Ideas the game touches, and where each one appears in it. The words the game itself uses (seal, dispatch, Summit, brief and so on) are in the rulebook.
How actors work out who counts in a system: the ritual, document or title that makes someone a member rather than an outsider.
In the game: The credentials ceremony on the projector, and every Summit: the table decides whose credentials it accepts.
The module’s Recognition thread (“Who counts?”), from the Architecture
The papers an envoy carries to show who sent them and that they may speak for that government. Without them, an envoy can be refused a hearing.
In the game: Each delegation’s credentials are received on the projector once its introductions are done. A Summit that clears a delegate confirms their credentials.
Game term, tied to the Recognition thread
What a government tells its delegates to press for, and what not to give away.
In the game: The dispatches on each phone. A delegation has more good instructions than places in its brief, so it must choose.
Game term
A joint statement issued at the end of a conference. It records what every government present could agree to publish, not what each of them wanted.
In the game: The Final Act on the projector: three points from each delegation, and none of the arguments behind them.
Provenance notes on the Bandung Final Communiqué, Week 10 primary sources
A system organised around two great powers and their blocs, as the Cold War is often described.
In the game: The two outside powers pulling the congress their way, and the tally of how many points each got into the Final Act.
Week 10 reading list: the week’s system concept (Acharya 2016; Lüthi 2016)
The refusal to join either Cold War bloc: the Third World project as a claim to be a third pole, not a periphery of the other two.
In the game: A delegation that keeps every forgery out of its brief has stayed non-aligned. The debrief asks whether the congress as a whole did.
Week 10 reading list: the week’s counter-concept (Acharya 2016; Lüthi 2016)
A state’s authority over its own territory and affairs, which other states are expected to respect.
In the game: The instruction “Sovereignty”.
Bandung Final Communiqué (1955), Section G, principle 2
The principle that no state should intervene in another state’s internal affairs.
In the game: The instruction “Hands off”. The forgery “A word in the right ear” cuts against it.
Bandung Final Communiqué (1955), Section G, principle 4
The right of a people to choose its own government and political future.
In the game: The instruction “End colonialism”, and the Observer, who speaks for a people the conference discussed but did not seat.
Bandung Final Communiqué (1955), Sections C(1) and D
States agreeing to defend one another. The question at Bandung was whose interests such a pact served.
In the game: The instruction “Self-defence” and the forgery “A strong friend”: the hardest pair in the game to tell apart.
Bandung Final Communiqué (1955), Section G, principles 5 and 6(a)
No term matches that.