For the United States the prevailing world order is the focal point when resolving geopolitical conflicts, to which game theory could make a significant contribution.(1)

𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒇𝒍𝒊𝒄𝒕 𝑹𝒆𝒔𝒐𝒍𝒖𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏

Mathematically based game theory is good for the computer to generate models.(2) Useful models help us to reflect on conflict resolution. In this regard let’s check out the following three mathematical expressions:

(A) P (A| B) = P (A ∩B) / P(B), where P(B) >0 

(B) U235 + n → fission + 2 or 3 n + 200 MeV 

(C) a∗ = (a∗,··· ,a∗) ∈ A 

(A) refers to the conditional probability, and (B) a nuclear chain reaction. Both apply to a short sharp shock equivalent to a geopolitical quake that could touch off a chain of events leading to a point where a “nuclear option” is on the table if not on the button. Such showdown is an incredibly high-stakes game. No one wants to blink first if and when brinkmanship is at play.(3) Worse, all bets are off once brinkmanship turns out to be the end game.(4) 

But how can the United States get around brinkmanship while holding a challenger in check? The answer lies in (C) a Nash Equilibrium, which is a positive result of stabilizing a volatile situation in the interest of the prevailing world order.(5)

𝑺𝒊𝒎𝒖𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝑺𝒊𝒕𝒖𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑹𝒐𝒐𝒎

At Harvard we let game theory play out in a simulated Situation Room of the White House where national security crisis meetings are held. In one of these meetings the participants had to deal with a North Korean missile crisis intertwined with a digital currency challenge from China, which was taped and put on YouTube for public feedback.(6) As you can see, once they got started, they couldn’t put the brake on themselves. Spontaneous application of game theory was what we were looking for, and spontaneously the participants delivered.

Thanks to public feedback, the simulated White House team decided that Pyongyang was not targeting Seoul or Tokyo or Washington, after all. It was actually targeting Beijing for largesse and more largesse. All along, in addition to coal, Pyongyang had been selling Beijing sea sand needed for the latter’s construction projects.(7) Now, due to over-construction, Beijing no longer needed so much sand. Economic woes forced Kim Jong-un to kick up a fuss time and again. So it was basically Beijing’s problem. The U. S. sanctions worked well enough to hurt Pyongyang which in turn became a pain in Beijing’s neck. Neither Beijing nor Pyongyang could reshape the global order at the expense of Washington.

Meanwhile, never letting a crisis go to waste, the real-life White House team uses the North Korea case to warn the Southeast Asian countries about the undesirable consequences of getting too close to Beijing. It seems to be paying off. Manila, for instance, is returning to the fold by preserving the Visiting Forces Agreement with Washington.(8) The  greenback, on top of security, means something to the Philippines and its neighbors. Fence-sitters as they are, they know how to soothe Washington by keeping a discreet distance away from Beijing.

𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒄𝒍𝒖𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒓𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒓𝒌𝒔

Action may speak louder than words, but the aforementioned Harvard study indicates that decision matters most. It is also noticed that a sound decision is based on a sound anatomy of the crisis at hand. Not all crises require dramatic responses, however. As the sole superpower in today’s world, the United States can afford to keep its cool and play the long game.(9) Continuing to exercise control over global sea routes, we don’t even have to fish in troubled waters, unless “fools rush in where angels fear to tread”.(10)

——Lingyang Jiang 

Footnotes:

(1) Schelling, Thomas C. (1960). The strategy of conflict (First ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

(2) Chen, Xi; Deng, Xiaotie (2006). Settling the complexity of two-player Nash equilibrium. Proc. 47th Symp. Foundations of Computer Science. pp. 261–271.

(3) Allison, Graham and Philip Zelikow (1999). Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.

(4) Jeffrey Kimball and William Burr, ed. (February 20, 2018). "Nixon, Thieu, and the Bomb: CIA Report Sheds Light on Richard Nixon's Madman Diplomacy". National Security Archive.

(5) Nash, John (1951) "Non-Cooperative Games" The Annals of Mathematics 54(2):286-295.

(6) Crisis simulation  — The Harvard Gazette

(7) North Korea is making millions selling sand. Yes, sand. - CNN

(8) Daily Memo: An Alliance Survives—Geopolitical Futures (June 3, 2020)

(9) Pillsbury, Michael (2015). 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘏𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘥-𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘔𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘯: 

𝘊𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘢'𝘴 𝘚𝘦𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘵 𝘚𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘨𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢 𝘈𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘭𝘰𝘣𝘢𝘭 𝘚𝘶𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳. 

New York: St. Martin’s Griffin.

(10) Alexander Pope’s 1711 poem, An Essay on Criticism, line 625.