Exam

IcelandZSimulationHandbook.pdf

Home >Political Science homework help >Exam

The Iceland-Z Virus: National Security Council Disaster Management Simulation Handbook

Global Disaster Politics:

Comparative Public Policy, Emergency Management, and Problem-Solving Political Science 24733: Special Topics in Comparative Politics

Simulation Designed by Professor Jeffrey S. Lantis

The College of Wooster 2020-2021

Part I: Simulation Overview Welcome to a role-playing simulation of crisis meetings of the National Security Council dealing with a global pandemic. The theme of this crisis decision-making simulation is: What should the United States do to respond to an increasingly severe outbreak of a deadly virus? This is a perennial and highly relevant theme for national security, human security, and global public health. You will be assigned to work in teams to represent roles as national security “principals,” including the President of the United States, the Director of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Director of Central Intelligence, the Secretary of Homeland Security, etc. Participants will engage in a series of deliberations on the best response to a hypothetical policy crisis scenario. Your goal is twofold: to faithfully represent your assigned role and to try to develop strategies and interagency agreements that you believe will most keep the U.S. population safe. You will make decisions about how to proceed in the face of an emergency, how to prepare and protect the community, and how to ensure such a crisis can never happen again. The simulation will run for approximately one week of the term. This handbook provides you with the necessary tools to begin your research and preparation, including background information on the crisis, web resources, rules of procedure and suggestions for further readings. The handbook also includes information about your role groups and directions and themes for further investigation during the exercise. There are three major “rounds” of the simulation, divided between intra-group and inter-group deliberations and negotiations. The simulation is structured to fit the class meeting schedule, building to an effort to develop a working consensus on the third day of the simulation. We will also follow a set of rules of procedure, designed to facilitate negotiations and allow for simulation time to be divided between informal deliberations and formal presentations. During informal periods, players meet with each other to debate and design policy solutions. In our formal presentations, bureaucratic representatives make speeches, respond to questions, and introduce and debate resolutions to these problems. Role-playing simulations are popular active teaching and learning approaches, and their effectiveness in promoting engagement and critical thinking is well documented in the scholarship on teaching and learning. The simulation is also designed to promote knowledge of important contemporary issues and different bureaucratic perspectives. As you work with other students to attempt to influence policy, you will gain important insights about decision-making and experience the process of problem solving first-hand.

Pandemics and Global Health: Background Information Pandemics, defined as the spread of infectious diseases over wide regions of the world and in high concentrations in the population, have been responsible for the greatest human death tolls in history. For example, the bubonic plague killed approximately 25% of the entire European population in the 14th century. The A/H1N1 pandemic of Spanish influenza (or “Spanish flu”) pandemic in 1918-1919 led to the deaths of 50 to 100 million people. More American soldiers in World War I died from the flu than were killed in combat. In the 1950s, societies struggled to overcome the polio epidemic, a disabling and life-threatening disease. Polio was eventually

