Trent Ledford

September 5th, 2017

Iceberg Modeling

Events: North Korea flew a missile

over Japan

Patterns/Trends: a recent increase in the amount of missile

tests; increased economic sanctions place upon North Korea;
increasingly hostile regime; increasing poverty within North
Korea.

Underlying Structures: U.S. response to perceived threats and

communism; North Korean isolationist and unfriendly diplomatic policies.

Mental Models: The enemy cannot be reasoned with mentality; remnants

of Cold War ideology; power must be kept at all costs.

Part I:
For this exercise, I have decided to model the system responsible for the recent missile
test North Korea recently performed. On Tuesday, August 29th, a missile was launched that flew
over Japan. Since it did not strike the nation it flew over, it is most likely was a gesture of
intimidation. Like any other political behavior, there is a system behind it, including factors that
have been in play since before the turn of the century.
 There are some underlying patterns and trends associated with this event. For example,
over the past year there has been an increase of nuclear testing and missile testing done by the
regime. As a result, there have also been increased economic sanctions on North Korea; even
China (who backed North Korea during the Korean Conflict) has placed economic sanctions on
that nation. This also exacerbates the increasing trend toward poverty in North Korea as well as
the trend of increasing hostility with other powers. All of these parts play a role culminating in
this event.
In addition there are some underlying structures that make this issue possible. First of all,
there is the United States policy when it comes to dealing with threats (including, during the
Cold war, communism). This includes containment and, with more radical regimes, termination
of the governments of enemy nations. In addition, due to the nature of their communist
government, North Korea also has an isolationist diplomatic philosophy and comes across as
very unfriendly. These are due to the organizations and policies at play, and further aid in the
issue arising.
There are also plenty of mental models at play here. The first is that power must be kept
at all costs. For North Korea, this creates a mentality that nuclear weapons (and showing them
off) is the only means for survival. There are also mental models stemming from Cold War era
policies; for example there is an aggressive the enemy cannot be reasoned with mentality,
resulting in anxiousness in all sides of the conflict. These mental models also aid in creating this
situation.
Sources for Part I:
http://www.popsci.com/north-korea-missile-test-japan
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/china-bans-north-korea-iron-lead-coal-imports-
as-part-of-un-sanctions/2017/08/14/a0ce4cb0-80ca-11e7-82a4-
920da1aeb507_story.html?utm_term=.2168cf19aedc

Part II:
1). I think the Iceberg Model is a neat model since it does broaden your perspective. Even
though it is easy to think problems are just mere cause and effect situation, many of the worlds
problems are more complicated than that. This makes this model more useful since it prevents
one from falling into this trap. This broadened perspective is useful, since it allows for a
different manner of problem solving; it allows one to think about if one particular underlying
aspect is changed, what is the result. This can cause unique, lasting solutions for problems to
arise.
2). As with any other system, there are leverage points that can be used to change the system.
For example, if you look deep into the system I used, one leverage point I think of is changing
the enemy cannot be reasoned with mindset. Though it would be difficult to do, changing this
mindset, even to they can be reasoned with can make a huge difference in the way all the
nations involved in this situation communicate and create policies. Changing this mindset would
result in increased likelihood of less hostilities. After all, it is better to reason with an adversary
than be hostile. However, this is easier said than done, and like all complex issues, more than one
solution may be necessary to change this situation.
3). There are several issues I would like to look into using a systems model like this. One that
immediately comes to mind that is perplexing to me is why U.S. schools are falling behind in
education compared to other affluent nations. This system would be useful since it could help
someone like me understand what is going on in the background, including trends and mindsets.
In other words, rather than just adding a bandage, it can be used to help solve the roots of issues
like this.