired me to start this topic.

An interesting question.

Over the last four years, two of the most popular and iconic characters in the Legacy comic series have been Admiral Gar Stazi of the Galactic Alliance and His Imperial Majesty Roan Fel of the True Empire. Each character has a broad fan base and both have been the subject of many interesting discussions about the state of politics in 137 ABY and whether one of them is a "hero" in the series.

Hav's question is valid- do we the fans give Stazi more slack when it comes to his actions than we do to Roan Fel? Is this because Stazi fights for the resoration of democracy, while Fel fights to regain his throne? Are Stazi's actions comparable to those that Fel has taken?

(Writers note: So that my own bias is clear, I am big fan of Gar Stazi and the GA. If you didn't know this by now, you have been living under a rock)

So before I chime in with my own thoughts/ideas, I am curious to see what my fellow Litizens think about the actions and motives of Stazi and Fel. Are the similar or are they different?

Thoughts?

--Adm. Nick

 

I think the biggest reason people will cut Gar Stazi some slack where they would pile on Roan Fel is the force sensitivity. It isn't real common to see a force user that can straddle the fence between "Light" and "Dark", usually performing undeniably light actions but occasionally dabbling in questionable or outright dark actions. An example may be what Fel did to the crew of the Dauntless. If Stazi had done the same thing it may have been thought of as a pragmatic admiral destroying a nest of traitors/enemies. Fel Sanctioning the executions conjures up images of Sith Lords slaughtering people whole sale without giving it a second thought. I think that for "normal" people it is not that hard to do something questionable, realize their actions were ridiculous, and just swear to themselves they will be a better person. Force Users could try to do the same but it seems that a few questionable acts can "infect" the person with the Dark Side and begin the slide to foaming at the mouth evil.

In one of the Legacy of the Force books, Wedge Antilles mentions that sometimes he thinks/says things that provoke a "Canny glance" (I believe that was the term) from Luke Skywalker that causes him to feel bad. Speaking of Wedge, if I remember correctly he was one of the Generals who agreed that the ships that the Vong were hurling at Coruscant needed to be shot through, even if they contained sentient non-combatants. It was framed as a tough decision that most of the generals regretted having to do but did it anyway. Another example was Wedge sacrificing the Duros squadron a little later in the NJO series. It was harsh, but Wedge did the right thing. Can you honestly see Luke Skywalker sitting back and watching an entire Task force burn? If a Jedi did something like that I would expect In and Out of universe outrage.

Perhaps this is also because the Jedi (and Imperial Knights) are always seen doing the impossible. Doing something like executing the crew of the Dauntless, firing through hostage screens, or watching a fleet of allies commit suicide all seem like things that the Jedi SHOULD be able to avoid. Imprisoning or brokering a deal with the entire crew of a star destroyer, moving the hostage ships out of the way with the force, finding a way to win that battle at Duros to save the suicidal Task Force are things we would expect a "Light" force user to do (even if our expectations are unrealistic).

 

He actually did basically that with a Mandalorian squadron in Invincible. In-universe, Boba Fett was outraged, and out-of-universe, well... you've been to these forums before.

A lot of people don't like the way dark way that Denning often likes Luke, but I suspect that Luke in Invincible had more to do with Denning posing the question of just how far one can go in fighting fire with fire. And I doubt if he'd claim that in his LOTF books, Luke had the correct answer to that question.

I have a very different reading of Stazi's actions in Renegade. When he nearly started an all-out-salvo with his allies, it wasn't just to piss Admiral Fenel off --- it was to protect the helpless lifepods that had been jettisoned from his enemy ships. And hadn't he had already given his word that they would be protected? In his own words, he did it because... "I would not become that which I fight." To me, that seems like the exact opposite of Roan Fel in Ready to Die. And not at all incomprehensible jackassery.