3 eradicated in the western world with the development of a vaccine. Over the past few decades, sporadic cases of avian influenza have threatened the globe, including the H5N1 virus in the late 1990s. Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) was a viral respiratory illness caused by a coronavirus, called SARS-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV), that emerged in Asia in February 2003. The illness spread to more than two dozen countries and killed nearly 800 people before the outbreak was contained through isolation, contact-tracing, and quarantine. The H1N1 swine influenza virus epidemic first emerged in the United States in 2009 and quickly traveled around the world. It is estimated to have killed more than 12,000 people in the United States, and as many as 600,000 worldwide.1 Developing Responses and COVID-19 Over time, these episodes of the spread of infectious diseases have been both tragic and informative. Scientists learned that epidemics of infectious diseases are caused by the spread of microbes. They have constructed hypotheses about diseases, tested them, and reported the results widely. These findings have enabled our society to grow almost used to seeing the spread of some of these diseases, such as the common cold, flu, strep throat, and chicken pox. Science shows that these illnesses are often passed from person-to-person through touching or aerosol droplets (through speaking, coughing, or sneezing, for example). Most of these are survivable and manageable, though severe influenza is responsible for an average of 30,000 to 60,000 deaths annually in the United States. In some of these cases, exposure can equal life- long immunity from repeat infections. Careful observation and analyses of these patterns can promote greater knowledge of the threat and potential responses.2 The study of the spread of diseases through groups of people at the population level requires detective work. When an outbreak occurs, policy-makers and medical epidemiologists try to discover how they are distributed in a population in terms of person, place, and time. They seek to know the nature and scope of the threat (e.g., Is it local? How does it spread? Is it global? How fast can it spread? How long with the threat last?). These clues help to form a hypothesis for how and why a disease is transmitted. They study patterns of disease acquisition and transmission, and develop hypotheses for how and why viruses are spread.3 They then work to isolate the virus, replicate it in the lab, and begin studying treatments or cures. Along the way, policy-makers must reckon with critical questions related to the implications of science for regulation, especially questions of what types of behaviors remain permissible and how to maintain mission-critical functions of government and society. All of these issues, and more, arose in the COVID-19 pandemic of 2019-2021, a widespread, lethal global health crisis. In December 2019, a new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) emerged first in Wuhan, China, and quickly spread around the world. The acute respiratory syndrome caused hundreds of thousands of deaths across more than 100 different countries within the first four months. The World Health Organization declared COVID-19 to be a global pandemic in March 2020. Not only did scientists find that the disease was highly contagious and easily transmissible, but its infection fatality rate (IFR), estimated between 1-2 percent of those infected, raised alarm bells for the public health community. This was compared to the seasonal influenza IFR of 0.1 percent. By December 2020, the global death toll of the COVID pandemic was 1.75 million people, and rapidly growing.

4 Various governments, nongovernmental organizations, and international governmental organizations have sprung into action in response. Their first step was to trace and study the disease. Scientists in the People’s Republic of China successfully sequenced the genetic code of the novel coronavirus and shared this information with the world in January 2020. Western nations were somewhat slow to respond to growing crisis, however, and it took time for them to better understand the nature and depth of the problem. Once they recognized its severity, though, responses to the pandemic applied an all-of-government response in many countries. Not only did governments formulate potential responses, they worked closely with all sectors of societies in attempts to regulate or encourage changes in citizens’ behaviors. Epidemiologists and public health experts scrambled to try to respond, and they had to balance their scientific studies with policy concerns. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behavior, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. Seeking effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months. The pandemic has led to a massive global public health campaign to slow the spread of the virus by increasing hand washing, reducing face touching, wearing masks in public and physical distancing.4

Figure 1. Phases of COVID-19 Pandemic Response 5

A W A R E N E S SP L A N N I N G

1 9 8 0

R E E V A L U A T I O N A C T I V A T I O N /

R E S P O N S E

I M P L E M E N T

N E W P L A N S

R E E N T R Y /

R E C O V E R Y R E I N V E N T

C re

a te

d fo

r D

r. J

e ff

L a

n ti

Schedule Synopsis

Participants will be assigned to groups representing key executive branch players and other actors engaged in policy-making. Each role group is provided with background worksheets which include directions and themes for further investigation during the exercise. The goal of this exercise is to develop strategies and interagency agreements that will keep U.S. citizens safe! You will make decisions about how to proceed in the face of an emergency, how to prepare and protect the community, and how to ensure such a crisis can never happen again. There are three major “rounds” or days of the simulation, divided between intra-group and inter-group deliberations and negotiations. The simulation is structured to fit the class meeting schedule, often building to an effort to develop a working consensus on the third day of the simulation. We will also follow a set of rules of procedure, designed to facilitate negotiations and allow for simulation time to be divided between informal deliberations and formal presentations. During informal periods, players meet with each other to debate and design policy solutions. In our formal presentations, bureaucratic representatives make speeches, respond to questions, and introduce and debate resolutions to these problems.

