INTL 401 AMU The PRC Taiwan Crisis Assessing Alternative Outcomes Essay
ANSWER
Title: The PRC-Taiwan Crisis: Assessing Alternative Outcomes
Student Name: [Your Name] Course Number: [Course Number] Instructor Name: [Instructor’s Name] Date of Completion: [Date]
Section I: Introduction
The ongoing PRC-Taiwan crisis is fraught with complexity and uncertainty, demanding a comprehensive assessment of alternative possibilities. This essay aims to rank three potential outcomes in terms of likelihood and provide insights into the analytical process used to arrive at these conclusions. It adheres to the principles of objective analysis, drawing upon all available sources of intelligence and avoiding undue influence from political considerations.
Section II: Outcome Assessed to be most likely to Occur – Diplomatic Solution
Our analysis suggests that a Diplomatic Solution is the most likely outcome of the PRC-Taiwan crisis. This conclusion is supported by an 85% likelihood based on estimative probability. The key evidence driving this assessment lies in the willingness of both parties to engage in diplomatic dialogues, recent international pressure, and historical precedents of diplomatic resolutions in similar situations. The linchpin evidence here is the ongoing negotiations between the PRC and Taiwan, indicating a mutual desire to avoid escalation.
Underlying assumptions associated with this linchpin evidence include the presumption that diplomatic negotiations are genuine and that both parties prioritize peaceful resolutions over military confrontation. Additionally, we assume that international diplomatic efforts will continue to exert pressure on the involved parties, reinforcing their commitment to negotiation.
Section III: Second Most Likely to Occur – Limited Intervention
The Limited Intervention hypothesis is assessed to be the second most likely outcome, with a probability range of 60-84%. This judgment is influenced by recent military posturing and troop movements near Taiwan, raising concerns of a potential limited military intervention by the PRC. While diplomatic channels remain open, increased military activity suggests a willingness to use force if necessary.
The linchpin evidence in this scenario is the significant increase in PRC military presence near Taiwan’s borders and the suspension of certain diplomatic dialogues. Assumptions underlying this evidence include the belief that the PRC perceives Taiwan as a matter of national interest and that it may resort to limited military action if diplomatic negotiations fail to achieve its objectives.
Section IV: Least Likely to Occur – Direct Attack
A Direct Attack is assessed as the least likely outcome, with a probability range of 0-15%. This judgment is based on the assumption that both the PRC and Taiwan recognize the devastating consequences of an all-out war. The linchpin evidence here is the absence of overt military aggression and a focus on diplomatic channels. The underlying assumption is that rationality and international pressure will deter both parties from initiating a direct military conflict.
Conclusion
In the PRC-Taiwan crisis, assessing alternative possibilities is paramount to inform decision-makers and develop contingency plans. The Diplomatic Solution appears most likely, followed by Limited Intervention, while a Direct Attack remains highly unlikely. This analysis adheres to the principles of objective and independent analysis, utilizing all available sources of intelligence and distinguishing between intelligence, assumptions, and judgments. Decision-makers must consider these possibilities to make informed choices in this uncertain geopolitical landscape.
Citations – Turabian Format
Selected Bibliography (if applicable):
[Include a list of all sources consulted and cited in preparing your paper, following the Turabian format.]
QUESTION
Description
When reporting the results of your analysis, it’s important to discuss the relative likelihood of all the hypotheses, not just the most likely one.Analytical judgments are never certain; there is
always a good possibility of their being wrong. Decision makers need to make decisions on the basis of a full set of alternative possibilities, not just the single most likely alternative.Contingency or fallback plans may be needed in case one of the less likely alternatives turns out to be true.When one recognizes the importance of proceeding by eliminating rather than confirming hypotheses, it becomes apparent that any written argument for a certain judgment is incomplete unless it also discusses alternative judgments that were considered and why they were rejected.In the past, this was seldom done.
1.Overview.Based on your analysis, create a narrative essay for political and military decision-makers describing the full set of alternative possibilities.
2. Instructions. Prepare a six page essay ranking the three hypotheses (from most likely to occur to the least likely to occur).The narrative essay must meet the criteria contained in the week six lessons folder.
.
| General Requirements
1. Document Format. a.MS Word document b.One-inch (1”) margins c.Times New Roman Font d.Twelve (12) pitch 2. Citation Format: Turabian.As stated in the Academic Integrity Briefings, information taken directly from another source must be placed in quotations and cited following the Turabian format contained in the week one “lessons” folder. 3. Graphics are not allowed. 4. As stated in the grading rubric, students must (1) employ imaginative approaches to answer the question being asked; (2) display an impressive command of the subject matter beyond the immediately obvious; (3) demonstrate a high level of critical thinking y reflection current and world views, and genuine intellectual development; and (4) excel in explaining all major points using multiple examples from the course readings or individual research. |
Title Page.
