Joe Biden says that if Barack Obama is elected president, he will be “tested” like John Kennedy was. It’s hard to know exactly which Kennedy test Biden has in mind. JFK was tested in the foreign policy arena in multiple ways. But in one notorious situation — the Cuban missile crisis — Kennedy’s ego and inexperience nearly caused a nuclear war between the U.S. and USSR. Fidel Castro was eagerly standing by, ready to light the fuse.
This post offers a glimpse inside the Kennedy White House (above pic shows JFK with Soviet foreign minister and ambassador, Oct 18, 2962), background on the Cuban missile crisis, and a chance to examine a 2×2 matrix game — the sort of thing the next U.S. President, no matter who he is, will “play” repeatedly with U.S. lives and property on the line. Whoever plays for us had better know what he’s doing.
In teaching negotiation to MBA students, I often use one actual missile crisis event as supporting material for a discussion of game theory. Game theory, for newbies, is a way of analyzing how people make decisions — when their decisions interact with others’ decisions to produce an outcome — but neither party knows for sure what the other(s) will do. Game theory figures prominently in negotiation in business, politics, geopolitics and warfare.
Take, for example, two gas stations located at opposite corners of a busy intersection. Station 1 can’t talk with Station 2 to agree on a price for unleaded gasoline because doing so would violate antitrust (competition) law. As a result, each station has to guess what the other will do and then set its price accordingly. In order to “win,” Station 1 must correctly guess what Station 2 is thinking about what Station 1 is thinking about what Station 2 is thinking about what Station 1 is thinking . . . and so on.
Game theory sounds silly (or even pointless), but it is deadly serious. If the leader of a nuclear powered military guesses wrong about another nuke leader, serious global warming can happen in a series of rapid-fire blinding flashes. This almost happened, in late 1962.
In relation to this near nuclear catastrophe, I have used the exam question shown below in my MBA negotiation courses. If you’re up for a bit of a challenge, read the background material, listen to the audio file of President Kennedy conferring with his advisors, then take a shot at answering the question. I’ll post my official answer later in a comment.
Question
In late 1962, fearing a U.S. invasion, the Castro government allowed the Soviet Union to secretly place nuclear missiles on Cuba capable of striking large portions of the United States. (See graphic below.)
At about the same time, the U.S. placed missiles in Turkey capable of striking the Soviet Union.
When the U.S. discovered the missiles in Cuba, it blockaded Cuban ports and loudly called on the Soviets to withdraw the missiles. During the ensuing public showdown between U.S. President John Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Kruschev, the U.S. and USSR came close to launching nuclear warheads against each other. Nuclear war was averted when Kruschev publicly agreed to remove the missiles from Cuba in exchange for Kennedy’s then secret agreement (link is to a RealAudio file) to remove the missiles from Turkey.
In terms of the matrix game* shown below, the private reality was that K & K ended up in cell [_____] (enter I, II, III or IV). However, at the time of the incident they publicly appeared to land in cell [_____] (enter I, II, III or IV).
Bonus blog points: Describe how Barack Obama and John McCain would respond to the same or similar situation if it were to arise in March of 2010.
*Thanks to Professor Howard Raiffa, Harvard University, for the chicken-macho game idea.
{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }
Having lived through the era as a young adult, I know how perilous it felt to Americans. As in fact it was.
The Cuban Missile Crisis had been preceded by the Bay of Pigs fiasco. A young, inexperienced president was being tested–much like Joe Biden promises us that Obama will be tested within the first six months of his administration — assuming he has one, as now appears inevitable.
It was a distressful time. As much sympathy as we felt for his young family when the news came from Dallas, and while we were appalled at the event, many of us were grateful JFK was no longer at the helm. The presidency belongs in more experienced hands.
Obama already blinked, when Putin attacked Georgia. That’s all they needed to know. No wonder our “friends” and enemies are so eager to see him elected.
You’ll note, I hope, that the missiles installed in Cuba in 1962 by Krushchev could reach Washington.
Now we have the Russian navy invited into the hemisphere by Obama’s friend in Venezuela, Hugo Chavez. Does anyone think they don’t carry missiles? Is this the coming crisis Joe Biden is warning of, or does he have a wide variety in mind?
Well, Frankly, it is just a tad bit dissembling of you to characterize Putin’s placement of long range bombers in Venezuela as being done at the request of Obama’s “friend.” You bring the concept of Orwellianism to a new low. Putin, as you may recall, was the guy into whose eyes Glorious Leader George Bush looked deeply, saw Putin’s soul, and decided he was an alright kinda guy to have for a friend. (About the only interesting thing McCain has had to say this entire campaign was that HE looked into Putin’s eyes and saw K.B.G.)
The placement of those long range bombers and Russian naval forces in Venezuela was a test of Bush/Cheney, doofus. Do you think they passed it or failed it? Are we more secure today after 8 years of Rethuglican rule, or less secure?
What does “KBG” stand for?
It is a smart ass way of writing K.G.B. when one is not fully awake.