Schedule Synopsis Schedule Day 1: This involves introductions, providing a rules briefing, directing preliminary intra- group meetings on their bureaucratic perspective and potential policy solutions. The session continues with brief presentations by groups outlining their preferred policy solution to the crisis scenario. As a foundation for the in-class presentation, groups are required to draft a one- page written draft policy statement outlining the themes they believe are most important, with a detailed policy rationale. Each group is allowed three minutes to present their perspectives in the group meeting. Day 2: This day begins with an update on the crisis at hand. We will then initiate a period for informal, inter-agency deliberations with the goal of building policy consensus. Players should focus on development of draft policy directives through informal, inter-agency deliberations. Ultimately, the National Security Advisor (read: Professor Lantis) will moderate the discussion and promote the goal of policy resolution. Remember that for a policy directive to be an effective solution, an oversized majority (two-thirds) of bureaucratic agents present have to agree on and vote for the proposed solution by the end of the final session. Day 3: We will continue to track breaking news and allow inter-agency deliberations. We will share drafts of policy directives both informally and formally, with the goal of working toward final resolutions. Day 3 also includes a round of voting, where each team will get to decide whether they view the policy directives to be an optimal solution. The final phase of Day 3 involves presidential deliberation and announcement of final policy decisions.

Debriefing: The end of the simulation should focus on debriefing, providing an opportunity to discuss individual and group experiences. This type of analysis is especially important because experiential learning frequently occurs after, rather than during, an exercise.6

Part II: Step-by-Step Simulation Guide

Day 1: Breaking News, Draft Policy Statements, Interagency Forum

Synopsis Today’s session includes introductions, a rules briefing, directing preliminary intra-group meetings on their bureaucratic perspective and potential policy solutions. The session continues with brief presentations by groups outlining their preferred policy solution to the crisis scenario. As a foundation for the in-class presentation, groups are required to draft a one-page written draft policy statement outlining the themes they believe are most important, with a detailed policy rationale. Each group is allowed three minutes to present their perspectives in the group meeting. Thus, the briefing needs to be concise and creative in order to gain the attention of other bureaucratic actors and the president.

Day 1 Schedule Details For the first 20 minutes, your assignments are:

• Review your role assignment and profile sheet carefully.

• Review and consider background information, including the briefing handbook and web resources. Then begin to process the current case through the ‘lens’ of your role assignment, and prepare a brief presentation to the president based on talking points. Remember that your briefing needs to be concise and creative to catch the attention of the president.

• Consider answers to the following questions:

-What is your assessment of the severity and legitimacy of the threat? -What are possible responses, and their pros and cons? -What are your policy recommendations? -Do you recommend a complete and immediate shutdown of society? -Do you recommend everyone shelter in place where they are located? -Do you close schools and stores? -How to guarantee public service and food needs are met in this crisis? -How to guarantee order and lawful behavior?

• Prepare your policy recommendation form and discuss who will present and key points

Next 30 Minutes:

• First interagency policy forum—presentations by each role group.

• The President will decide on the order and timing of presentations, as well as moderate debate, discussion, and questions as time permits.

Rules of Procedure

• Students will participate in rounds of the simulation across class meeting days, and they may communicate individually or in groups between sessions, as well.

• Students will follow guidance and complete worksheets and develop interagency

response proposals in sequence during the simulation. • Delegates will address one another respectfully, and we will maintain decorum

throughout the process.

• Guidance and information about each phase of the simulation will be shared with the class group as a whole, and the professor will be on hand to advise and support any individuals or groups with questions.

