Marko Papip
Geopolitical Alpha
Geopolitics has always been an intriguing puzzle to me—an intricate, multi-layered game theory problem with no obvious level of abstraction to rely on. Nations are governed by individuals whose decision-making processes do not always align with the interests of the people they represent. For example, Papic highlights that during the 2019 Brexit negotiations, Boris Johnson was effectively playing a three-level game: managing internal Tory divisions, securing Conservative dominance over Labour, and navigating Britain’s global standing. Only by considering the interplay of these three games could someone make an informed prediction about the negotiation outcomes. This is in addition to subtler but equally significant dynamics, such as Brussels’ large incentive to “make an example out of Britain”, - adding as much friction and foolery as possible to rigorously impede negotiations so they don't result in a net positive for British people post-Brexit.
“Preferences are optional and subject to constraints; constraints are neither optional nor subject to preferences.”
Surprisingly simple and bare of any sophsticated trickery, Geopolitical Alpha takes a strongly practical approach—its focus is on gaining a grounded thinking edge, rather than on theoretical analysis of events. Papic offers a clear method for digesting geopolitical events by modelling how real-world actors make decisions under uncertainty—highlighting incentives, constraints, and likely responses—rather than relying on idealised theories or retrospective analysis. He explicitly presents his framework as descriptive rather than prescriptive—designed to understand the world as it is, rather than how it should be. In this pursuit, he champions what he calls “professional nihilism.”
Overall, he has given me a sharper lens through which to refine my simplistic parsing of global drama.
Notes
The constraints framework
- Dialectical Materialism (Marx): Material reality dictates outcomes more than ideology or personal preferences.
- Diagnosticity of Constraints: To understand geopolitical decisions, we need data points that help distinguish between competing theories.
- Person vs Situation Bias: People tend to over-attribute decisions to individual agency rather than the structural constraints shaping their actions (i.e. we need more food, we need more housing, we have a energy deficit dependency)
Types of constraints
- Political
- Economic
- Financial
- Geopolitical
- Legal
- Wildcard / black swan e.g. pandemic or natural disaster