I think that Stazi has more of a thirst for power than he lets on, but I still applaud the rhyme and reason of his actions. Along with Treis Sinde, he's the biggest hero within Legacy's pages.

 

Gar Stazi is a reluctant leader of the GA, willing to sacrifice himself for the cause, not believing any single sentient should become more important than the idea they are fighting for.

So far, Roan Fel is fighting to take back his "birthright," and the Fel Imperial Remnant has become very much centered on him, the person. It's like with Krayt and his Galactic Sith Empire, thought not as much of a cult of personality. Yes, Roan as Emperor is much much better than a Sith in charge. Yes, Roan despises the Sith, and at least used to despise the dark side. But he still seems to be doing it for his self-interest, to regain the galaxy, to regain what's his, not "free" it. His rule, not self-rule. It's right that it would be better for the galaxy, but it's still is tainted by selfish motives.

So, it's obvious why Stazi would be more popular, with an audience mainly from democratic countries.

Also, we have not seen Fel and his Empire nearly as much as Stazi with all his GA issues.

Ganner is awesome too. So is Marasiah. Wolf, and Shado, and the younger Jedi too. Also the other GA officers and pilots are heroic too. Jariah isn't that bad either. I have a feeling the Yages are going to go heroic on us soon too, possibly other Moffs and Imperials as well.

 

Hi new poster here. I read renegade and Stazi's actions came off as foolish in the extreme. the people in those pods are still on the side Krayt the sith the enemy. yes they were at a disadvantage at the time but it only takes a few months or a year at most to build a new ships and then these well trained soldiers will be back out there fighting for the sith killing Stazi's me. If they had killed them, yes distasteful, then the sith would had have to train new troops, 1 year to make a ship, 18 to make a man. It is a numbers game cold, yes but needed for victory.

 

Some(if not many) simply have a bias against the Empire it whatever form its now taken on.

Stazi is somewhat to the GA what Pellaeon was to the Imperial Remnant at one time. He's a stubborn hold out to believes in what he's doing, no matter the cost.

I mean he's proclaimed himself Chief of State of the GA at this point and I do wonder if he would be quick to hand power back to an official government if that came to pass? I suspect much like Pellaeon in the Remnant he would remain on as Supreme Commander and toss around his political weight any time he deemed in needed, regardless of government structure.

I do think we can term Gar as a hero, just like Treis Sinde or Ganner or even Wolfe. However, to me the biggest hero thus far in Legacy so far is Jaius Yorub.

 

Depends on what you consider "victory." If you become Krayt in all but name, then why even bother fighting?

 

Stazi has his fighters escort Torr's mutinous ship, and then facilitates the scuttling of Kelsan's fleet. Notably, this scuttling consists of Kelsan reneging on his surrender -- Kelsan is the bad guy here, and Stazi didn't make any previous promise to protect the lifepods -- which, again, consist of people violating their surrender. Fenel, here, is confronting a case of people violating their surrender and performing an act of belligerence -- scuttling the ships Kelsan had already surrendered to Fenel and escaping. The only thing Fenel had to attempt to counter that was the threat, and once it started, the action, of firing on those in violation. Is it nice and cuddly, the kind of thing we want to see our heroes doing? No. Is Fenel a jackass about it? Yeah. Is this really a case where Stazi ought to be on Kelsan's side and put his alliance on the line to protect a bunch of surrender-violating belligerents to whom his Imperial ally is giving the typical Imperial treatment? No. It's all about Stazi's ego, his desire to give orders to his allies but not take them, his need to feel morally superior to the Imperials it seems he can barely tolerate working with.

