In game theory we can have many patterns and we can use them in specific applications. But the problem is to understand their differences. So for example imagine that we have a strategic mix so we know that we have in reality different strategic behaviors and we want to get a result with a combination of them. The idea is to have the same target, the same aim. But the problem is that if you have only that, you cannot call yourself an alliance. So the idea is to imagine that the weakness of this kind of strategic mix is, in reality, the target. Because if you change the target, then the players have between them only oppositions and in reality we can see that the erasing of the target means the death of this kind of strategic mix. So it’s rather difficult to understand that if we don’t have rational players, we are not of course in Game Theory. So we can find this situation in geopolitics but the problem is to define this kind of difference and to understand that, at the end, we have something which is totally different, there is no comparison and that’s why it’s so difficult to characterize this kind of problem.