Day 1: Breaking News Report [To Be Accompanied by Video]

By: Matilda Overweather WASHINGTON, DC--U.S. intelligence sources report that a new lethal virus has begun to circulate across Europe. The virus appears to have originated in the town of Zjornökierkegaard, Iceland, famous for its natural hotsprings and tourist resorts. Experts have taken to calling it simply the “Iceland-Z” virus. The virus appears to have already been transmitted to continental Europe, and rumors of some symptoms associated with the virus— fever, cough, and itchiness—have begun to emerge in the United States. It has also already proven to be lethal: Of the 100 known infections in Iceland, 20 people have already died. Investigations have begun among EU emergency management personnel over the question of how deadly and dangerous the virus might be and possible additional measures. Background European concerns about the transmission of a deadly virus are understandably linked to wider public health worries in the post-COVID era. That disease, along with others like SARS and H5N1, have been devastating to health and well-being of societies. According to Johns Hopkins University data on COVID-19, the pandemic killed over 1.4 million people worldwide, including 410,000 in the United States in 2020-2021. The disease was highly contagious and easily transmissible, with an infection fatality rate (IFR), estimated between 1- 2 percent of those infected. Pandemics like COVID-19 also have devastating economic effects. We have also learned that pandemics also require whole-of-government responses to be most effective. The history of U.S. and global pandemic preparedness includes roles for governments, nongovernmental organizations, and international governmental organizations. Not only do governments formulate potential responses, they must work closely with all sectors of societies in attempts to regulate or encourage changes in citizens’ behaviors. What is Known about Iceland-Z? So far, there is only scant evidence about the depth of this potential threat. Scientists have learned that it is lethal, easily transmissible, and on the move. Common symptoms like coughs and fever seem to appear quickly in patients, raising the possibility that carriers of the virus are asymptomatic for some time before feeling ill. Like with COVID-19, this raises the silent threat that the virus could be transmitted unknowingly. Where is it? So far, about 100 cases in Iceland present these symptoms, but there may be many more infected persons. The European Union Pandemic Preparedness Group based in Geneva is currently trying to sample the virus in order to develop an effective test, and they suspect that as many as 100 more people are infected across several European countries. Finally, strange things are occurring in the United States, including a commuter plane crash outside Albany, New York, and an unusual number of people calling off work due to sickness along the eastern seaboard section of the U.S. Beyond that, much is speculation at this point. The world anxiously awaits word of a plan or response from your presidential administration, as dawn brings news of this virus and social media platforms begin to light up with rumors….

Day 2: Breaking News, Interagency Policy Directive Negotiations

Synopsis This day begins with breaking news and an update by groups on their positions on the matter of solutions to the crisis at hand, as well as the development of draft policy directives. Remember that it is critical for players to try to represent their assigned roles but also find areas for agreement with other players. For an NSCS policy directive to be an effective solution, an oversized majority (two-thirds) of bureaucratic agents present have to agree on and vote for the proposed solution by the end of the final session. The role of the President remains moderating and facilitating inter-agency dialogue in an effort to build a policy resolution.

Schedule Details For the first 10 minutes, your assignments are:

• Meet in groups to review and consider new information presented at the start of today’s session. Then begin to process the current case through the ‘lens’ of your role assignment, and reconsider any policy statements and directives that you have developed so far.

• Consider answers to the following questions:

-What is your assessment of the severity and legitimacy of the evolving threat? -What are possible responses, and their pros and cons? -How might your policy recommendations have changed?

Next 40 Minutes:

• Begin a period for informal, inter-agency deliberations is allowed with the goal of building policy consensus through sharing clauses of draft policy statements. This could involve large or small groups and plenty of discussion and draft writing. The role of the President remains moderating and facilitating inter-agency dialogue in an effort to build to a policy resolution.

• Develop draft policy directives: Groups that begin to establish consensus work together to write draft policy directives using templates available in class. Students should plan to meet outside of class to continue to develop policy directives for presentations on Day 3.