The real problem, though, is that once the escape pod situation is over, Stazi deliberately protects Torr's mutinous ship, the ship that has refused to surrender and remains a belligerent, from straight-up, run-of-the-mill attack by Fenel. He's protecting a hostile enemy from an ally, for no justifiable reason whatsoever -- just to spite Fenel and stick his thumb in Fel's eye to prove he's a big boy. Again, it's all about his ego, his hideously clumsy diplomatic posturing to say "Take me seriously!", his claiming to be a head of state (bull, bull, egomaniacal bull!), his raging condescension toward the allies it seems he never wanted to ally with. He talks about Fel testing him -- he failed. He shows he won't be pushed around, sure -- but instead of showing it like a mature guy, like a Wedge or an Ackbar would show it, he shouts and pounds his chest to make it all about him, and he demonstrates raging ego, total unreliability, and willingness to turn on his allies and jeopardize the alliance

 

actions (Legacy Spoilers)
AusStig posted:
Hi new poster here. I read renegade and Stazi's actions came off as foolish in the extreme. the people in those pods are still on the side Krayt the sith the enemy. yes they were at a disadvantage at the time but it only takes a few months or a year at most to build a new ships and then these well trained soldiers will be back out there fighting for the sith killing Stazi's me. If they had killed them, yes distasteful, then the sith would had have to train new troops, 1 year to make a ship, 18 to make a man. It is a numbers game cold, yes but needed for victory.


Depends on what you consider "victory." If you become Krayt in all but name, then why even bother fighting?
end quote]

To win, to survive, in battle there is no morality, after battle be kind, be caring rebuild the enemy's home, but in war destroy it first. If your enemy surrenders be kind to him, help him, heal him, but if the pretended to surrender then can you ever trust them to lay down there arms? to surrender to stop, to give up. What then?

 

Having read Havac's analysis of the situation, I realize I don't remember as much of this incident as I thought, so I will defer on the specifics, and just say that abandoning one's morals in battle is still abandoning one's morals.

 

I guess it all depends on your perspective. To be fair, the battle didn't exactly go as Stazi had been led to believe. For purely political reasons, Roan Fel chose Admiral Fenel for one specific purpose- to push Stazi and test his resolve. First Fenel shows up late, which undoubtedly put GA lives in danger. (Something that Stazi takes very seriously, as we see in #42) Then Fenel proceeds to issue commands to Stazi like he is a mere subordinate, rather than a valued ally who should be consulted. Fenel then continues to push the envelope for the remainder of the issue. If anything, the "bluster" or "ego" of Stazi appears because from the moment his supposed ally arrives, he is treated nothing like a valued partner.

For me, the message that the issue conveyed was that the Galactic Alliance would never be a vassal of Fel's Empire. Stazi says as much in the dialouge of the issue. Good men, like Jaius Yorub or Admiral Nict, had already given their lives to try and keep the spirit of the Alliance alive. Seven years of being on the run, with the daily stuggle to just keep the fleet together, supplied, and maintained, weighs heavily on a person. These seven years have colored Stazi's outlook and morals just as much as Fel's seven years on the run have. I should point out that Emperor Fel actually seems rather pleased with Stazi's actions in the issue. In fact, I believe that Fel goes as far as to state that Fenel was in error.

One thing that I believe sets Stazi above Fel is his own refusal to see himself as a symbol. He says as much directly to Captain Yorub in #20-21. In fact, Stazi was prepared to die on the Indomitable to acchieve his strategic goals at the battle of Calamari, only to be saved at the last moment by the Jhoram Bey acting under Yorub's orders.

Yorub, who Robimus correctly states is a true hero in Legacy, saw something that Stazi didn't. That he was a leader, not just a military commander. For me, the moment Stazi declares to Fel that he is Head of State of the GA, it's the moment that Yorub's sacrifice had it's greatest meaning.

--Adm. Nick

 

IMO

Stazi correctly saw that what at stake was not only the Sith-Imperial fleet they were after but the GA's (not just Stazi's) place in this new alliance he had -- an alliance with the one he considered responsible for the Sith-Imperial War, who brought the Sith into it as allies. Is this going to be an alliance of equals or not? I think he correctly figured it was a test -- and it shouldn't have been. In other words, it wasn't about the fleet. That's just the surface. It was really about the GA's place in this new alliance. And it's not just a matter of Stazi not being able to take orders; it's the status of the GA, both in the war and post-war (when that comes and assuming the allies win).

