Zootopia Vs Statecraft Simulation

It is difficult to argue a state’s motives simply with one factor or theory, as there are many aspects that contribute to the way a state may act. It is the same for the Statecraft simulation. While there are no factors that were initially seen as completely insignificant, there are factors that do not determine every action made, at least by my state, including the geography of our state or International Organizations. Other factors that were originally seen as insignificant, such as each leaders’ personality, research endowments, domestic factions, and certain norms, became very important throughout the simulation. The more influential factors turned out to be more based on values rather than specific aspects of the state, and these were taken into consideration when decisions were made.
While these factors were never insignificant throughout the simulation, they were not the first consideration in the decision making process. My state, Zootopia, found that both our geography and the imposed international organizations, such as the United Nations, did not directly affect the way we made our decisions. Zootopia was Country 2 at the beginning of the simulation, …show more content…
Perhaps it is the geography that is making it difficult for one country to attack another, or perhaps it is the fear of the International Criminal court, as these would be factors preventing nations in the real world from conflict. Yet I believe that more importantly, in the Statecraft world, the biggest factor was most likely the Cooperative Global Peace Award that would reward us with points at the end of the simulation. This is certainly not a realistic incentive, however in the real world, there are definitely benefits of not going into war that act as an incentive, similar to the Statecraft