Stand-off! Diplomacy in Fraught Times

JA Morrison | LSE
Simulation 2
2 February 2021

Want to use this material in your own course? Consult this page.

Background

This particular simulation is built on the tried-and-true model of a turn-based strategy game. Previously, I have used this model across several years in Korea. Those simulations were built around the security situation in East Asia at the time. At the LSE, I did several simulations with the course “Economic Diplomacy” modelling negotiations within the WTO’s ministerial conferences.

For this course, this group of students, and the current international context, we will simulate diplomatic negotiations in the context of a public health crisis and separatist movements. There are clear parallels to the crisis that erupted in the summer of 1914–a crisis that brought the First World War–which we have studied together. How will we, as agents, deal with similar structural challenges?

Preparation

I deliberately want to minimise the preparatory work for our simulations. But, for those who are keen, the links throughout provide some background, context, and further reading.

All students need to do prior to the simulation is to sign up for a country role on the course moodle.

Scenario

Imagine the following scenario…

May 2021. Following the landslide victory of the Scottish National Party, Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon announced, “The Scottish people have delivered a mandate to run a referendum to fully restore the independence of Scotland.” In London, Prime Minister Boris Johnson denounced Sturgeon, stating “The legal integrity of the Union shall not be challenged. The issue was settled decisively in the 2014 referendum. Any new ‘referendum’, run by the Scottish government–without our consent, which we will not give–would be absolute poppycock!” The next day, Sturgeon replied, “We will proceed with our referendum one way or another–by an official ballot, if possible, or by an informal plebicite, if necessary.” The European Commission refused to make official comment, but the governments of Spain and France issued a joint declaration: “Sovereign recognition is one of the fundamental principles of the European Union. We condemn any and all such separatist actions as acts of sedition to be punished by the internationally recognised national authorities. We pledge to challenge EU accession by any such illegal entities–near or far.”

BACKGROUND.

https://www.ft.com/content/0d57b733-d99f-47eb-859b-dca65ae4b10c https://www.ft.com/content/842f20d4-1728-4e9f-8afd-f57228f01e8a https://www.ft.com/content/152c146c-d418-411b-a2b0-6a4d1b05a3bf

June 2021. The ongoing COVID-19 virus mutations have proven much worse than feared. Even after extending the UK’s lockdown indefinitely, the virus has continued to spread. By 20 June 90 percent of UK healthcare facilities are at, or above, full capacity. The daily death toll has surpassed 2500–up from 1000 per day in February. The situation is better in Europe and elsewhere. But, unfortunately, the most effective vaccines are in extremely short supply. It is widely rumoured many of European-produced vaccines are being shipped to the Republic of Ireland, brought into Northern Ireland, and then sent on to England.

27 June 2021. Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, is quoted as saying, “We should have closed the Irish border–and this loophole–in January.” (https://www.ft.com/content/c678dc02-c5f5-4717-a7ca-43c0ba3f2b44) Unfortunately, the UK government’s consensus projections leaked that same day. The government expects that Catholics now outnumber Protestants in Northern Ireland for the first time. Arlene Foster, the leader of the Democratic Unionist Party and the First Minister of Northern Ireland, goaded Boris Johnson, saying, “It is time for Johnson to get his house in order and to put von der Leyen in her place. Our union is older, stronger, and deeper than any European union.” That afternoon, the Johnson government in London (pre-emptively) invoked the UK’s emergency powers (under the Northern Ireland protocol to the Brexit agreement) to maintain the free flow of trade between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.

At 2300, the European Commission, fearing the repercussions of a “hard border” within the Island of Ireland, instead ordered a halt to all vaccine shipments bound for Ireland. At 0100 the following morning (28 June) a shipment of 20,000 doses of the vaccine (seemingly bound for the UK) was detained upon its arrival in Dublin, the Republic of Ireland.

A diplomatic storm followed between the government of the Republic of Ireland, the leadership in Northern Ireland, the government in London, and the EU government in Brussels. That afternoon, pro-UK unionist factions marched in protest across Northern Ireland. At 1807, a series of coordinated bombs exploded at these marches, killing 1200. The so-called “Real IRA,” a separatist republican group that wants to create a unified, independent Ireland, claimed responsibility.

