The Foreign Service Journal, May 2003

game that rewards deception. Hastings Hunter and I shook hands. So far, so good. I then discussed the proposed pact with Richard and Nina, explaining why I thought it was a good deal for our side. Richard asked perceptive tactical questions and agreed that we were embarking on a sound strategy, although he also appreciated the risk. Nina listened intently, more in the spirit of intellectual curiosity. Hasty and I showed one another our proposed moves, a coordinated offensive against the vulnerable adversaries south of us: Italy, Austria- Hungary and the Ottoman Empire. I would form a solid defense against invasion by France — Ambassador Brinton — to the west. Because of the pact with Russia, I wouldn’t have to protect my eastern flank. The moves were opened. I did as I had promised. But instead of moving his Russian forces as we had agreed, Hasty moved them directly west into the German territory I had left unpro- tected. Just like that, I was done for. My armies and fleets were dead ducks. I had been invaded and the homeland was going to be overrun. Risks and Penalties I went home and told my children that we had honored the terms of our pact but Hasty had not. He had taken advantage of us and invaded our east- ern border, despite our agreement. Nina asked me: “Dad, if Hasty broke his part of the pact, do we still have to keep our part?” I told her that if one of us broke the pact there isn’t any pact, not any more. But that did- n’t really matter anymore. Now that Hasty and Russia have broken the pact and turned against us, we were done for. Maybe we shouldn’t have left our- selves so vulnerable, but that was a chance we took. Now our armies and navies would be swept off the board in the next couple of moves. We were out of the game. M A Y 2 0 0 3 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 57