

Wording is important. It isn’t a cloaking device. It may also cause the user to become invisible, but it is not a cloaking device.
Much in the way that a handgonne isn’t a pistol. And how a flintlock pistol isn’t legally considered a firearm in the United States (as the founding fathers intended)
That said? The romulans would use any excuse they feel like to launch an attack. They won’t care that it isn’t a cloak. They’ll say it doesn’t matter and the intention of the treaty was clear. Ultimately they don’t care about wording over intent, they’ll interpret the treaty in whichever way is most favorable for themselves and hope they’re still standing when the dust settles.
That said, I think any attack they launch would merely be a test of starfleet’s response. “if we attack are they going to let us keep what we take in exchange for ‘peace’, will they fight for its return, or would they press a counter-attack?” kind of thing.
Maybe I’m over thinking it.













I’d argue that a device that also happens to render the user invisible is not inherently a cloaking device.
A flintlock pistol is not legally a firearm in the US, and that distinction matters to quite a few people around here.
Now, ultimately the end result is the same (invisibility/shooty stick go boom) so in the end, the romulans would still consider it a cloak.