BACKGROUND.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-49250284

29 June 2021. Security forces in Northern Ireland crack down, making hundreds of arrests. In the midst of this, 3 police officers, and 14 pursued suspects, are killed–several in questionable circumstances. That evening, further marches by pro-UK unionist factions are met with counter-marches by pro-independence and pro-EU republicans. The clashes lead to violence, which then break out into to riots. By the following morning, Northern Ireland is burning, from Derry to Belfast.

1 July 2021. Parliament (hastily) passes the Stabilisation and Preservation of the Realm Act (2021), granting the government sweeping powers to enforce the rule of law, to arrest the separatists, and to maintain order. This grants the UK government the right to (effectively) suspend the right of habeas corpus, as during war. Johnson warned the republican separatists, “You are to comply with the rule of law or face the full athority of this government and the full might of the British Armed Forces.”

BACKGROUND.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13828537

2 July 2021. 10,000 heavily armed British soldiers are deployed across Northern Ireland. Sectarian strife continues with escalating violence directed against the Northern Irish security forces and the British soldiers. Thousands are arrested and held without indictment or trial.

3 July 2021. Solidarity protests and marches erupt around the world. The marches in Edinburgh and Barcelona are much larger than expected but remain peaceful. So, too, with the marches in Gibraltar–although these are in support of the pro-UK unionists in Northern Ireland. All these marches are met with counter-marches. Protests in Bilbao are peaceful; but rumours swirl that ETA has re-formed and is planning attacks throughout Spain.

When massive protests erupt in Hong Kong, the Hong Kong authority rules them illegal under the recent (June 2020) security law. There, protesters are disbursed with tear gas and water cannons. While there are no official figures, the media estimates that more than 500 people are killed. Many thousands are arrested.

4 July 2021. Late in the evening, Ursula von de Leyen declared, “The EU believes that the local rule of law, the rule of international law, and universal human rights must be defended equally, together, and without deviation. Just because the UK has rejected the European Court of Justice does not mean that it can violate international law with impunity. Today, I am calling for the European Commission to issue an immediate and total embargo on all trade with the UK until it releases its thousands of political prisoners and suspends its occupation of Northern Ireland.”

At the same time, the actions of the UK government were roundly condemned by President Joe Biden, a practising Catholic with Irish ancestry. In his 4th of July address, Biden stated, “We inherited from the UK a commitment to the principles of liberal democracy and, equally important, human rights. For that, we shall remain eternally grateful. We have grown, however, since we declared independence 245 years ago; and now, I fear, we have grown apart from the Mother Country. As we celebrate the anniversary of our independence, we see, once again, British soldiers occupying foreign soil, putting people in cages, and suspending the human rights of the weak and the innocent. Beyond being wrong in and of itself, such actions give license to our rivals to carry on their own absues. It needs to stop, now–or else!”

5 July 2021. Two hours after the declarations of von de Leyen and Biden, General Secretary Xi Jinping issued his own statement: “The People’s Republic of China insists that the only basis of international existence is that of the sovereign nation-state. Every sovereign state has the absolute, inviolable right to preserve the security, peace, and order of its society within its borders. We reject the neo-imperialist attempts by the United States and the European Union to impose their values on sovereign states abroad and to use such disputes as a mask for the pursuit of their own economic interests. We stand resolutely with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Just as they have respected our sovereignty in Hong Kong and throughout China, so too shall we respect their sovereignty in Northern Ireland.” Rumours swirl that Xi has (secretly) proposed offering the UK the right to purchase 15 million doses of vaccine–and an enticing trade deal–in exchange for the UK formally recognising the rights of the People’s Republic of China over the island of Taiwan.

Simulation Structure

Each “actor” will be played by a team of two students.

Each actor’s objective is to maximise his or her preferences, whatever preferences those might be, however they are (re)formed. To do so, actors will not merely develop and employ their own strategies but must also adapt those strategies to the actions of the other actors in the system. Thus, each actors’ success will depend on: (1) the interests pursued; (2) his or her inherent capacity to achieve those interests; and (3) his or her ability to work strategically in an anarchic environment.

