NOTHING BEYOND EQUILIBRIUM 1

Tact statesmanship has been favorable to powerful nations and nation-states in history. At the end of the Napoleonic wars (1803 to 1815), Austrian statesman Klaus von Matternich was instrumental in creating a diplomatic system of balance of power between condescending groups of victorious states after the Concert of Europe, which brought a lasting peace up to 100 years. 

The post-Concert of Europe of 1816 made peace reign on the continent. However, it was inevitable that conflict would rise again through the resuscitating influence of revolutionalism that sought an end to absolute monarchy. Due to this development, powerful states sought to extend peace in their domain by introducing reforms and creating new governments around their existing state structures. It was a chaotic period in Europe. 

However, it was an era of capable politicians with practical negotiation skills who were passionate about the art and craft of diplomacy -politicians and diplomats who sought peace between their rulers and their people despite the protests and repressions; the resultant effect was the total abolition of serfdom in Austria and Hungary, the end of absolute monarchy in Denmark, and the introduction of representative democracy in the Netherlands. Noticeable were Charles Maurice de Tallerand Perigod of France, Lord Palmerston of England, and, at the height of his ascendancy as the first Chancellor of Germany, Otto von Bismark of Prussia. 

AJP Taylor, a renowned historian, once wrote that the 19th-century European systemic balance of power 'made no one state powerful enough to eat up all the rest, and the mutual jealousy of the great powers has preserved even the small states.' this until the introduction of destructive alliance system which tends to push the world into a total conflagration. It will be a mastery of history in continuing our explanation of the aftermath of occurrences during the alliance system to the Great War, the people that shaped the formation of a failed League of Nations, and, twenty-six years later, the appearance of our current snailing collective security dub United Nations. However, their work still exists today, and it would be a disaster not to put into play how they came to draw a middle line called peaceful co-existence or force of Equilibrium in the international system.

 

Allow this brief glimpse to dash the history of Arab and Israeli wars in the past; the current state of the conflagration in Gaza between the IDF and the Palestines Hamas Islamist group has created a disequilibrium that has tied our hands as a significant power (United States). Also, the U.N., E.U., and other non-governmental groups are striving to immediately stop the cost of lives.

This excerpt examined John Nash's Equilibrium theory, where the author emphasized that nations and multinational organizations could change their approaches to improve conditions or situations, even if the level of change is minimal, as long as there is a payoff. United States State Department experts should review the success of past policies, which can still be helpful to the resolution of current crises bedeviling the Middle East. The Equilibrium maintained by the Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton administrations is a testament to their leadership skills. It is considerable advice that their administration be viewed for recent prospects and solutions.

Despite the immutability of United States support for Israel, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken's strategy so far in resolving the crisis is still stagnant despite warning Israel of her long-term security concerns, calling for humanitarian pauses, and the recent freeing of hostages through diplomatic means. This approach has been a recurring constraint strategy that keeps on the disequilibrium. The United States needs to adopt a hegemonic strategy by examining the efforts of the previously highlighted U.S. administrations.

Jimmy Carter's approach was a collaborative effort by individuals and departments in his government—all working hand in hand towards the primary goals achieved at Camp David. Carter's involvement and commitment were pivotal to the success of the Camp David Accords because he was open to discussion from all sides. However, we must recognize the role played by the administration's secretary of state, Cyrus Vance, and the vast CIA involvement; in the end, individual players like Egypt President Anwar el Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin seized the opportunities presented at the summit despite the subsequent stall. Thanks to Carter's involvement, they worked together. In the end, Israel was to be recognized for the first time by an Arab state, moving the region toward Equilibrium. 

The current administration's effort is withering, and the time needs to be on its positive side. Despite Bidens administration doing its best, which this excerpt is proud of as 'humanely possible' foreign policy

To be continued