The Geopolitical Negotiating Table

Have Current Events Smashed It To Smithereens?

It is commonly known that being the one to make the first move in a negotiation process, you have the advantage. You set the start point, and the timing, and you can influence the negotiations to your advantage more than your counterparty. But, the danger of starting with a proposal that is deemed so unfair by the counterparty that they immediately leave is a possibility. So, how can we negotiate in this modern world of geopolitics? Is there any trust left to even want to negotiate? How can the key issues of the world be negotiated today?

Photo by Cytonn Photography on Unsplash

---

Game Theory of Negotiation

The complexity of game theory in geopolitics boils down in simple terms to the fact that it is a game with 195 players, and each of these players has many strategies to choose from, with differing payoffs. Each of these strategies affects the other players. This is why the game of geopolitics is always occurring, even during periods with little tension. Every country is seeking its Nash Equilibrium. Any change in strategy by one country could mean another country no longer has a Nash Equilibrium, which is the optimal strategy. This occurs until a player no longer has the capabilities to achieve any Nash Equilibrium. Then comes cooperation with those who still can achieve an optimal strategy, or a period of rebuilding.

Those who stay in the game the longest are those who have bargaining power or any sort of power. This could be hard power through nuclear weapons, or a strong military. This could be soft power through culture. This could be connectivity to so many states that the most connected states automatically receive a seat at the negotiation table because they’re always involved.

Modelling game structures, game outcomes, and behavioural game theory are important aspects of game theory. There is no doubt that these players understand how the other thinks. They understand the games, and how they are played. We also currently see cooperation between the players in the Western Alliance and those in the China-Russia alliance. This is especially true for Russia and China. Xi Jinping’s visit to Russia last week has shown the strength of their relationship, and mutual understanding that a pivot away from the US system will be beneficial for both countries and so many others. This is their Nash Equilibrium. In return, the US maintaining the levels of control and power it has is its Nash Equilibrium.