Group One Ashley Morris

 Overall tone  Normally inclusive  Occasionally argumentative  Focused on presenting creative and effective solutions  Mediator helped to move the conversation along  She called on people to talk and asked questions or interjected to prompt conversation  Not uncommon for anyone to speak without the permission of the mediator  Natural organization  Two major categories Answers for the United States Solutions to facilitate the situation in Turkey  Two subcategories Short term solutions Long term solutions

 A structured conversation  Focused on achieving consensus  Mediator kept the conversation well structured, and seemed to have a specific method in calling on certain departments to contribute.  She asked pointed questions to each department  Proceeded to move in a methodical fashion unless someone requested to speak, even then the mediator would wait for an opportune time to give him, or her, the floor.  In the end, there was some reasonable disagreement within the group that prevented any complete consensus  Still a much narrower range of recommendations

 Goals 1. Focused on hearing everyone’s possible solutions, and encouraged creativity. Promoted inclusion, which extended to assistants and deputies as well as the representative secretaries 2. Focused on achieving consensus in an effort to produce a few recommendations supported by everyone, or a majority, rather than producing many recommendations

 Role of assistants and deputies 1. Extremely involved in the debate. It was not unusual for a second to speak without being given permission by his or her superior. 2. Basically served the role of advising their superior before the deliberation process, who then reported to the group as a whole.

 Goals 1. Left too many recommendations on the table, which can leave an individual with the power to determine what recommendations are made, since there was no clear majority. 2. There may have been an overcorrection here; many voices were not heard and many ideas never circulated. The problem is that a few powerful speakers in the group can easily dominate a conversation, which did happen from time to time.

 Role of assistants and deputies 1. Occasionally, the debate became argumentative. There were more ideas up for discussion, and more creative ideas were produced. The roles were in line with the goal of inclusion. The problem was that fewer ideas were elaborated on. 2. A more evident professional hierarchy produced fewer opinions for discussion. This lead to a focused discussion that worked on perfecting recommendations to achieve consensus. The roles were consistent with the goal of the group.

 When Professor Bennett spoke to us between the two simulations about the process that we went through in the first simulation, it became clear that we could have created a dangerous situation where one person held the power to manipulate the deliberation results and make recommendations based on their personal beliefs. A narrower approach would fix this problem, and thus we continued with a more focused process which in turn produced more focused results.

 Long Term Goals  Strategies to reduce oil consumption, which were regularly focused on the transportation sector, in the US  Examples: alternative energy research, increased car pool lanes, incentives for public transportation, and having the President directly addressing the public about the crisis and reducing consumption

 Unilateral versus Bilateral/Multilateral Action  No one really argued that the US should act unilaterally in response to terrorist attacks and kidnappings. This could be a direct reflection of the backlash of unilateral military action used during the Bush Administration, but also showed that there is a well supported movement towards multilateral action.  Examples: Use of NATO forces in Turkey, strengthening relations with Canada and Mexico to promote resource security, mobilizing UN and AU peacekeeping troops in the Niger Delta

 The First Simulation  A style of inclusion cannot produced well thought out, politically acceptable recommendations on a regular basis. When more creative ideas are presented, however, new avenues of foreign policy can be pursued to optimize the actions taken by the government.

 The Second Simulation  Since consensus was a goal, fewer opinions were put forth that went outside of the status quo. It is much harder to persuade a majority of representative officials to form a consensus about a relatively unusual recommendation that is influenced by more creative thinking in comparison to one firmly grounded in ideas about foreign policy that have already taken shape. This environment fosters an in depth deliberation process.

 It seems that the optimal way to create sound recommendations for the President in a crisis situation is to set up the process in three rounds. 1. Needs to involve expressing different plausible solutions when everyone who wishes to be heard should be. 2. Options from the first round can be discussed and modified while the departments express their opinions. Given permission, seconds in the room should be able to contribute to the deliberation process. 3. Should be restricted to the secretaries of each department. This round should focus on achieving consensus. The mediator of the process plays an extremely important role here in directing pointed questions about the options to specific departments to get the secretary’s final input.