The simulation will operate similarly to a turn-based strategy game (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turn-based_strategy), such as Risk or Diplomacy. Thus the simulation will be divided into several rounds. As with Diplomacy, each round will have two components: the Negotiation Phase; and the Action Phase

The Negotiation Phase

During this phase, actors meet to discuss, negotiate, and coordinate their actions. Actors are free to meet with whomever they please. They may arrange agreements however–and with whomever–they wish. It will be up to the actors themselves, however, to enforce these agreements. There will be no third-part enforcement. This is, after all, an anarchic, self-help system!

Following the first full round, the negotiation phase will generally be around 10 minutes in length. The moderators will give a ten-minute and a two-minute warning before the negotiation phase is closed.

The Action Phase

At the end of each negotiation phase, all negotiations will cease; and each actor will have a specified number of minutes (usually 5-10) to draft that actor’s actions. These actions will be drafted in silence and in secret from all other actors. They will then be submitted to the simulation moderator (James). The moderator will then announce and reconcile the actions submitted. This determines the state of the world for the next round, which starts immediately thereafter.

Engagements

In cases of engagements–military, economic, and otherwise–the moderator will determine the results. In the first instance, the results will be determined in a model similar to Risk: a random outcome, weighted by the potency of the forces brought to bear on the conflict. Ultimately, however, the moderator will determine the result with an eye to ensuring that the simulation is an enriching and enjoyable experience for the participants. Military engagements will have a range of outcomes, including (but not limited to): total victory/defeat; stalemate with proportional losses; and lopsided losses with no victor as yet. The moderator may also develop and specify the reactions of other actors (such as separatists groups, global markets, etc).

The initial military capabilities and the distribution of territory is the same as that which exists in the world today. Actors may choose to employ as much or as little of their military capacity as they wish. They should consider, however, the likely implications of using, say, nuclear weapons and/or attacking civilian populations.

Just as in the real world, different regime types grant different actors different levels of control over the military. In some cases, political leaders can deploy military force as they see fit. In more “liberal” regimes, the chief executives and military leaders need support from political actors at home. These constraints are specified below.

Country Roles and Profiles

Republic of Ireland

The Republic of Ireland has one of the most complicated positions. It is determined to maintain its position within the EU. This goes beyond just its formal and nominal rights. It also wants to continue enjoying the same substantive connection to the Continent as any other EU member. Unfortunately, it has very difficult geography, sharing a land border with Northern Ireland–a border with a very troubled history. A substantial portion of its population supports unification; and there is deep sympathy for the Catholics in Northern Ireland–particularly when factionalism rises and the (traditionally) minority Catholics face discrimination and, many argue, oppression.

BACKGROUND.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2020/02/13/irish-unification-is-becoming-likelier

Spain

Spain is a committed member of the EU, even as the challenges of membership (particularly austerity) have fallen disproportionately on its shoulders in recent years. It has strong economic and personal ties with the UK. The UK is a major destination for Spanish exports, just as Spain is one of the major destinations for Britons travelling and living abroad. Indeed, nearly one third of all British expatriates live in Spain. (One does not wonder why!).

Yet, at the same time, the UK and Spain have long-standing, simmering tension over the status of Gibraltar. Moreover, some Spaniards remain offended at the English monarchs’ mistreatment of Catherine of Aragon and Elizabeth I’s (successful!) prosecution of the Anglo-Spanish Wars.

More presently, many in Spain feel a kinship with their fellow Catholics in Ireland, especially those who suffer in Northern Ireland. At the same time, the separatist movements in Spain–particularly in the Basque Country and Catalonia–are a clear and present danger to Spain as a sovereign state. Fearing the potential repercussions at home, the Spanish government remains deeply concerned about such movements anywhere in Europe.

BACKGROUND.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39480836

France

In many ways, France’s relationship with the UK parallels Spain’s relationship. There is the economic interdependence (although less significant). There is also a similar shared, often troubled history of relations. Indeed, across the ages, France and the UK have been, variously, the bitterest rivals and the closest of allies. France shares Spain’s concerns about separatist movements, including of course the very same Basque movement. But these challenges have proven less threatening on that side of the Pyrenees in recent years.