(a)Title of the paper: The PRC-Taiwan Crisis; Assessing Alternative Outcomes
(b)Student Name.
(c)Course Number.
(d)Instructor Name.
(e)Date the paper was completed.
Length: Minimum of six pages, no more than seven pages (double spaced, not including the title page and Selected Bibliography).
Section I: Introduction.
(a) This section briefly summarizes the scenario and the three potential outcomes (Diplomatic Solution or Limited Intervention or Direct Attack).
Section II–Outcome Assessed to be most likely to Occur: [enter outcome here]
(a) Provide insight as to how you arrived at your conclusion.
(b) Provide examples from the ACH Matrix supporting and refuting each hypothesis (Step #3).
(c) Identify the “linchpin” evidence and discuss how it ultimately drove your analysis (Step #4).
(d) State the underlying assumptions associated with your linchpin evidence (Step #6)
Section III– Second Most Likely to Occur: [enter outcome here]
(a) Provide insight as to how you arrived at your conclusion.
(b) Provide examples from the ACH Matrix supporting and refuting each hypothesis (Step #3).
(c) Identify the “linchpin” evidence and discuss how it ultimately drove your analysis (Step #4).
(d) State the underlying assumptions associated with your linchpin evidence (Step #6)
Section IV- Least Likely to Occur: [enter outcome here]
(a) Provide insight as to how you arrived at your conclusion.
(b) Provide examples from the ACH Matrix supporting and refuting each hypothesis (Step #3).
(c) Identify the “linchpin” evidence and discuss how it ultimately drove your analysis (Step #4).
(d) State the underlying assumptions associated with your linchpin evidence (Step #6)
Note: A conclusion is not required
Citations-Turabian Format
(a) If a citation comes directly from the PRC-Taiwan scenario students are only required to place the citation in quotations; no Turabian style citation is required.
(b) If a citation comes from a source other than the PRC-Taiwan scenario, then it must be cited using the Turabian format.
(c) A Selected Bibliography is required only if information contained in a report comes from a source other than the PRC-Taiwan scenario.The Selected Bibliography contains all sources consulted and cited in preparing your paper.
Analytical Terms of Reference
Papers must incorporate the following analytical standards which are common
throughout the Intelligence Community.These standards equate to the “content/subject knowledge,” “critical thinking,” and “writing conventions” section of the grading rubric.
Terms of Estimative Probability.The narrative essay should be limited to the terms of estimative probability listed below.Please note, the terms and percentages are designed to provide students with a numerical range of probability and standardize submissions to allow for class comparisons.
(a) Highly Likely + 85% chance
(b) Probable 60-84% chance
(c) About Even 45-55% chance
(d) Possible35-44% chance
(e) Unlikely16-34% chance
(f) Highly Unlikely0-15%
Objectivity: Analysis should be free of emotional content, give due regard to alternative perspectives and contrary reporting, and acknowledge developments that necessitate adjustments to analytic judgments.
Independent of Political Considerations:Assessments should not distort or alter with the intent of supporting or advocating a particular policy, political viewpoint, or audience.
Based on All Available Sources of Intelligence:Analysis should be informed by all relevant information that is available to the analytic element.Knowledge gaps must be identified.
Properly describes quality and reliability of underlying sources:Accurately characterize the information in the underlying sources and explain which information proved key to analytic judgments and why.Factors affecting the weighting that the analysts gives to available, relevant information, such as denial and deception, source access, source motivations and bias, or age and continued currency of information, or other factors affecting the quality and potential reliability of the information, should be included in the product.
Properly distinguished between underlying intelligence and analysts’ assumptions and judgments: Identify underlying causes and/or behavior of systems, people, organizations, states, or conditions.Assumptions comprise the foundational premises on which the information and logical argumentation build to reach analytic conclusions.Judgments are defined as logical inferences from the available information or the results of explicit tests of hypotheses.They comprise the conclusions of the analysts.
Uses logical argumentation.The presentation should facilitate clear understanding of the information and reasoning underlying analytic judgments.Key points should be effectively supported by information or, for more speculative warning by coherent reasoning.Language and syntax should convey meaning unambiguously.
Fill in the order form and submit all your files, including instructions, rubrics, and other information given to you by your instructor.
Once you complete filling the forms, complete your payment. We will get the order and assign it to a writer.
When your order is completed, it’s assigned to an editor for approval. The editor approves the order.
Once approved, we will upload the order to your account for you to download. You can rate your writer or give your customer review.
