The Game of Risk

         In our International Politics class, we played the game “Risk.” I was a member of the black team. Described as a peace-loving “middle power,” the objective of the black team was to “bring a peaceful resolution to global conflicts.” To actually win the game, we needed to have the Diplomatic Status Board show no declarations of war at the end of a round or have 16 alliances. Each team received a secret power, the black team’s secret power was “World Council Censure.” This power is intense, our diplomat could request to censure a team at the World Council. If a team was censured, they would be unable to vote on the World Council for two rounds. In addition, the censured team would have only two reinforcements per turn and would be unable to declare war. Despite possessing a great secret power, our team did not use it. The black team won slyly by creating 16+ alliances.
In relation to world politics, part of the game was quite realistic. Each team had its own unique set of goals and strategies to achieve them, like states in the real world. The teams possessed different territories and forged alliances to keep themselves “safe” which mirrored international politics. *add more
         The fact that the black team, the “peacemakers” won the game two times out of three in this classroom version of risk is amusing to me. I believe these wins are contingent on two characteristics that are present in international politics/risk: egocentrism and relationships. The egocentrism of teams made them unaware of the goals of other teams. Throughout the game, teams tried to claim as many territories as possible while simultaneously declaring alliances or war with other teams. Therefore, teams were interacting with each other to help themselves to achieve world domination. Each team was concerned with creating mutually beneficial relationships and or engaging in war to secure territories. Because of this, the teams were distracted. They were unaware of the intentions of all or some of the teams. It is apparent the black team flew under the radar during the game. Since we did not pose a threat to any teams, most teams forged alliances with us. The teams did so under the impression these alliances would benefit them. Being unaware of the goals of the black team proved to be a fatal flaw for all teams, especially for green and blue who came the closest to winning.
       A part of the game that felt unrealistic concerning world politics was the mechanics of the game. Every game needs a set of rules to function. In the game risk, some rules created interactions between states that would not happen in real life. Obviously, a state in real life would not have to wait to attack another or declare war. Also, a state would not have to abide by a specific order to carry out a form of action. The strict organization was necessary for the game to operate but in reality, disorganization and spontaneity would be prevalent.
            To make the game relate more to international politics, I would add unexpected elements. Since the world is a highly unpredictable place, I would add a wildcard to each round. There would be 30 different wildcards, varying from natural disasters to unwanted government intervention. Each team would have a stick with their color placed in a mug. Then, to be fair, the professor would draw a stick without looking every round. This would decide which team was the receiver of the wildcard. The point of pulling a wildcard would be to implement a random setback that could easily occur in the world. Another advantage of having the wild cards would be the chance to include countries across the globe.
        In the future, a way to improve the game is to tweak the way it is facilitated, so more students participate. Each team had a diplomat and a president, so naturally, the students who filled those roles participated the most. To ensure other members of the team participate, the professor could implement a few different strategies. Non-title team members could record the moves of the other teams for each round, hypothesize objectives of other teams and strategize plans to win.
Overall, I found the game of Risk exciting and relevant to our International Politics class. Playing the game was an efficient way to bridge concepts learned in class and fun. The teamwork/decision making and action of moving pieces on the board was a way to let students connect socially and visually with international politics.