Day 2: Breaking News Report [To Be Accompanied by Video]

By Matilda Overweather There have been concerning new developments with the Iceland-Z virus in recent hours. The latest reports tell us that the virus continues to rapidly spread across the EU and we now have more than 1,000,000 confirmed cases here in the United States. Tragically, the disease is proving extremely deadly, and scientists have confirmed that the IFR is at 20%. This virus is something the likes of which we’ve never seen, and the response has been the same. All of Europe has shut down and put shelter in place orders into effect—all except the UK, that is. Hospitals in Europe are overwhelmed, and are refusing patients at the doors in many countries. Social media has gone into a frenzy and store shelves are emptying as Americans remember the challenges with getting essentials in March of 2020. Take a look at this clip from popular TikTok user @erwinandco’s account, in an attempt to make light of the situation…A number of Tik Tok users have also drawn associations between Gen Z and the Z virus, and have created a popular dance routine that is usually accompanied by the line, “Make the Z virus dance go viral!” I’m glad the youth of America can still create artistic, though somewhat disturbing, content in such a challenging time.

11 Day 3: Interagency Negotiations, Final Policy Forum, Presidential Announcement

This is the final day of our simulation dealing with a global pandemic. The theme of this crisis decision-making simulation is: What should the United States do to respond to an increasingly severe outbreak of a deadly virus? You are engaging in a series of deliberations on the best response to a hypothetical policy crisis scenario, with the goal to represent your assigned role and to develop strategies and interagency agreements that will keep the U.S. population safe. You will make decisions about how to proceed in the face of an emergency, how to prepare and protect the community, and how to ensure such a crisis can never happen again. Synopsis

This day begins with more breaking news and an update by groups on their positions on the matter of solutions to the crisis at hand, as well as the development of draft policy directives. These directives will be shared through a round of presentations, and the president will moderate an inter-agency dialogue in an effort to build a policy resolution.

Schedule Details For the first 10 minutes, your assignments are:

• Review and consider new information presented at the start of today’s session. Then begin to process the current case through the ‘lens’ of your role assignment, and reconsider any policy statements and directives that you have developed so far.

Next 30 Minutes:

• Final interagency policy review meeting and presidential decision. The President will moderate discussion and promote the goal of policy resolution.

• For a policy directive to be implemented, an oversized majority (two-thirds) of

bureaucratic agents present have to agree on and vote for the proposed solution by the end of the session.

• The President then deliberates and announces a ruling on final policy decisions.

Part III: Role Assignments

Role Assignment: Attorney General Iceland-Z may represent a threat to U.S. security, but you have a number of concerns related to your professional role and responsibilities.

• First, you believe this is a problem for states, not the federal government. And you have a legal responsibility to dissuade the president from taking federal actions that would violate states’ rights in these circumstances.

• Second, you believe that a strong federal response could open the government up

to legal jeopardy if treatments or cures are not proven to be safe. • Third, you believe that a national mask mandate is unconstitutional and illegal,

and would open the administration up to a huge legal debacle.

• Fourth, you believe the president may not fully understand the legal complexities in this situation. Their plans to issue emergency orders could be fraught with legal landmines.

These positions are further complicated by the fact that your tenure in office so far has not been easy. It has been plagued by legal and political challenges associated with politics. In some ways, given your knowledge of the law and the Constitution, you bear the heaviest responsibility of all in terms of deliberating on policy routes. There are important legal, ethical, and societal issues to consider when it comes to any action involving responses to the pandemic. And caution is the word.

Role Assignment: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

You represent the highest-ranking military officer in the United States. You are an old ‘war horse.’ Your position enables you to work with the chiefs of all military branches. Even as the pandemic rises, you are keeping your eyes on the horizon. The world has become a much more dangerous place. Terrorists that we had thought were vanquished are now back with a vengeance and even threating the American homeland. Not only is the threat of global terrorism on the rise, it is metastasizing into strains that are more violent, better armed, better funded and more difficult to counter. You have seen credible evidence recently, for example, of the potential for non-state actors to carry out crippling cyber-terrorist attacks on the U.S. power grid. You and your fellow ‘chiefs’ have also discussed scattered evidence that the Iceland-Z virus actually did not originate from Iceland, but rather is a Chinese-inspired plot to sew instability in the western world. China watched the United States and its western allies nearly crumble during the COVID-19 pandemic, and they have expansionist plans that would benefit from a weakened United States. You believe that the intelligence is strong. Develop a convincing set of arguments that the president must take immediate action in the interest of international and national security.

