Why not add to my list of unreasonable suggestions from a coding point of view.
I think it’d be a cool addition to the game if there were multi-part dilemmas. So instead of simply receiving the notification “Diplomatic Immunity: foreigners now hate you”, you’d get to issue a response, do you stand by the diplomat, do you offer justice, or do nothing, and then a second part would come based on your actions, and grant a greater impact than the first stage.
Equally, this would potentially allow for things like diplomatic conflicts. When the dilemma to send troops to defend oil sources comes, it could be followed up (if you choose to send forces) by you receiving a trade embargo, which harms your trade and investment, or perhaps your forces encounter heavy resistance, and you have to commit more money to your military spending or risk the shame of defeat.
Even greater is that this could act as the grounds for a simple war system. A simple set of two or three choices, with differing chances of success based on your strengths and weaknesses in various areas (GDP, Military Spending, Racial Tension), and additional options thanks to policies you have implemented (Drone Strikes Act, Leniant Refugee Policy), which then pushes the war closer to defeat or victory. With victory, you gain whatever the war was about, perhaps receive an income source of reparations temporarily, and, Everyone, Patriot, Conservative, Strong Leader boosts. Whereas in defeat you lose all of those factors, and maybe a policy or two gets a Manifesto Style “target” on it that you have to meet and hold for X Turns, where if you break it you will start a new chain of war events, and lose Trustworthy.
To me, all of these suggestions seem simple so long as the multi-stage dilemmas matter is possible. The war idea becomes very easy to do from there, in my totally uninformed standpoint.