Free formation

In "Two and three Groups", it was explained that there can be only two-Groups Subcoalitions or a mix of two-Groups and three-Groups Subcoalitions. In "Availability and steps", it was explained that there are three ways to form Subcoalitions and Coalitions a) agreement b) DMPR or RLS c) FREE FORMATION in steps. Free formation third could work out well, if certain guidelines are followed.

FREE FORMATION does NOT REQUIRE GENERAL AGREEMENT. ONLY the GROUPS that FORM SUBCOALITIONS and COALITIONS must agree. It takes only as little as two Groups to agree to form a Subcoalition. This Subcoalition can merge with another one, at a later stage and form an incomplete Coalition. At a third step, another two-Groups Subcoalition can be added to make the Coalition complete.

The arrangement of the Groups in Subcoalitions and Coalitions can be done TOP-DOWN or BOTTOM-UP. In top-down, the Coalitions are decided and then divided in Subcoalitions. All or only the available Groups can be considered. In bottom-up, Subcoalitions are formed and then combined in a such a way to make Coalitions. Both top-down and bottom-up can be used in the FREE FORMATION in steps.

A possible Coalition is E2-R1-R4-M1-M2-M3. Suppose that this is decided first and then the Subcoaltions are formed. One possibility is to have two three-Groups Coalitions, E2-R1-R4 and M1-M2-M3. Another is three two-Groups Subcoalitions, E2-M1, M2-M3, R1-R4. In bottom up, Subcoaltions (E2-R1-R4, M1-M2-M3 or E2-M1, M2-M3, R1-R4) are formed first in steps and then merge to form the Coalition.

Suppose that in the first step M1-M2-M3 is formed. At that time, they would not know if E2-R1-R4 woull also be a three-Groups Subcoalition. It is possible that instead there could be two two-Groups Subcoalitions, E1-E2 and R1-R4. M1-M2-M3 will not be able to merge with one or both of them to make a Coalition. If it merges with only one, there will be five Groups. If it merges with both, there will be seven Groups.

The number of Groups is six. In China's and India's Coalitions, there will be two more Groups. M1-M2-M3 can't be added to China's and India's Coalition either. Suppose that eventually, all other Subcoalitions have two-Groups. M1-M2-M3 will not be able to be part of a Coalition. But there will be one Group left that will not be in any two-Groups Subcoalition.

This is because the number of all the Group is sixteen (16), without China and India. So there will be one three-Groups Subcoalition, six two-Groups Subcoalitions and one Group alone, 3 + 6 X 2 + 1 = 16. M1-M2-M3 will have to break into two parts, a two-Groups Subcoalition and a single Group. The single Group will form a Subcoalition with the other Group that is not in one of the six two-Groups Subcoalitions.

Another possibility is that there would be only one more three-Groups Subcoalition, A1-A2-A3. Perhaps they would not want to be together in a Coalition. There are some countries in M1-M2-M3 area that have good realtions with USA. But overall, this is the most anti-USA area in the world. Also the rest of the Groups will oppose such a Coalition because it will have a large part of gas and oil resources.

A mix of three-Groups and two-Groups Coalitions is possible with an agreement. Another example is Coalition A1, A2, A3, E1, M1, S1. This can be divided into two three-Groups Subcoalitions, A1-A2-A3 and E1-M1-S1. In Coalition E1-E2-R1-M1-M2-M3, there can be two three-Groups Subcoalitions, E1-E2-R1 and M1-M2-M3. There are really endless alternatives.

But extreme caution is necessary regarding three-Groups Subcoalitions. In Free formation in steps, these can exist only in a top-down process. If a complete Coalition is decided, it can be divided into two three-Groups Subcoalitions. Otherwise, THREE-GROUPS SUBCOALITIONS should be AVOIDED. DMPR/RLS do not work well with a mix. In another article, we will explain how two-Groups Subcoalitions can be used instead of Groups in DMPR or RLS processes.

Any three two-Groups Subcoalitions can be combined to have a six Group Coalition. Also any one of the two Groups Subcoalition can be added to China's and India's Coalition. This will become clear in another article. But a three-Groups Subcoalitions will be a problem. It can be combined only with another three-Groups Subcoalition. It can't be combined with China and India.

Ideally, an agreement will be made that will involve all Groups or the available ones. Suppose that an agreement can't be made. There are still two ways to arrange Groups in Coalitions a) DMPR or RLS b) FREE FORMATION in steps. Free formation could work out well. But three-Groups Subcoalitions can exist only if the Coalition has been decided and is complete. Otherwise, they should be avoided.

GROUPS (as suggested in Appendix 31) are ENCOURAGED to FORM SUBCOALITIONS. SUBCOALITIONS are ENCOURAGED to form COALITIONS, even if these are INCOMPLETE for some time. For instance, in the first example that we gave, E2-M1 and R1-R4 could form an incomplete Coalition. One two-Groups Subcoalition will be missing. This could be added at a later time. It could be M2-M3 or another one.

FREE FORMATION can be combined with DMPR or RLS process. Suppose that we have four incomplete Coalitions A) A1-A2 and R2-R3 B) E2-M1 with R1-R4. Without China and India, there are eight Groups left; A3, E1, M2, M3, S1, S2, S3, S4. The ranking is shown below. One of the three RLS versions or DMPR can be followed with the eight Groups only. There can be also a veto.

Suppose that I-E1-A3 have already formed a complete Coalition or that decision makers place them in a Pseudocoalition. These three Groups will be excluded. The reamining Groups will be six M2, M3, S1, S2, S3, S4. Decision makers could make three two-Groups Subcoalitions, M2-M3, S1-S2, S3-S4. Let's say that the ranking order for A, B and C is as shown on the left side of the table below.

In that case, the assignment order is extremely important. Probably this would have to be decided randomly, as in drawing numbers from a hat. Let's assume that the assignment order is randomly determined B-A-C as it is shown in the table above. The result is shown on the right side of the table. The final Coalitions, with the two Groups Subcoalitions will be 1) A1-A2, R2-R3, S3-S4 2) E2-M1, R1-R4, M2-M3 3) C, S1-S2 4) I, E1-A3.

In conclusion, FREE FORMATION in steps could work out well, if an agreement can't be made. Three-Groups Subcoalitions can exist, only if a complete Coalition has been decided. Otherwise three-Groups Subcoalitions should be avoided. Two-Groups give many more choices and offer more flexibility. Free formation can be combined with DMPR or RLS processes but three-Groups Subcoalitions will be problematic.