Sandip Kumar Mishra is an associate professor at the Centre for East Asian Studies.
Trump's lopsided two-level game
By Sandip Kumar Mishra
.jpg?w=728)
In 1988, American political scientist Robert Putnam propounded a very interesting two-level game theory in international relations. It is basically a political model of international conflict resolution.
The theory says that in any negotiation for conflict resolution, actors simultaneously negotiate with their counterparts (inter-state) as well as taking into consideration domestic political scenarios (intra-state). It's considered important to coordinate accomplishments at both levels.
A win-win at both levels is ideal and also possible but for this, visionary leadership is required. Such leaders articulate their objectives at both levels in a mutually enforcing way and achieve success.
There have even been some exceptional leaders who had the courage to face setbacks domestically but archive great success in resolving intractable inter-state conflicts.
In the case of the U.S. President Donald Trump's efforts to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue, the two-level game theory might be useful to comprehend the complicated process.
Trump's policy and behavior toward North Korea has been quite inconsistent and this had led to a situation in which progress and despair are defined, and redefined, by the U.S. president quite frequently.
Actually the definition of progress which helps in domestic politics appears to be more important for Trump than the actual resolution of the North Korean issue. Trump's tweets, formal statements and even actions indicate that apparently the U.S. has no long-term pro-active policy to denuclearize North Korea.
The Trump administration has been just reacting to North Korean and South Korean policies and initiatives, and unduly trying to claim others' achievements as his own. Furthermore, Trump has also been trying to gain political mileage by portraying small achievements as big steps forward.
This inconsistency in dealing with North Korea (inter-state level) must be understood in the context of his consistent search for an image (in domestic politics) which seeks to disagree, disown and denigrate all policies of the Obama administration and rely on superficial and populist policies.
It could be said that Trump is more concerned about his personal gain as well as his achievements in domestic politics than having a well-laid out plan to deal with North Korea.
His policy towards North Korea began with being tough in rhetoric and actions such as talking about “fire and fury” and “maximum pressure” because at that time, he had to show in domestic politics that previous administrations' policy of “strategic patience” vis-a-vis North Korean nuclear and missile programs was not appropriate.
It was claimed that North Korea has agreed to soften its approach and is ready to denuclearize only because of the tough policy of the Trump administration. Actually, it's being claimed that North Korea had no choice but to come to the negotiating table because of the U.S. strangulation strategy.
However, it's quite well known that the role of the South Korean administration and change in North Korean posture were, if not more, equally important to bring North Korea to talks.
Similarly, when the Trump administration agreed and decided to talk to North Korea, it did not appear sufficiently prepared about the new move and this has been seen as on the one hand Trump tried to reach out to North Korea through various meetings at different levels, including his own summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, while his foreign policy team remained dominated by hawks such as John Bolton and thus gave confusing signals to North Korea.
He sometimes claims that “great progress” has been made and thanks Kim Jong-un for it. But he also maintains that North Korea is an “unusual and extraordinary threat.”
Actually, it's because Trump is less concerned about nuances of foreign policy and more interested in selling it in domestic politics, in particular to improve his own precarious position in the polls.
Trump is aware that among all the major steps his administration has taken both inside and outside the country, his handling of North Korea has got the highest popular support. The U.S. is also going to polls for the Senate and House of Representatives in November this year and Trump would like to use the North Korean issue for this.
However, it would be better if the Trump administration articulated a long-term pro-active plan to resolve the North Korean nuclear and missile issues without considering its instrumental role in American domestic politics.
It would necessarily need patience and sustained attempts. It might be counterproductive if the North Korean issue is being used only to get an edge in domestic politics and the personal aggrandizement of Donald Trump.
The sincerity of the Trump administration and building of trust are keys in dealing with North Korea. Thus, if the two-level game of the U.S. vis-a-vis North Korea remains lopsided, it may not be able to provide the desired results and rather derail the process.
The author is associate professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India. He could be reached at
sandipmishra10@gmail.com
.