Arguably, France is the country most zealously committed to the European project–except, perhaps, for Germany. This is partly due to the orientation of Macron’s government. But it also follows from French history and France’s structural position in Europe. With much to fear from Germany, the French since 1945 have seen the European project as the best means to ensure their security. With their empire gone, the French also see the European project as the best vehicle to exert continuing influence on global affairs. And with the UK’s resurgence in the realms of international finance, higher education, and cultural exports, the French see the European Union as a mechanism with which to maintain Paris as a counterweight to London.

European Commission

The European Commission has a strong commitment to maintain the European Union itself–obviously–and as a robust entity with a strong international legal identity. It wants “an ever closer Union,” and it generally wants to see the locus of authority–political, economic, and diplomatic–centralised in Brussels. Consistent with those objectives, the EC works to advance the cause of human rights around the world.

The EC’s relationship with London is varied, to say the least. It does not want to make London suffer for its own sake; but it is determined to ensure that London does not dictate terms to Brussels. As throughout the Brexit Negotiations, the EC believes it is important that its European and global audiences perceive the European Union as maintaining the upper hand over the United Kingdom. These motivations, plus its increasingly urgent desire to secure vaccines, drive it to prefer establishing the de facto border in the Irish Sea rather than at the official land border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. This, however, is at odds with its desire to maintain peace within the whole island of Ireland–and, more broadly, to quell the separatist movement in Northern Ireland.

The EC has the great difficulty of balancing its own institutional interests, the preferences (and sometimes dictates) of those of the EU’s member states (such as France and Spain), and the EU’s broadest values.

United States

From a geostrategic and economic standpoint, the United States is able to hold the intra-European conflicts–particularly the separatist movements–at arm’s length. Simply put, there is little for the US to gain materially from becoming ensnared in internecine European conflict–and much to lose!

But the US typically treats Ireland sentimentally; and Ireland has always assumed an outsized importance in American foreign policy. This is partly because so many Americans–nearly 10 percent of the entire American population–think of themselves as “Irish.” Indeed, there more than four times as many people in the United States who describe themselves as “Irish” as there are people living in Ireland today.

Historically, the great spokesmen for American independence within the UK–Edmund Burke and William Petty, 2nd Earl of Shelburne–were themselves (ethnically) Irish. In fact, some scholars even argue that the fate of the American Revolution itself turned on Ireland’s 1779 sympathetic uprising against the British (https://semanticscholar.org/paper/2eab161220aea057405eda9fa0c405e2f68b00da) Thus, while Americans do think fondly of their “English cousins,” many Americans feel a deeper kinship with the Irish, particularly the oft-told narrative of English oppression and colonial resistance.

As East-West tensions softened and the Cold War ended, the American imagination returned to its old rivalry with the English. Consider the narratives and framings of three of 1992’s top films: Last of the Mohicans, Far and Away, and Patriot Games. Patriot Games is conspicuous in American films in casting the IRA in a negative light. But it frames its antagonists as “an ultra-violent faction of the IRA”–working against the IRA–and it casts Sean Bean (from the North of England) to portray the malevolent, rage-filled Irish terrorist. (You might know Sean Bean from Game of Thrones and, originally, from his adventures all around Spain during the Napoleonic Wars in Sharpe.). So, we have the vicious circle of construction and reconstruction in which, as Hollywood renders it, America’s villains are English and the English are America’s villains (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1279809/BARRY-NORMAN-Why-does-Hollywood-ALWAYS-cast-English-actors-villains.html)

There are strong parallels between the way that Americans have felt about Ireland and the way that Russians felt about Serbia in 1914. Traditionally, the IRA’s most extensive financial, military, and political support has come from Americans. At the same time, President Bill Clinton made the pursuit of peace in Northern Ireland one of his top foreign policy objectives. Wielding his famous “people skills” and the diplomatic weight of the United States, Clinton helped to break the logjam, clearing the way for the landmark Good Friday Peace accords (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/1065913.stm and https://irishamerica.com/2020/11/clintons-irishtriumph/)

