There is speculation about the nature of the Resistance in the film and the Republic (is it now called an Alliance--I forgot)? I'm listening to the new canon book, the first of a trilogy, called Aftermath. It is set, at least this first book is, right after Return of the Jedi. Yes, much of the galaxy is still ruled by what's left of the Empire, but that Empire is on shaky ground. The worlds controlled by the Rebels continue to grow after Palpatine's and Vader's deaths, at the expense of the territory controlled by the Empire. Plus, there is a lot of infighting going on in the Empire as various ambitious "middle management" scramble to fill the power vacuum left by the Emperor. The old Empire is splintered, barely hanging on by a thread, as Moffs and Admirals and Generals strive to solidify their own power at the expense of others.
Mon Mothma, at the first Alliance Senate session--the first since the Galactic Senate was dismantled in A New Hope--proposes to reduce the Republic forces by 90%. Her advisers urge her not to make this proposal, saying that it is too early. But, Mothma, as the Republic Senate Chancellor, is determined to show the galaxy that the Rebels were not just a mob hungry for a power grab. She doesn't want member worlds to feel as if the new Republic is just the old Empire with new leadership. The Old Republic was not militarized--not until Palpatine enacted the measure during Attack of the Clones--and, Mothma wants the new Republic to attract worlds based on the promise of democracy. Her plan is to keep 10% of the former forces as a peace-keeping arm of the Republic (since the Jedi are now pretty much extinct), but to also train member worlds to grow their own world-based defense forces.
This is her political face.
Her practical face is to use the existing Rebel Alliance as a separate entity not sanctioned by the new Republic. It's her way of having her cake and eating it too. The Rebels still exist as a unified organization--they're just not an official Republic body.
I think this is pretty cool.
So, the Resistance that we see in the film is the Rebel body, 30 years later. The Republic (or Alliance...damn, I can't remember how it was called in the film) is the true government without a strong military force--not unlike the Old Republic shown in The Phantom Menace.
In the movie, we see, of course, the Republic capital be destroyed.
One other thing about the scene in the book--Mon Mothma's advisors advise her not to make this move. They argue that a strong Republic is needed, with a strong military, if the threat of the Empire is ever going to be eliminated. One of her advisers says that, without the strong military, that the conflict with the Empire will just be prolonged. A lot of smaller world forces will translate into a lot of small skirmishes, allowing the Empire to avoid being snuffed out.
And I think the film bears that out. It's 30 years later, and the two sides are still fighting.
Was that a good move on Mon Mothma's part?
There are pundits supporting both views. Mon Mothma had a Galactic Republic to rebuild while many would risk the nature of the New Republic in the face of eliminating the remnant of the Empire.
I love this Star Wars political stuff.
Mon Mothma, at the first Alliance Senate session--the first since the Galactic Senate was dismantled in A New Hope--proposes to reduce the Republic forces by 90%. Her advisers urge her not to make this proposal, saying that it is too early. But, Mothma, as the Republic Senate Chancellor, is determined to show the galaxy that the Rebels were not just a mob hungry for a power grab. She doesn't want member worlds to feel as if the new Republic is just the old Empire with new leadership. The Old Republic was not militarized--not until Palpatine enacted the measure during Attack of the Clones--and, Mothma wants the new Republic to attract worlds based on the promise of democracy. Her plan is to keep 10% of the former forces as a peace-keeping arm of the Republic (since the Jedi are now pretty much extinct), but to also train member worlds to grow their own world-based defense forces.
This is her political face.
Her practical face is to use the existing Rebel Alliance as a separate entity not sanctioned by the new Republic. It's her way of having her cake and eating it too. The Rebels still exist as a unified organization--they're just not an official Republic body.
I think this is pretty cool.
So, the Resistance that we see in the film is the Rebel body, 30 years later. The Republic (or Alliance...damn, I can't remember how it was called in the film) is the true government without a strong military force--not unlike the Old Republic shown in The Phantom Menace.
In the movie, we see, of course, the Republic capital be destroyed.
One other thing about the scene in the book--Mon Mothma's advisors advise her not to make this move. They argue that a strong Republic is needed, with a strong military, if the threat of the Empire is ever going to be eliminated. One of her advisers says that, without the strong military, that the conflict with the Empire will just be prolonged. A lot of smaller world forces will translate into a lot of small skirmishes, allowing the Empire to avoid being snuffed out.
And I think the film bears that out. It's 30 years later, and the two sides are still fighting.
Was that a good move on Mon Mothma's part?
There are pundits supporting both views. Mon Mothma had a Galactic Republic to rebuild while many would risk the nature of the New Republic in the face of eliminating the remnant of the Empire.
I love this Star Wars political stuff.
