Recently, I have been reading a book about Japan's defeat in WWII. It led me to think about wargames in general.
To me, there are two types of wargames.
One is the confidence building type. The training type. Where the enemy behaves in much the way that current intelligence assesses he may behave. It is about executing a plan against a known enemy, to test the effectiveness of the plan, build confidence in the plan, and train people in how to carry out that plan.
It is the "winning" type of wargame. Where the good guys (the friendly side) is supposed to win. The enemy behaves like how we think he will behave (which may be close, or way off, depending on how good our intelligence and assessments are).
The other type of wargame is the "losing" type. This is when the enemy does what he can do, given the resources available to him. The difference is between can and may. "May" is about probability, about what he is likely to do. "Can" is about possibility, no matter how small, and is about what he is able to do. Here, the goal is to try to beat the good guys, to make the friendly side lose. This is to expose the weaknesses in existing plans, to expose areas which have not been considered in planning or were not answered. Here, consideration must be given beyond the military to bring in economic and politic aspects of war, since war is not a standalone condition and is part of a bigger grand strategy.
It is about identifying risks, military or otherwise, so that they can be dealt with.
But nobody likes to lose. Nobody likes to be shown his weaknesses. And it can be bad for morale too. So this type of wargame is rarely conducted. Yet it is just as important as the "winning" type. Only with both will you be able to be fully prepared for this dangerous feat known as war.
So I think what is important is that in a wargame, we must not be afraid of losing. Because losing helps to make the plan better. And it is better to lose in a wargame so that we can improve the plan, rather than lose in an actual war, by which time we won't have the luxury of time to improve the plan.
To me, there are two types of wargames.
One is the confidence building type. The training type. Where the enemy behaves in much the way that current intelligence assesses he may behave. It is about executing a plan against a known enemy, to test the effectiveness of the plan, build confidence in the plan, and train people in how to carry out that plan.
It is the "winning" type of wargame. Where the good guys (the friendly side) is supposed to win. The enemy behaves like how we think he will behave (which may be close, or way off, depending on how good our intelligence and assessments are).
The other type of wargame is the "losing" type. This is when the enemy does what he can do, given the resources available to him. The difference is between can and may. "May" is about probability, about what he is likely to do. "Can" is about possibility, no matter how small, and is about what he is able to do. Here, the goal is to try to beat the good guys, to make the friendly side lose. This is to expose the weaknesses in existing plans, to expose areas which have not been considered in planning or were not answered. Here, consideration must be given beyond the military to bring in economic and politic aspects of war, since war is not a standalone condition and is part of a bigger grand strategy.
It is about identifying risks, military or otherwise, so that they can be dealt with.
But nobody likes to lose. Nobody likes to be shown his weaknesses. And it can be bad for morale too. So this type of wargame is rarely conducted. Yet it is just as important as the "winning" type. Only with both will you be able to be fully prepared for this dangerous feat known as war.
So I think what is important is that in a wargame, we must not be afraid of losing. Because losing helps to make the plan better. And it is better to lose in a wargame so that we can improve the plan, rather than lose in an actual war, by which time we won't have the luxury of time to improve the plan.
No comments:
Post a Comment