As a careful Russia-watcher of several decades (ergo, no Democrat) I was, like Doran, appalled when Bush made that naive remark. I saw what McCain saw: KGB. You cannot be a KGB colonel, as Putin was/is — and have a soul to trust.
But yes, Hugo Chavez is a friend to Obama. Their declared socialist/Marxist goals, unlike those of Bush and Putin, are shared. The information is available online to anyone who wants it.
One of Obama’s big money donation “bundlers” is Code Pink operative Jodie Evans. She is a virulently anti-military supporter of Hugo Chavez — the well-known Venezuelan dictator famous for his hateful anti-American rhetoric. You’ll find a photo of this major supporter of Obama arm-in-arm with Hugo Chavez at http://www.stoptheACLU. Any friend of my friend, you know the line. Especially when she brings money.
Then you have the laptop computer seized in a raid on FARC rebels in Colombia, with 13 documents of interest, one of which claims to expect greater help in FARC’s efforts to topple the US-friendly Colombian government once Obama is elected. Obama has made no comment. Per FARC chieftain Raul Reyes, quoting “two gringos” he met with who assured him Obama would be elected and more help would be coming when that happened. (Gringos? Was that before or after Obama bud NM Gov. Richardson flew to Venezuela and met with Chavez to negotiate for the release of the FARC hostages?)
Naturally, Venezuela claims the documents are lies, but they should arouse considerably more curiosity in our press than they have. Especially since Interpol confirms they are genuine.
Venezuelans in exile definitely believe there is a connection between these two. If folks like these came this close to McCain and Palin, the press would all over it like a blanket.
Frankly, you have to know, and are disregarding the facts, that the Bush Administration participated in the attempt to overthrow the Chavez elected government; contributed to the attempt to have him assassinated; and have spent mucho dinero on anti-Chavez propaganda in and around Venezuela. So what do expect Chavez to be: A George Bush good ole buddy?
The United States could have had a policy of peaceful engagement with Chavez; Bush could have made efforts to work with Venezuela on matters of common interest. Bush could have laid off the attempts at killing Chavez and overthrowing him. There was no real reason why this could not have resulted in being friends with an exporter of huge amounts of oil. But no. Bush/Cheney had to do the stupid thing and make an enemy of an oil exporting nation. And cause Chavez to look other places for international treaties.
It is a measure of Bush/Cheney’s incompetence and venality that they make war in Iraq to try to grab by an unbelievably expensive war, the oil we could be buying at much less the cost. It is a measure of the stupidity that they will drive up the price of oil by essentially keeping Iraq oil off the market, and pissing off Venezuela to point that Chavez might raise his price, or at the least, go along with OPEC this October to limit production.
But wait. Maybe it isn’t such a stupid thing to do after all. It would be stupid if Bush/Cheney and their millions of enablers, like yourself, gave a real damn about America and the prosperity of the American people. It would not be stupid if Bush/Cheney and their millions of enablers, like yourself, don’t give a damn. If the Bush/Cheney goal all along has been to increase the price of oil by, in part, limiting the availability of oil on the international market, then they are doing just the right things.
Bush/Cheney would rather spend a billion dollars a day, or a week, what the hell does it matter, in Iraq, than make peace with Chavez and the Iraqis. They would rather huff and puff and threaten sending troops to Georgia, and a US Fleet into the Black Sea, than keep the peace with Venezuela.
Tell us, why?
You make these really stupid comments about Obama being a socialist, even though, as a result of Bush’s policies, Communist China holds our notes and is a good friend of the Bush/Cheney vision of what America is all about. And please check me, but doesn’t China have some close contact these days through commercial treaties, and maybe military, with Venezuela? Why don’t you engage in some intellectual honesty and give Bush/Cheney, and Sen. McSame, a little hell about that if you are so concerned about creeping socialism. You know — friend of my friend.
I saw a comment last week which was right on point: When Democrats appear to be winning, the right wing nut Republicans start calling them commies. Your comments, in that regard, are right on time.
Doran –
Assuming that everything you write about Bush/Cheney is factually accurate and fairly interpreted, how does any of this translate to “Obama will do a better job than McCain of seeing to America’s prosperity”?
I think Neal Boortz’s piece makes a powerful argument in the other direction: While the Republicans have failed to deliver on their promises over the past decade or so (at least), Barack Obama will be a disaster for America.
Doran,
That Bush is an idiot says nothing about whether Obama is a Marxist and buddies with Chavez, Castro, or Odinga. And why would we make peace with Chavez? Isn’t he the same guy that has been helping the FARC to terrorize the Columbians?
If you didn’t notice the price of a barrel of crude is $67.84. A gallon of gas, here, is $2.51, not so outrageous.
We are at peace with the Iraqis.
Alex! Wake up!
Oil prices are declining because the entire World is about to enter a serious, serious, serious recession followed by a devastating depression. Only someone so blinded by political ideology, as you seem to be, could find it “not so outrageous” that this is happening.
Does anyone really know what was under that tarp covered ship deck leaving Cuba back then?
So Professor Schulzke, when are you going to post the answer?