Are their rules in warfare? Well, we have the Geneva Conventions. Fenel's order to shoot the lifepods was vindictive, following the order to scuttle the fleet. Those in the lifepods couldn't defend themselves.It was something you would see the Sith doing. Stazi was morally appalled. He's pragmatic enough to do things to make the new alliance work but there are lines he won't cross.

Is Stazi perfect? Heck no! Far from it! He's stubborn, he has blind sides, and he's not the most diplomatic of sentients. I agree -- he'd be a terrible president. But, for now, he's assuming the mantle of head of state because that's the reality -- he IS the head of what remains of the GA. Strong willed, strong-egoed but, IMO, not an egomaniac.

But that's just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

-- John

PS Great discussion! I'll try not to trample on it too much but I couldn't resist getting in on it.

 

I'm not cutting Stazi any slack, and I'm not really in love with Fel either. Both get a huge sympathy bonus because of their affiliations; Stazi is essentially in Ackbar's position, meaning he's a Rebel Alliance Admiral. 'nuff said. Fel, on the other hand, is related to the Fel and Antilles families of the beloved New Republic era, and we all know that he's also related to the Solos. The schism between his Empire and Krayt's Empire is that of Palpatine's total evil and the cuddly "lovey dovey Empire" that got established in the end of the Bantam run, declaring guys like Thrawn and Pellaeon (and Soontir Fel, which wasn't hard anyway) to be heroes and their version of the Empire to be very honourable. It was finally okay to dress up as a Stormtrooper and like Star Destroyers.

So, both Stazi and Fel should be "good" by default. Legacy isn't going for simple affiliations, though, therefore both are shown to be somewhat ruthless thanks to their respective situation. Fel is a totalitarian Emperor after all, and Stazi is holding the shambles of the Alliance together by jumping his fleet from system to system every 33 minutes for seven consecutive years. He might be a bit more grouchy than Ackbar.

When their ruthlessness comes across as badpantsery and people dedicate their post signature to them, that's one thing. People like do-what-they-like characters as long as they have some redeeming "cool" quality.

However, I don't see a double standard in cutting Stazi more slack because of his affiliation. Fel is taking the heat for doing things that are baaaad, like executing complete enemy crews and grabbing for Sith artifacts that anyone with a bit of OOU knowledge can recognize as evil to the core even before they've been drawn to the comic page. Not for being an egomaniac. Therefore, Stazi can't get the same treatment because of ego trips; he would get the same treatment for executing enemies (but he wouldn't do that, right?) and grabbing for Sith artifacts. Or, I don't know, building a Death Star. In that "moral" regard, Stazi simply embodies the Rebel Alliance and Fel embodies the Empire.

Showing the volatile arrangement behind the Alliance/Good Empire alliance this soon struck me as a bit too strong - we've worked for this arrangement since the start of the series, and when it's there, we just get told that it doesn't work anyway. Was Stazi right to not have fleeing enemy soldiers gunned down? Of course, that's the whole point of the story. Is Fel wrong to continously wipe out those who didn't accept his holy right to the throne? Of course. And this is where the characters do or do not get their slack. Not when they're on ego trips.

The most interesting part of it all is that you can hope for some peaceful future with Marasiah being a more benevolent Emperor than her father (although she doesn't come across as all that benevolent and more like the holy right to the throne type - that is, when she's actually in the comic). But is there somebody who could lead the Alliance if it ever got on its feet again? Stazi isn't fit to become galactic president a la Sheridan. His more moral underlings don't come across as larger than life and therefore would always look like the "somebody had to do it and the cast ran out of characters" solution (hey, we're back to Galactica again!). Other "good" main characters? The Jedi. Should a Jedi lead a political faction? Hm... no. The best setup I can see at the moment is Marasiah receiving enourmous enlightenment offpage and then uniting the complete galaxy, doing away with the Good Empire once and for all. The probable setup would be everything somehow working out with enough gray areas to allow for future conflicts. Or maybe Cade on the throne of the Necromongers, I don't know.

