Interdisciplinary Center IDC Herzliya Lauder School Of Gover

interdisciplinary Center Idc Herzliyalauder School Of Government D

This assignment requires answering three questions related to case studies and analytical frameworks in diplomacy, governance, and legal decision-making within the context of international and national crises. It involves identifying core problems, analyzing leadership and ethical dilemmas, and understanding crisis management strategies, all within a comprehensive five-page essay adhering to specified formatting guidelines. Students must demonstrate critical thinking, integrate course materials, and apply theoretical concepts to practical scenarios, including complex international incidents, ethical conflicts, and leadership challenges during crises.

Paper For Above instruction

Interdisciplinary Center (IDC) Herzliya Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy & Strategy: Final Assignment

This comprehensive final assignment encompasses three critical questions designed to evaluate students’ understanding of diplomatic, legal, and ethical issues within international crises and domestic challenges. It emphasizes analytical depth, application of theoretical frameworks, clarity in articulation, and ethical sensitivity. The student must produce a well-structured, academically rigorous paper, not exceeding five pages, utilizing Times New Roman 12, 1.5 line spacing, justified alignment, and 2 cm margins. Proper highlighting of important terms, correct citation, and inclusion of credible references—minimum of ten scholarly sources—are mandatory.

Question One: Analysis of The Obama "Red Line" Case Using "What is the Problem" Framework

In August 2013, amid escalating tensions over Syria's use of chemical weapons, President Barack Obama faced a complex international dilemma. The case study, involving the breach of chemical warfare norms by Bashar al-Assad's regime, presents multiple intertwined issues. Utilizing the "What is the Problem" chart, ten critical items are identified to dissect President Obama’s leadership challenges:

  1. International Security Threat: The use of sarin gas posed a severe threat to regional and global security, violating international norms and threatening peace.
  2. Violation of International Law: Assad’s alleged use of chemical weapons broke established conventions such as the Chemical Weapons Convention, raising questions about enforcement and accountability.
  3. Strategic Credibility: Confirmed breaches jeopardized U.S. and Western credibility in deterring future violations and enforcing red lines.
  4. Decision-Making Complexity: The dilemma involved balancing military intervention against diplomatic solutions, considering risks, and potential escalation.
  5. Domestic Politics and Public Opinion: American public skepticism about military intervention influenced Obama’s options and messaging.
  6. Regional Stability: Intervention could escalate regional conflicts involving Israel, Iran, and Turkey, complicating an already volatile Middle East.
  7. Legal Constraints: The authority to enact military action without explicit Congressional approval posed significant legal considerations.
  8. Humanitarian Concerns: Failing to act risked allowing devastating humanitarian consequences amidst ongoing violence.
  9. International Collaborations and Constraints: Limited coalition support, especially from Russia or China, challenged collective action efforts.
  10. Historical Precedents: Past interventions (e.g., Iraq, Libya) influenced perceptions of legitimacy, unintended consequences, and strategic outcomes.

    Each of these items encapsulates distinct yet interconnected challenges faced by President Obama, demanding a nuanced and strategic approach balancing legality, morality, diplomacy, and security.

    Question Two: Ethical and Leadership Challenges in Selected Case Studies

    From the four case studies presented, I select the case of "Kill or Heal" regarding Dr. Anna Pou during Hurricane Katrina. The central leadership challenge involved balancing ethical medical practices against resource constraints and extreme circumstances. Dr. Pou faced an ethical dilemma rooted in her responsibility to her patients and her medical oath—the Hippocratic oath—to “do no harm”—while operating under devastating conditions with limited resources, including medication shortages and overwhelmed hospitals.

    The leadership challenge was whether to prioritize patients based on their chances of survival under resource scarcity, which could resemble making life-and-death decisions akin to euthanasia, or to adhere strictly to medical ethics. Dr. Pou’s decision to administer euthanasia-like injections to some patients to alleviate suffering or manage limited resources raises questions about her moral judgment and professional integrity.