When running for president, Joe Biden invoked his fellow Democrat’s legacy, tweeting, “We can’t allow the Good Friday Agreement that brought peace to Northern Ireland to become a casualty of Brexit” (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/Biden-warns-you-k-northern-ireland-peace-deal-cannot-become-n1240302) Then, in his first post-election phone call with Boris Johnson, the president-elect warned the prime minister that deepening the US-UK “special relationship” was contingent upon maintaining the Good Friday Peace agreement (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54892505)

China

Much like the United States, China does not have extensive material interests in Ireland as such; although it does have considerable economic interests in the EU. China has had a strained relationship with the UK over the past several centuries. There were the Opium Wars and colonisation more generally. And then there was the UK’s fight against communism across the twentieth century.

In 1997, the UK’s 150-year “lease” of Hong Kong ended. To much fanfare, this brought the peaceful “handover” of Hong Kong from the British authorities to local authorities reporting to Beijing. To ensure continuity and preserve Hong Kong’s advantageous ties with the UK, Beijing promised to maintain a “one country, two systems” rule.

Since then, however, the growth and opening of “mainland” China has reduced the centrality of Hong Kong. As its relative economic importance has diminished, so has its political clout. In June 2020, Beijing imposed a harsh security law to reduce protests and opposition. Critics–in the UK and elsewhere–suggest this will eliminate Hong Kong’s special legal protections and status as an entrepôt to China. But many have criticised the Johnson government in London for not doing more to criticise the crackdowns in Hong Kong.

Most broadly, Beijing has become increasingly determined to stem all separatist movements–in Xinjiang, Tibet, Manchuria, and elsewhere. It also seeks to deepen and formalise its control over Hong Kong and Taiwan. As such, China has considerable interests in seeing the international system stand against all separatist movements in the name of national sovereignty. In particular, seeing the British put down the separatism in Northern Ireland–even using violent means; perhaps especially if the British use violent means–serves China’s agenda. Driving a wedge between the UK and Europe advances its geostrategic interests, especially if it means securing British assent to its own policies at home.

BACKGROUND.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/1/newsid_2656000/2656973.stm https://www.ft.com/content/d61dca46-792a-4c82-9553-9ec8720cca81 https://www.ft.com/video/1770e787-22db-4c57-9228-31528a37de8a https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2020/10/asia/black-gold-hair-products-forced-labor-xinjiang/

UK

It is challenging–if not impossible–to define the UK’s position. Indeed, this simulation sees enormous tension between the interests of: the pro-Union factions within Northern Ireland; the separatist factions within Northern Ireland; the Scottish separatists; the Scottish unionists; pro-EU Britons; pro-Brexit Britons; the civil service and foreign policy establishment in London; the British Tory party–officially the Conservative and Unionist Party; and the Boris Johnson government.

The simple fact is that the countries, parties, and factions comprising “the UK” could be radically different within just a few years. For one thing, Scotland could leave the UK and then, perhaps join the EU. At the same time, the new Catholic majority in Northern Ireland could demand a referendum, hold one, and then win it. If it then joined with the Republic of Ireland, it would effectively “join” the EU as a result.

The loss of Scotland and/or Northern Ireland is not likely to fundamentally alter the UK’s economy or material circumstances–although the UK might have to relocate its military (particularly nuclear) forces stationed in Scotland and Ireland.

But these scenarios would substantially change the politics of the UK. Remember that the Theresa May government was given a majority only by the support of Northern Ireland’s Democratic and Unionist Party. More important, Scotland has traditionally provided much of the Labour Party’s support. Some fear that losing Scotland would effectively give the Conservative Party a free hand in UK elections–which might explain Boris Johnson’s apparent lack of enthusiasm for preserving the Union with Scotland.

Whomever plays as the UK will get to define the agenda for this “country” in the years to come.

BACKGROUND.

https://www.ft.com/content/152c146c-d418-411b-a2b0-6a4d1b05a3bf https://www.talkingpoliticspodcast.com/blog/2021/304-what-is-the-union