 

Exactly! The post-war galaxy is as important, if not even more important, assuming the allies prevail over the Sith. If the Galactic Alliance is viewed as a mere puppet, or as a member of the "supporting cast", it will not be in a strong enough position to restore representative government via a reformed Galactic Alliance Senate. After fighting for seven years, the last thing Stazi would want is for the GA to simply disappear or be absorbed by the Empire.

What, he pulls a vibroblade on an unarmed Imperial representative, and suddenly Stazi is not diplomatic?

Thanks for your kind words and feedback. I'd be curious to hear what you opinion is on Roan Fel and his actions...

--Adm. Nick

 

We also have to consider, that Roan Fel is hunted by his part/responsibility in the last war and the take-over of the Sith. His great tragedy is, that had he been a Palpatine-level, totalitarian emperor his own bellicose Moffs would have never been able to push him into a war with the Galactic Alliance.

Concerning the execution of the crew of the Dauntless, I'll take that with a grain of salt. We never see those executions taking place only hear this former - traiterous - governour-guy talking about them once he returned to Coruscant and reporting to Darth Maladi.

However there is a problem with the Felpire and we see it when Treis Sinde is supporting the Mon Calamari. During and after the battle aboard that Acklay he is upset and later regrets the need to kill his former comrades in arms, just because they were following orders. They idea/concept of disobeying illegal or immoral orders seems to be unknown in the GFFA.

What brings me to Gar Stazi: Who or what gives that guy the right to call himself the GA-Head of State? Who elected him into his position? Last thing I know his military AND civilian superiors had surrendered and agreed to peace with the empire. The man is actually a mutineer, a rogue, a warlord still pretending to fight a war that ended seven years ago. I really hope we see more of the civilian/military leadership of the GA-remnant in future issues, because otherwise - I'm afraid - Stazi has less of a leg to stand on than the leaders of the old rebel-alliance.

 

That is an interesting point, FTeik. I had forgotten that the Moff Council was able to pile enough pressure onto Fel to get him to agree to declaring war on the Galactic Alliance. I would love to see an issue that takes place in 127 ABY that shows the deliberations of the Moff Council and their presentation to Fel.

Well, at least one Triumvir, Gial Gahan of Mon Calamari, supported Stazi covertly for seven years. Granted Gial Gahan was not physically present on the Indomitable in the same way Mon Mothma was on Home One, but it is still pretty significant.

If one of the GA's top three leaders supported Stazi, it stands to reason that other senators, bureaucrats, and politicians supported Gar Stazi as well. His postion as de-facto Head of State is out of necessity rather than any desire for personal or political power.

--Adm. Nick

 

Those in the lifepods couldn't defend themselves
end quote]

At the time. But Stazi still could have tried to capture some of them, even the crew of the ship he saved could have been captured. Instead he let them go scot free.
Also some food for thought all the soldiers of the sith empire are actively adding and abetting genocide, due the sith's actions on Mon Calamari.

[quotejfostrander0]
we have the Geneva Conventions
end quote

Finaly the Geneva Conventions specifically out law "fake" surrender, ie, no we changed our minds we don't surrender any more. Which is what the sith, even those who killed their captains went along with the scuttle order.






That's it all imperial troops are brain wash to obey all orders it explains everything.

