Are armed minor still considered neutral regarding trade routes?
Example 1: USSR starts Poland Invasion. Warsaw is still under Polish control. I would presume that USSR could not establish trade routes trough Warsaw, but West and Axe will be able to do it.
Example 2: France is invaded. French North Africa becames an Armed Minor. They are not in war, so, in principle the 3 players could establish trade routes Trough FNA
Am I right?
15.42 Armed Minors
An Armed Minor is considered a separate independent Faction and an Enemy of its Violator.
Also relevant is the following.
14.21 Trade Routes
. . . Trade Routes can pass through Friendly and Neutral areas, including Open Seas. They cannot pass through Rival areas except for Straits. They cannot pass through any Enemy-controlled area or a Sea Area that contains Escaped Enemy Subs.
1.14 Land Area Control
. . . Factions have default control of their own Powers’ National/Colonial Capitals unless marked with a Control marker.
. . . Unless its Capital is controlled or occupied by another Power, a Colony becomes an Armed Minor (15.42) when its owning Major Power is Defeated.
Thus, we can conclude the following:
Example 1: As an armed minor, Poland in this case is an enemy of its violator, the USSR. The USSR cannot trace trade routes through Poland.
Example 2: French North Africa is a colony that becomes an armed minor only after France is defeated. Until then, it is part of the France's territory (but it's not Home Territory). Thus, a Rival may not trace a trade route through French North Africa unless (a) France is defeated and that Rival was not the violator, or (b) the Rival controls French North Africa.