Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Process of negotiation in diplomacy
Positive effects of international trade
Relevance of negotiation in diplomacy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Process of negotiation in diplomacy
Running Head
The Statecraft simulation is a helpful tool for understanding the different aspects of international politics. In the simulation, students are able to experience diplomacy through trial and error in political positions within their designated countries. In addition, the simulation was created by Dr. Keller to resemble reality. As a result, each country has different advantages and disadvantages with regards to recourses, location, country attributes and government type. Furthermore, through this recourse, students have the chance to gain valuable learning experiences in a manner, not harmful to society.
Throughout the simulation, each country was presented with the issue of international relations. According to the Goldstein
…show more content…
and Pevehouse, “international relations (IR) concerns the relationships among the world’s governments” (Goldstein & Pevehouse 2013-2014, p. 1). Furthermore, international relations attempts to answer the question, “How can a group-such as two or more countries-serve its collective interests when doing so requires its member to forgo their individual interests?” (Goldstein & Pevehouse, 2013-2014, p. 3). Each country experienced international relations through the “Three basic principles-which we call dominance, reciprocity, and identity” (Goldstein &Pevehouse, 2013-2014, p. 3). Every country in statecraft experienced the IR “principle of reciprocity” since “reciprocity solves the collective goods problem by rewarding behavior that contributes to the group and punishing behavior that pursues self-interest at the expense of the group” (Pevehouse & Goldstein, 2013-2014, p.
5). Negative reciprocity occurred when each county belonging the Intergovernmental Organization, known as the United Nations, expelled CBUstan for attacking Sapphire Island. Each country came to this unanimous decision since CBUstan’s decision to attack the island automatically denied the world points for the end of the simulation. In contrast, each country experienced positive reciprocity through international trade. During the simulation, Alpha Delta Pi traded oil steel from Crustacea. These trades enabled both countries to gain needed resources. Furthermore, Alpha Delta Pi was able to make a profit on some of their trades. As a result, Alpha Delta Pi made a 2.5 to 1 trade with The Holy Roman Empire. In retrospect, the leaders of Alpha Delta Pi should have specialized in the production of steel and oil in order to gain a “comparative advantage” (Goldstein & Pevehouse 2013-2014, p. …show more content…
167). The world in the statecraft simulation experienced the principle of identity when The Holy Roman Empire stopped the ice cap from melting and saved the world from drowning. In the end, this issue was solved through the Regime Theory where The Holy Roman Empire emerged as the regime to “overcome collective goods dilemmas by coordinating the behaviors of individual states” (Goldstein and Pevehouse 2013-2014, p. 67). In addition, this issue was an example of the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Each country in the simulation had to trust The Holy Roman Empire with a designated amount of their recourses. As a result, while The Holy Roman Empire won an award for saving the world, it was in everyone’s best interest to contribute to the cause. If The Holy Roman Empire had used these recourses for their personal agenda, the rest of the world would have ostracized or attacked them. Furthermore, every country in the world including The Holy Roman Empire would have drowned. According to Goldstein and Pevehouse, “dominance solves the collective goods problem by establishing a power hierarchy” (2013-2014, p. 5). During the first few turns of the simulation, CBUstan managed to takeover Sapphire Island. This provided their country with an almost unlimited amount of recourses which they used to their in order to oppress the other countries of the world. For a while, Alpha Delta Pi had one of the highest education ratings in the world. The country’s leaders spent the majority of their time researching technologies for building and improving schools as well as the majority of their recourses building these structures. Unfortunately, since CBUstan possessed a greater amount of recourses than Alpha Delta Pi, they won the bidding for the big project to build Harvard University. In addition, during the first and second Statecraft wars CBUstan had an overwhelming amount of military reinforcements that caused damage to countries such as Alpha Delta Pi and The Holy Roman Empire. The world of statecraft was predominately ruled by realist theories.