Role Assignment: Director of Central Intelligence Agency All of the lights are ‘blinking red’ when it comes to Iceland-Z. This will become a global pandemic, and allied intelligence agencies are gearing up to share information about how to fight it. At the same time, you have some very convincing new information about the origins of Iceland-Z. You believe that the virus may have been intentionally released by the Chinese government in Iceland, a country that they knew had huge volumes of trade and travel with both North America and the European Union. The intelligence on Iceland-Z whereabouts comes directly from your own clandestine operatives and satellite reconnaissance. You believe it is rock-solid, actionable information. Thus, you will need to convince the U.S. president that the United States should take concerted action against the Chinese regime. Given recent criticisms of U.S. foreign policy as “feckless”, the president desperately needs a ‘win’. The president’s statement last Thursday that the United States does not yet fully understand the nature of the virus was politically damaging, not to mention a dangerous signal to the world of indecision.

Role Assignment: The President of the United States

You are the most powerful leader in the free world, with a mandate to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. You believe that the Iceland-Z pandemic represents a clear challenge to U.S. national security. You are also concerned about the instability associated with pandemic rioting and societal unrest, and you must act to ensure the future security of our nation. Among your considerations should be short-term and long-term policy decisions, communication with the public, and the issuing of emergency orders. You must also coordinate with state and local authorities. Your assigned role is special, though. You should listen carefully to the presentations and take notes when needed. Following each presentation you will have an opportunity to ask one challenging question of each presenter. In the end, though, you have to do something! The media and members of Congress are criticizing your policies as “feckless” in recent months. You may consider any diplomatic, economic, political, or military actions to address this developing situation. Your final policy choice should be well reasoned and insightful. Good luck! PS: You should play the part as you see fit…you are not required to portray the current president (or a recent one).

Role Assignment: Secretary of Health and Human Services

You have many years of experience inside HHS, and you are relieved that the president seems to be a moderate and thoughtful leader. You are considered the leading expert in the government on pandemic preparedness and response. You are not a scientist like Dr. Fenster at the National Institutes of Health, but you are an expert on policy. You believe that the U.S. government should act quickly with a central/federal government response to decisively to launch a massive pandemic response program. Your organization, along with others focused on health and welfare, have long considered pandemic preparedness an important priority, and you have personally led dozens of meetings over the years, including after-action reports on COVID-19 and studies of SARS, and potentially dangerous tropical diseases. Your experience with interagency programs is also very valuable in this situation. Some of your counterparts who lead government bureaucracies have other priorities and may be less willing to find common ground. But you are committed to promote open discussion and even compromise—so long as it helps you to get where you intend to go with a massive response. You should advocate for indirect and creative policy solutions to this crisis.

Role Assignment: Director of the National Institutes of Health

Dr. Fenster, you are a legend in the fight against infectious diseases! You have served as the director of NIH for seventeen years, and in this capacity you have helped prior administrations battle pandemics and other serious public health challenges. You have written three books on pandemic response and conducted probably a thousand interviews over the years. The one thing you know from your research, including time in the field researching infectious disease transmission, is that the only way to respond to this crisis is a total, immediate lockdown of government and society. The data on the possible infection- mortality rate for this disease is off the charts—worse than any of the major influenza and coronavirus pandemics that have struck the globe before. Worse than COVID. You know the answer to this situation: we need an immediate lockdown or millions of Americans will die. And we need it now. Remember, you have a great deal of credibility, and it is possible that you might be able to actually dissuade all the entrenched bureaucrats and military advisors from reckless actions.