 

I agree, absolutely. My problem isn't that Stazi stood up for those in the lifepods against Fenel -- it's that he did it like a jackass, and then went on to do something he absolutely shouldn't have, again in a jackassish manner, just to prove a point. He immediately loses his composure and goes off on Fenel and puts his allies on the brink of shooting. Let's look at other ways he could have handled the situation without compromising his morals:

Instead of shouting at Fenel, he keeps his cool. He tries to talk Fenel down. Maybe he threatens to jump his fleet out and leave Fenel to the mercies of the enemy fleet that's no longer of a mind to surrender -- he gets the same effect of staring down Fenel without escalating things to violence between the allies. He can also be moving his fleet in-between at the same time, blocking the shot without making an issue out of it while he continues to negotiate, but not just camping in front of them and daring Fenel to shoot. In no case should he protect Torr, whose mutiny and continued belligerence is causing the whole problem.

Instead of focusing on Fenel at all, he slips his ships in-between and tries to talk Kelsan down -- insist he not violate his surrender and his word, point out that unless he surrenders, Stazi can't guarantee his life-pods won't be shot down by Fenel, threaten that either he surrenders and his men have a chance to man their ships for the GA/Fel Empire, or he blows his ships and the GA picks up his escape pods and sends them to POW camp on Tatooine and see how he likes that -- making some attempt to defuse the situation instead of making it more explosive.

Instead, he chooses the worst possible way to stand up for his morals. The most grandstanding way -- because it makes for a good comic issue, OOU -- but the worst possible way IU.

 

Legal acts shmegal acts. Of course you have legal authority if you create the laws yourself. Of course you can write your laws with the express explanation that you don't accept any persecution of war crimes, for example; just ignore the SW Geneva analog planet.

The basic fact is this: The whole crew was executed for operating a starship that a Sith Lord was on who wanted to kill Fel. This is not like blowing up the Death Star; This is stopping the Death Star, getting the whole crew onto a Yavin 4 continent, nuking that continent and then taking the Death Star. I don't really think that such a response, however legal it might be under the circumstances, is something I can agree with. Especially when I'm sitting at home in a comfy chair, sipping lemonade and reading a colourful comic book.

Is it easier when there's just one spy guy who gets executed? No. And that's why Stazi has lost a gazillion points in my book. And worse: that scene was almost even more offensive than Fel's, because it was even more "oh by the way" and because of the already described affiliation bias. Plus, the victim has to tell everyone how thankful he is for his death sentence (is this the restaurant at the end of the universe?) so that even virtually the last guy admits that Stazi is doing a really great job. But that's my moral view on the topic, I guess other people can ignore stuff like that easier and fall back to the general SW good vs SW bad division.

 

I gotta disagree with you Hav. As I mentioned in my response to FTeik in an earlier post, Stazi drew some legitimacy from former Triumvir Gial Gahan. For seven years, Gial Gahan and the Mon Calamari covertly provided Stazi with weapons, supplies, spare parts, and recruits. Sure, if Gahan had been standing on the bridge of the Indomitable with Stazi, we would of been given that nice ROTJ feeling of the political and military leaders fighting together side by side. But the reality of 137 ABY was far different from 4 ABY. In this instance, a former senator like Gial Gahan (my Mon Mothma equivilent) had to support Stazi via less obvious means. Besides, just cause we haven't seen any other GA loyalist senators in Legacy, that doesn't mean that they don't exist. Recall that the opening lines of #36 mentions that many worlds are secretly donating warships to Stazi's forces. Who is to say that Stazi isn't in contact with the former Sullustan senator? Or recieving information on Imperial movements from Raltiiri government officials?

I fully agree with your desire to see more of this kind of thing in Legacy, but I imagine that such stories would be pretty unlikely, other than the occasional mention in dialouge.