At the begging of the simulation, there was distrust between most of the countries. As a result, each country took precautionary measures to defend their country against an attack through building up their military. After CBUstan took over Sapphire Island, everyone’s suspicions of human nature being selfish were confirmed. Soon after this, CBUstan attacked The Holy Roman Empire for threatening to attack them first. As a result, Alpha Delta Pi and the Holy Roman Empire became allies in order to deter further aggression from CBUstan and their ally Crustacea in order to ensure a balance of power. As a result of their military size, country structures and overall quality of life, CBUstan proved to be the hegemon or state “holding a preponderance of power in the international system, allowing it to single-handedly dominate the rules and arrangements by which international political and economic relations are conducted” (Goldstein &Pevehouse, 2013-2014, p. 48). While this was true during the simulation, after the simulation, The Holy Roman Empire proved to be the real hegemon when they won the majority of the Statecraft
awards. The world in the simulation experienced several different types of war. The first war was a “territorial dispute” over Sapphire Island in which several countries declared a “Total war” against the territory and it’s inhabitants (Goldstein & Pevehouse, 2013-2014, p. 129, 111). In the end, CBUstan occupied the island by defeating both the natives living on the island and the other countries attempting to do the same. After this, CBUstan gained total control of both the island’s territory and recourses. Individuals from each team practiced the “Rational Model of Decision Making” before writing their memo for each turn (Goldstein and Pevehouse, 2013-2014, p. 79). Each team member had a designated leadership role and responsibilities. As a result, each leader had to assess the status of their country and make decisions on how to improve it. Members of each country were expected follow the steps: “Clarify Your Goals in the situation,” “Order Them by importance,” “List the Alternatives for achieving your goals,” “Investigating the Consequences of each alternative,” “Choose the alternative that best achieves your goals” (Goldstein & Pevehouse, 2013-2014, p. 79). After this, each member was expected to write a memo describing this process and then share their ideas with the rest of the group. The “bureaucratic politics model” also known as “government bargaining,” occurred in Alpha Delta Pi when the countries’ leaders conducted international transactions. The Civil Libertarians, who made up the largest faction in the county, became displeased and even rioted when the country did not acquire gold and steel. However, these recourses, particularly gold, were already abundant in the county, and had to be traded in exchange for other recourses. While, this displeased a percentage of the population, it had to be done in order for the government to have enough funding to build structures and improve the overall quality of life in the country. The Statecraft simulation helped me understand international politics from a new perspective. Since I am a kinesthetic learner, the simulation was a great way for me to apply the course material in a more tangible way. This learning experience helped me understand international relations on a deeper level. I was able to learn about trade, infrastructure and war through making mistakes in a way that did not literally harm society or the world.
For the purpose of this essay, this writer will define reciprocity as the expectation or ‘norm’ that people will respond to another party in the same manner in which the other party has treated them. So, for practical purposes, this means rewarding a good deed with another good deed, and punishing a bad deed with another bad deed. Of course, in order for a system like this to produce a favorable outcome, both groups must start out with good deeds, otherwise the system will only lead to relatively permanent hostilities.
International organizations such as NATO and the UN are essential not only for global peace, but also as a place where middle powers can exert their influence. It is understandable that since the inception of such organizations that many crises have been averted, resolved, or dealt with in some way thro...
The society in 1984 revolves around 3 'superstates' which are Eurasia, Eastasia, and Oceania. All of these states are in a constant state of war with one another, yet all are self contained, and require no trade with one another, and therefor do not require war as a means of economical necessity. However, it is their feeling that as long as a constant state of war is prevailing, the people will be too preoccupied with the war effort to worry about whether or not the present political system is working. The government constantly reminds the people that when they win the war, Oceania will rule the world, and life will be better.
To understand the international relations of contemporary society and how and why historically states has acted in such a way in regarding international relations, the scholars developed numerous theories. Among these numerous theories, the two theories that are considered as mainstream are liberalism and realism because the most actors in stage of international relations are favouring either theories as a framework and these theories explains why the most actors are taking such actions regarding foreign politics. The realism was theorized in earlier writings by numerous historical figures, however it didn't become main approach to understand international relations until it replaced idealist approach following the Great Debate and the outbreak of Second World War. Not all realists agrees on the issues and ways to interpret international relations and realism is divided into several types. As realism became the dominant theory, idealistic approach to understand international relations quickly sparked out with failure of the League of Nation, however idealism helped draw another theory to understand international relations. The liberalism is the historical alternative to the realism and like realism, liberalism has numerous branches of thoughts such as neo-liberalism and institutional liberalism. This essay will compare and contrast the two major international relations theories known as realism and liberalism and its branches of thoughts and argue in favour for one of the two theories.