Role Assignment: Secretary of the Treasury Well, here we go again. Scientists and advisors to the president are concerned about the spread of the Iceland-Z virus to a broad population and are considering drastic actions like shutting down the economy. You cannot let this happen! There are several major reasons for your opposition to any concerted government response. First, you are painfully aware that the last pandemic of COVID-19 caused a worldwide, deep recession that crippled the American economy for years. The costs of the shutdown and then subsequent retrenchment by the population and the government are still being felt. In many ways, you believe that COVID-19 will have a long-term economic and psychological impact similar to the Great Depression a century before. Generations will be scarred for life. Second, the U.S. government officials really have no idea yet of the severity of the new threat and are hinting at rash actions that may undermine the prospects for U.S. economic dominance. Third, we are losing to China. Their authoritarian regime and state-controlled economy was the only one in the world to rise up through the ashes of COVID-19 to take dominant control of the global economy. Their immediate response to the pandemic last time allowed them to move on fully a year before other governments could. If we take drastic actions in the United States, we will likely end up with an economy as powerful as…Italy. Your mission is to convince the president that the United States should adopt a slow and cautious attitude and that we should keep the economy open (with some precautions) at all costs.

Role Assignment: Secretary of Defense Your mission is to convince the president that the military has a primary role in defending against the spread of the Iceland-Z virus. You know that the world is a more dangerous place today. There are threats on every horizon. And only the military has the capabilities to respond to them effectively. You should recommend decisive and strong action. This includes the use of the military to restore order in unrest, to patrol the streets in cities that have experienced pandemic- related problems, and to deliver needed food and medical aid. You support a military operation to fix this problem, and you should think creatively about military options that have a good chance of success. At the same time, you and some other agency heads also have deep concerns about the reliability of this new intelligence on the actual origins of Iceland-Z. You believe that the virus may have been intentionally released by the Chinese government. Consider military options, strategies, resources, and objectives carefully in light of these circumstances.

Role Assignment: Director, Centers for Disease Control (CDC)

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is the federal agency mandated with protecting the health of Americans. It used to be among the world’s preeminent health agencies, playing a crucial role in fighting disease globally and acting as a first responder in outbreaks in the past. However, your agency has faced sharp criticism, particular due to is failures during the COVID-19 pandemic. The agency that you’ve known and loved for twenty years there is actually on the precipice of being disbanded. In other words, this crisis response may be your last chance—and you cannot afford to get this one wrong. Here’s what you know, shared exclusively with you by your experts in the field:

• Iceland-Z is more contagious and more deadly than anyone seems to be reporting. Hospitals in Europe will be overrun in a matter of days, and this has the potential to sicken millions in the United States.

• Containment of this virus may be impossible, but your experts have begun to try

to promote radically different thinking: starving the virus! Given the fact that the CDC failed to respond effectively to the early spread of COVID, your scientists have a new plan: Mass evacuation and isolation versus lockdowns in place.

• Scientists predict that Iceland-Z will reach the east coast of the United States

quickly, so you should recommend: -immediate closure of air and maritime travel on the eastern seaboard;

-mass evacuation of populations from urban areas in the northeast to temporary quarters for one month in the Midwest.

This approach may sound radical, but isolation to starve the virus of victims has effectively helped end the Ebola virus outbreak in Liberia in 2015 and a similar outbreak of smallpox in rural India in 1997. Be bold, and good luck!

Role Assignment: Governor of California You are a former Hollywood movie star and now serve as governor of the largest state in the union, California, with a population of 40 million. Iceland-Z may represent a threat to U.S. security, but you have more pressing concerns related to your own state and immediate interests.

• First, you believe this is a problem for states, not the federal government. You have a political and legal responsibility to dissuade the president from taking federal actions that would violate states’ rights in these circumstances.

• Second, you believe that a state mask mandate and curfew laws are legal, but that

a federal plan would be unconstitutional and illegal.

• Third, you are convinced that the president doesn’t fully understand the health complexities in this situation—that they are misguided and misinformed. Some of the most serious research on Iceland-Z is underway at top California labs, and you will have more information soon to make the most informed policy choices.

To further complicate this picture, you also have personal political ambitions that may someday include a run for the presidency. You need to tread carefully, defend California’s interests, and watch out for state’s rights. Good luck!

