Welcome to DouglasDeBono.Com, the Cyberspace Home of author Douglas De Bono

Welcome to DouglasDeBono.Com, the Cyberspace Home of
author Douglas De Bono.

Game Theory

Game theory is a branch of mathematics that studies the interactions of people or groups of people as they employ an ever increasing number and variety of technologies to achieve specific goals. John von Neumann was the first man to advance the theory, but it has been further refine by John Nash [see the movie A Beautiful Mind], A. W. Tucker and others.

Recent headlines continue to demonstrate just how dangerous the War on Terror is becoming.

The Russian Federation readily admits that it will continue to build the nuclear facility at Bushehr. The technology transfer includes a gas centrifuge plant (required to process enriched uranium), plutonium separation and other nuclear items. Considering Russia’s Chechen problem and Chechen resistance’s increasing cooperation with al-Qaeda and Hezbollah, this is either a desperate or insane policy.

On the final day of a six power (i.e. China, Russia, Japan, South Korea, North Korea and America) talks related to North Korea’s nuclear ambitions, North Korea announces that it plans to test a nuclear weapon. Any further policy of appeasement towards North Korea will probably result in mushroom cloud.

During the first six months of 2002, India and Pakistan came close to a nuclear exchange over border disputes and other provocations. This crisis coincided with American operations against Taliban and al Qaeda forces in western Pakistan and eastern Afghanistan. It served to distract American military planners and the Bush Administration from the military and political needs in Afghanistan.

Add to this the published unclassified reports that Saddam Hussein had two groups dedicated to developing nuclear weapons [see my article Saddam’s Nuclear Arsenal]; the proliferation of missile technology from North Korea to Pakistan, Iran and Iraq; missing Soviet era nuclear weapons [see my novel Blood Covenant]—you have to ask yourself: Who gains?

Any one of the above facts taken in isolation can be dealt with through a series of diplomatic and/or military means, but that is not the world confronting the Western democracies. Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, and Iraq (until recently) are all ruled by some form of dictatorship. Russia is attempting to recoup the huge military expenditures since Stalin is busily selling technology (generally, military to anyone with cold hard cash) For example, most of Saddam Hussein’s military hardware was a combination of German, French and Russian manufacture. Several of China’s newest warships were built at Russian shipyards and had been originally slated for the Russian Navy.

These are the salient questions:

1. Who gains from nuclear Pakistan with a credible (albeit short range) delivery system?
2. Who gains from the proliferation of North Korean missile technology?
3. Who gains from a nuclear equipped Iran?
4. Who gains from a nuclear armed Iraq?

A nuclear armed Pakistan threatens its primary enemy: India. Such a threat forces India to assign at least 50% of its known nuclear arsenal to Pakistani targets. Absent a nuclear Pakistan, India, who assigned its arsenal to targets in mainland China. India and China have a long standing border dispute along India’s northern border.

Ever wonder where a Stalinist country like North Korea gets the idea that building buried plutonium separation plants, and manufacturing missiles is better than feeding its people? North Korea is one huge prison camp. However, the proliferation of missile technology provides China with a degree of deniability when it comes to arming fanatic Islamic regimes. Those regimes threaten the West, principally the United States. When America is forced to respond militarily against regimes in Middle East and Central Asia, then it has less time to worry about Chinese expansion into the Pacific Rim.

Whatever secret protocols exist between Tehran and Moscow, they are inadequate and fool hardy (perhaps, Russia is plagued with the same type of myopic thinking that plagues the American State Department: Iran can become a partner in the War on Terror. That works as long as you ignore the mountain of evidence suggesting they are a prime terrorist state). A nuclear capable Iran poses a threat to both Russia and America. Russia is important, because just like India, China has had a long standing border dispute with Russia. During the Cold War, this problem tied down 44 Red Army motor/rifle and tank divisions (in this case game theory worked to the West’s advantage).

Finally, a nuclear armed Iraq posed a clear and present danger to the United States. Events in March/April brought an end to the Saddam Hussein regime and concentrated American forces in the Gulf. The perception that Iraq had the capability of wielding weapons of mass destruction was sufficient to bring about decisive military action.

Ah, but where are these WMDs in Iraq, and is the intelligence equally faulty regarding North Korea and Iran?

The most likely locations for Iraqi WMDs are underground bunkers in the Bekka Valley and the Hemrin Mountains north of Baghdad. As to faulty intelligence regarding North Korea and Iranian WMDs, we have their public statements and known facilities. The only reason you need a gas centrifuge is to develop weapon’s grade nuclear materials.

Which brings us back to game theory and China: A couple of things have not played out as expected.

1. The United States did not become bogged down in Afghanistan or Iraq.
2. North Korea went beyond missile proliferation to the outright development of nuclear weapons. The most likely outcome is a nuclear capable Japan (something Beijing does not want).
3. Pakistan and India did not have a nuclear exchange (which would have sacrificed Pakistan and crippled India).

Conclusions:

1. China is an adversary and not an ally when it comes to the War on Terror.
2. Military action against North Korea is more likely (and this will put American forces on China’s border), because no civilized country can tolerate the proliferation of nuclear weapons to Islamic terrorists with hefty bank rolls.
3. Israel will probably move unilaterally to reduce and/or eliminate Iran’s nuclear capability.
4. American and/or Israel action against Syria and friends in the Bekka is more likely, because neither county will tolerate WMDs in the hands of Hamas, Hezbollah or Syria.