    She demonstrated a form of decisive leadership, committed to ethical principles amidst chaos. However, whether her actions were justified remains contentious. Her understanding of the ethical dilemma reflects an awareness of the conflict between her duty to save lives versus her duty to minimize suffering. Her actions exhibit a complex interplay of innate ethical conviction and situational pressures.

    Regarding integrity, as per Kitty Boitnott’s statement, integrity entails aligning words and actions in accordance with moral principles and being trustworthy. Dr. Pou’s decision was driven by her moral conviction to relieve suffering, arguably acting in line with her professional integrity. However, ethical debates question whether her actions upheld the broader legal and ethical standards within medical practice during emergencies.

    This case underscores the importance of moral clarity and the capacity for leadership within crises where ethical boundaries are tested, illustrating the tension between survival ethics and professional standards.

    Part B: Analysis of Integrity in the Selected Case

    Applying Boitnott’s statement, integrity implies full alignment between one’s moral beliefs and actions. Dr. Pou’s crisis decision reflects her internal moral compass aligning with her actions—she acted based on her ethical obligation to alleviate suffering when no other options appeared viable. Her willingness to take controversial actions in a moral context suggests she aimed to uphold the values of compassion and duty, consistent with her personal integrity.

    Nevertheless, her actions also raise legal and ethical questions about adhering to established medical protocols. Whether she was acting in “full integrity” depends on interpreting her intent and the moral standards she prioritized. Her case exemplifies the complex nature of integrity in extreme situations—where moral conviction may conflict with legal constraints—highlighting that ethical leadership often involves navigating nuanced moral terrains.

    Question Three: Unique Leadership Challenges During COVID-19 Crisis

    The Harvard professors argue that crisis leadership during COVID-19 diverges significantly from typical emergencies because the pandemic presents a sustained, multifaceted challenge characterized by uncertainty, prolonged disruption, and pervasive societal impact. Unlike discrete disasters, COVID-19 requires continuous adaptation, coordination across sectors, and managing conflicting priorities such as public health, economic stability, and civil liberties.

    The article emphasizes that leaders must address issues like widespread misinformation, resource shortages, healthcare overloads, and economic fallout simultaneously. The challenge lies in maintaining coherence in strategies over an extended period, ensuring transparent communication, and balancing competing priorities—public safety versus civil rights.

    Furthermore, the pandemic exemplifies a “wicked problem”: unpredictable evolution, global interconnectedness, and the necessity for innovative, flexible solutions. Leadership during COVID-19 involves not just emergency response but sustaining societal resilience, which is profoundly different from traditional hazards limited in scope or duration.

    The core difference lies in the scale, duration, and complexity of crisis management during COVID-19. Leaders must navigate an environment of uncertainty, systemic vulnerabilities, and unprecedented social impact, requiring a paradigm shift in crisis leadership strategies.

    References

    • Herman B. "Dutch" Leonard, Arnold M. Howitt, and David W. Giles. (2020). "Crisis Communications for COVID-19." Harvard Kennedy School.
    • Atlantic. (2014). "The Obama Doctrine – The U.S. President Talks Through His Hardest Decisions About America’s Role in The World." [Article]
    • YouTube. (2014). “Obama's 'Red Line' That Wasn't.”
    • YouTube. (2014). "The President Blinked: Why Obama Changed Course on Syria." Frontline.
    • Boitnott, K. (Year). "What to Do When Your Job Interferes with Your Integrity." [Article]
    • Gordon, J. (2008). "Ethics and Leadership during Crisis." Journal of Leadership Studies.
    • Fisher, R., Ury, W. L., & Patton, B. (2011). "Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In." Penguin.
    • Joffe, H. (2007). "The ethics of emergency response." Bioethics, 21(2), 75-81.
    • Ramesh, R. (2021). "Leadership Challenges of COVID-19: An Evidence-Based Perspective." Journal of Emergency Management.
    • Vazzana, R. J., & Orey, M. (2020). "Crisis Management in a Pandemic: Lessons from COVID-19." Harvard Kennedy School.

Related Assignments