Additional Readings and Resources Josh Wingrove, Susan Warren, and John Tozzi, “Virus Exposes U.S. Unreadiness, Testing Trump’s Grip on Crisis,” Bloomberg News, March 20, 2020, pp.1-8. Michael D. Shear, Shri Fink, and Noah Weiland, “Inside Trump Administration, Debate Raged Over What to Tell Public,” New York Times, March 8, 2020, pp.1-5. Laura Barron-Lopez, Holly Otterbein, and Maya King, “Health Professionals Warn of ‘Explosion’ of Coronavirus Cases in Minority Communities,” Politico.com, April 6, 2020, pp.1-9. Melissa Healy, “Could a ‘Controlled Avalanche’ Stop the Coronavirus Faster, and with Fewer Deaths?” Los Angeles Times, April 25, 2020, pp.1-13. John F. Harris, “Admit It, You Are Willing to Let People Die to End the Shutdown,” Politico.com, April 30, 2020, pp.1-11. Kim Hjelmgaard, Eric J. Lyman and Deirdre Shesgreen, “This is What China Did to Beat the Coronavirus; Experts Say America Couldn’t Handle It,” USA Today, April 1, 2020, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/04/01/coronavirus-covid-19-china-radical- measures-lockdowns-mass-quarantines/2938374001/. Victor Asal, “Playing Games with International Relations,” International Studies Perspectives, vol.6, no.3 (August 2005), pp.359–373. Emre Hatipoglu, Meltem Müftüler-Baç, Teri Murphy, “Simulation Games in Teaching International Relations: Insights from a Multi-Day, Multi-Stage, Multi-Issue Simulation on Cyprus,” International Studies Perspectives, vol.15, no.4 (November 2014), pp.394–406. Laura Horn, Olivier Rubin, Laust Schouenborg, Undead Pedagogy: How a Zombie Simulation Can Contribute to Teaching International Relations , International Studies Perspectives, vol.17. no.2 (2016), pp.187–201. Stephen M. Shellman and Kursad Turan, “Do Simulations Enhance Student Learning? An Empirical Evaluation of an IR Simulation,” Journal of Political Science and Education, vol.2, no.1 (2007), pp.19–32. Brigid A. Starkey and Elizabeth L. Black, “Simulation in International Relations Education,” Simulation and Gaming, vol.32, no.4 (2001), pp.537–551. Kirsten Taylor, “Simulations Inside and Outside the IR Classroom: A Comparative Analysis,” International Studies Perspectives, vol.14, no.2 (2013), pp.134–149. Priya Dixit, “Relating to Difference: Aliens and Alien-ness in Doctor Who and International Relations,” International Studies Perspectives, vol.13, no.3 (2012), pp.289–306. Jutta Weldes, To Seek Out New Worlds: Exploring Links between Science Fiction and World Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003).

23 Endnotes

1 “The 2009 H1N1 Pandemic,” CDC.gov, https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009- h1n1-pandemic.html. 2 Associated Press, “CDC: 80,000 People Died of Flu Last Winter in the United States,” September 26, 2018, https://www.statnews.com/2018/09/26/cdc-us-flu-deaths-winter/. 3 Paul E. Waggoner and Donald E. Aylor, “Epidemeology: A Science of Patterns,” Annual Review of Phytopathology, vol.38, no.1 (2000), pp.71-94. 4 Congressional Research Service, “COVID 19: Global Implications and Responses,” CRS In Focus Report, June 12, 2020, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11421. 5 Figure adapted by Lilia Eisenstein; graphic inspired by Regina Phelps, “COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Phases—Where are We? and Where are we Going?” Risk and Resilience Hub, April 1, 2001, https://www.riskandresiliencehub.com/covid-19-pandemic-planning-phases-where-are-we- and-where-are-we-going/. 6 Brent E. Sasley, “Teaching Students How to Fail: Simulations as Tools of Explanation,” International Studies Perspectives, vol.11, no.1 (February 2010), pp.61-74; Michael Prince, “Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol.93, no.3 (2004), pp.223-231.