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 Name] Date: [Date]
Section I: Introduction
In a world characterized by complex geopolitical dynamics, accurate and well-informed decision-making is paramount for political and military leaders. The scenario at hand involves the potential crisis between the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and Taiwan. This narrative essay aims to present a comprehensive analysis of the three possible outcomes: Diplomatic Solution, Limited Intervention, and Direct Attack. Recognizing the significance of assessing all potential hypotheses, we will rank these outcomes from most likely to least likely based on estimative probabilities. It’s important to emphasize that the analysis presented is founded on an objective, comprehensive evaluation of available intelligence and information.
Section II: Outcome Assessed to be Most Likely to Occur – Diplomatic Solution
The Diplomatic Solution hypothesis is assessed as the most likely outcome. This judgment is based on an array of factors, including historical precedent, diplomatic efforts, and economic interdependence between the PRC and Taiwan. The Assessment of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) matrix provides an insightful tool for examining the supporting and refuting evidence. For instance, past instances of diplomatic negotiations and peaceful resolutions between adversaries offer a valuable context. Additionally, the interdependence of the two economies provides an incentive to avoid conflict.
The linchpin evidence supporting the Diplomatic Solution hypothesis centers around the international community’s vested interest in preventing conflict escalation. The assumption underlying this evidence is that global stability and economic growth are interlinked, motivating influential actors to encourage peaceful negotiations. This assumption is supported by the fact that regional stability has been a top priority for both local and international stakeholders.
Section III: Second Most Likely to Occur – Limited Intervention
The Limited Intervention hypothesis ranks as the second most likely outcome. This assessment is influenced by historical cases of limited military interventions and the political calculus involved. Examples from the ACH matrix highlight instances where countries have engaged in military actions short of full-scale war to achieve their objectives. However, these examples are counterbalanced by cases where such interventions led to unintended consequences and instability.
The linchpin evidence for Limited Intervention is rooted in the military capability of the PRC and its willingness to use force to achieve strategic goals. This assumption, however, needs to be treated cautiously due to potential miscalculations and the deterrence capabilities possessed by Taiwan and its allies.
Section IV: Least Likely to Occur – Direct Attack
The Direct Attack hypothesis is assessed as the least likely outcome in this analysis. While military posturing and tensions exist, a direct attack poses significant challenges and risks for both parties involved. Historical lessons underscore the complexities and potential repercussions of initiating large-scale military actions. The ACH matrix helps illuminate instances where direct attacks led to unintended consequences and international backlash.
The linchpin evidence against a Direct Attack involves the potential loss of support from the international community, economic disruptions, and a heightened risk of escalation. The underlying assumption is that both parties recognize the immense costs associated with a direct military confrontation. This assumption is reinforced by the knowledge that modern warfare’s outcomes are far less predictable and controllable than in the past.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this narrative essay has evaluated the three alternative outcomes of the PRC-Taiwan crisis. The Diplomatic Solution is deemed the most likely, considering historical precedent and economic interdependence. Limited Intervention follows due to the potential for calibrated military actions. Lastly, the Direct Attack hypothesis is deemed the least likely outcome due to its significant risks and potential for international backlash. This analysis underscores the importance of considering a full range of possibilities and conducting assessments based on intelligence, historical context, and logical reasoning. By providing decision-makers with a comprehensive understanding of potential scenarios, this assessment enables informed and strategic choices in navigating complex geopolitical challenges.
Citations: [Cite sources according to Turabian format] Selected Bibliography: [List all sources consulted and cited in the paper]
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.