Don't get me wrong, the comparison between the GA Remnant and the old Rebel Alliance isn't ironclad. I acknowledge that one major difference is that the GA Remnant was formed out of the remains of the Defense Force, whereas the Alliance to Restore the Republic was formed out of a group of senators. However, just because Gar Stazi is acting like "Admiral in Chief", I don't think we can fault him for being undemocractic or power hungry. Note that in his coversation with Fel at the end of #36, he prefaces his "I am the Galactic Alliance" speech by saying "until such time as a new government can be formed". (My copy of #36 is currently being borrowed by a friend, so I cannot look up the exact quote). Had Stazi not mentioned the resumption of democratic government, I would of been worried too. But given the limited nature of dialouge in a comic book, statements like that carry alot of weight, IMO.

Ultimately, I think John's comments about Stazi lacking any diplomatic skills sums up why Stazi acts the way he does. His bluster and pride (in the GA) do affect his interactions with others. But I have no doubt that the second the allies prevail over the Sith and the Galactic Alliance is restored that ole' Stazi hands over the reigns of power to an elected or appointed official. Then he can either retire or assume the role of Ackbar within the new administration.



--Adm. Nick

 

It should be pointed out that Stazi acquitted himself poorly in the first issue he appeared in-- remember how he flipped out and stabbed poor Captain Bovark, rather than keeping a cool head and thinking the situation through?

The man is emotionally unstable and not fit to command a merchant vessel, let alone the remains of the GA military.

 

Stazi saved the bulk of the Core Fleet and other accompanying GA fleet units by fighting his way out of Caamas, thereby saving some semblance of the Galactic Alliance. He then keeps his fleet together for seven years, without a friendly port or shipyard, all while on the run from increasingly powerful Sith Imperial fleets.

An impressive feat by any standards, including the standards of the very Captain Bovark you mention.

John summed it up best when he said that Stazi wouldn't make a good Chief of State. In diplomatic situations, he is definately too quick tempered and suspicious. But can your really blame him? Stazi is forced to trust the man who allowed the Sith to aid his Empire in war against the Galactic Alliance. We (ie, the reader) know that Fel was forced unwillingly to comply with the wishes of his Moff Council (something his daughter is ashamed off). Yet, to your average GA member, Fel is the man who broke decades of peace and declared war on his GA ally.

Stazi is no saint. He isn't perfect. But he is a damned fine fleet commander and someone who genuinely is working towards the restoration of the Galactic Alliance.

Anyways, I doubt I can sway you and Hav to my viewpoint, but at least we can all have fun in a robust and friendly debate on the matter.

--Adm. Nick

 

"I am the Galactic Alliance." - Gar Stazi.
"I am the Senate." - Palpatine.

I said it before and I say it again, Gar Stazi isn't that impressive - just because an Imperial diplomat desperate for allies flatters him doesn't mean, that the flattary is justified. Stazi was probabely only successful for seven years, because he and his rest of the GA-fleet were a minor nuisiance, not enough to warrant the attention of the Sith themself, but their imperial lackeys like Admirals Sha Dun and Admial Valan. Only with Roan Fel taking over Bastion and making moves of fraternisation does Stazi climb up the ladder of importance.

As a last question: Was Gial Galan still a member of the triumvirate at the time of the battle of Caamas?

 

Yes, Gial Gahan, along with Bail Antilles and Nu Toreena, composed the GA Triumvirate in 130 ABY. As the Legacy Era Campaign Guide established, shortly after the end of the war the Triumvirs were replaced by Imperials. Gahan then returns to Mon Calamari and begins supplying Stazi.

This is why I argue that Stazi did have political backing up, as one of the GA's chief executives supported his resistance. In that respect, Gahan is very similar to the senators who helped form and support the Rebel Alliance.

--Adm. Nick

 

BTW, how big is the GA during Legacy? Is it truly just this ragtag fleet, so that when they'll happen to retake Coruscant (or any other planet with the facilities and resources for a senate) they'll just ask surviving politicians to step in, or the population to vote again? Is there some corner of space in which all planets still follow the rule of the Alliance, like the Imperial Remnant did? That's one of those things I'm not sure about.

Because if Stazi truly is the remnant of the Alliance, he's got less than what your average Bantam warlord had.