Understanding the World ‘We’ Live in’, International Affairs, Vol. 80, No. I, (2004) pp. 75-87.
middle of paper ... ... Unfortunately, this idea of a zero sum military power game does not match up with reality. Each state takes actions based on the given situation and neo-realism misses this nuance. Constructivism actually considers this more by analyzing the actors at play and their identities and interests.
“International Agreements.” The Concise Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Third Edition. 1994: Columbia University Press. Lanouette, William. A. “Why We Dropped the Bomb.”
Kent, J. and Young, J.W. (2013), International Relations Since 1945: A global History. 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The realism that will be the focus of this paper is that of Kenneth Waltz. Kenneth Waltz presents his theory of realism, within an international system, by offering his central myth that, “Anarchy is the permissive cause of war”. Kenneth Waltz’s central myth helps answer the question as to why war happens in the first place. During the cold war, there was a heightened sense of insecurity between Russia and the United States due to presence of nuclear weapons. The Movie Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb used cold war tension between the two countries to tell the story of a general who went crazy and decided to unleash his fleet of nuclear bombers onto Russian military bases.
The international setting is home to 196 countries and many international organizations in the world today. The number of countries and organizations in the world is a malleable figure that is constantly fluctuating. Over history, we have learned about countries conquering others, colonies forming their own countries, and countries forming their own colonies. Keeping track of the ever-changing states in the international system has been an overwhelming process. To make life simpler, over the past couple hundreds of years, in an effort to organize the states motivations to make bold decisions, we have developed theories to explain the process. These theories are backed with hard evidence and reaffirmation by other scholars over time. The main
To view this crisis I chose the individual level of analysis because it is very easy to take that approach when you have three major key players as I mentioned above. Each and every one of those men held an excruciating amount of power which could have changed the total outcome of the Cuban Missile Crisis if not used correctly. They all had the highest influences on how the crisis would end. The relationship between countries can be compared to a puzzle. One leaders relative power depicts one single piece to the dynamic puzzle made up by all respective countries and leaders. I drew to the conclusion that the individual level of analysis and international relations theory of realism combined together and allowed me to describe the situations of the Cuban Missile Crisis in the best way possible. The powerful leaders such as Preside...
Roskin, M., & Berry, N. (2010). IR: The new world of international relations: 2010 edition (8th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Longman/Pearson Education.
People’s ideas and assumptions about world politics shape and construct the theories that help explain world conflicts and events. These assumptions can be classified into various known theoretical perspectives; the most dominant is political realism. Political realism is the most common theoretical approach when it is in means of foreign policy and international issues. It is known as “realpolitik” and emphasis that the most important actor in global politics is the state, which pursues self-interests, security, and growing power (Ray and Kaarbo 3). Realists generally suggest that interstate cooperation is severely limited by each state’s need to guarantee its own security in a global condition of anarchy. Political realist view international politics as a struggle for power dominated by organized violence, “All history shows that nations active in international politics are continuously preparing for, actively involved in, or recovering from organized violence in the form of war” (Kegley 94). The downside of the political realist perspective is that their emphasis on power and self-interest is their skepticism regarding the relevance of ethical norms to relations among states.
The international system is an anarchical system which means that, unlike the states, there is no over ruling, governing body that enforces laws and regulations that all states must abide by. The International System in today’s society has become highly influential from a number of significant factors. Some of these factors that will be discussed are Power held by the state, major Wars that have been fought out in recent history and international organisations such as the U.N, NATO and the W.T.O. Each of these factors, have a great influence over the international system and as a result, the states abilities to “freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development”.
Whenever world politics is mentioned, the state that appears to be at the apex of affairs is the United States of America, although some will argue that it isn’t. It is paramount we know that the international system is shaped by certain defining events that has lead to some significant changes, particularly those connected with different chapters of violence. Certainly, the world wars of the twentieth century and the more recent war on terror must be included as defining moments. The warning of brute force on a potentially large scale also highlights the vigorousness of the cold war period, which dominated world politics within an interval of four decades. The practice of international relations (IR) was introduced out of a need to discuss the causes of war and the different conditions for calm in the wake of the first world war, and it is relevant we know that this has remained a crucial focus ever since. However, violence is not the only factor capable of causing interruption in the international system. Economic elements also have a remarkable impact. The great depression that happened in the 1920s, and the global financial crises of the contemporary period can be used as examples. Another concurrent problem concerns the environment, with the human climate being one among different number of important concerns for the continuing future of humankind and the planet in general.