Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This work reviews the development and tests of an intermediate force capability (IFC) concept development hybrid wargame aimed at examining a maritime task force’s ability to counter hybrid threats in the gray zone. IFCs offer a class of response between doing nothing and using lethal force in a situation that would be politically unpalatable. Thus, the aim of the wargame is to evaluate whether IFCs can make a difference to mission success against hybrid threats in the gray zone. This wargame series was particularly important because it used traditional game mechanics in a unique and innovative way to evaluate and assess IFCs. The results of the wargame demonstrated that IFCs have a high probability of filling the gap between doing nothing and using lethal force. The presence of IFCs provided engagement time and space for the maritime task force commander. It also identified that development of robust IFC capabilities, not only against personnel, but against systems (trucks, cars, UAVs, etc.), can also effectively counter undesirable adversarial behavior

Keywords

Gray zone hybrid threats kriegsspiel matrix non-kinetic non-lethal wargaming

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Hoffman

. Examining complex forms of conflict: Gray zone and hybrid challenges. PRISM 2018; 7(4): 30–47.

Morris

Mazarr

Hornung

, et al. Gaining Competitive Advantage in the Gray Zone: Response Options. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2019.

Hoffman

F G

. Conflict in the 21st Century: Hybrid Wars. Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, 2007.

Hoffman

. The contemporary spectrum of conflict: Protracted, gray zone, ambiguous, and hybrid modes of war. 2016 Index of U.S. Military Strength. The Heritage Foundation, 2016. Available at: https://www.heritage.Org/sites/default/files/2019-10/2016_IndexOfUSMilitaryStrength_The%20Contemporary%20Spectrum%20of%20Conflict_Protracted%20Gray%20Zone%20Ambiguous%20and%20Hybrid%20Modes%20of%20War.pdf(accessed 10 September 2020).

US Department of Defense. Quadrennial Defense Review Report, February 2010. Available at: https://archive.defense.gov/qdr/QDR%20as%20of%2029JAN10%201600.pdf (accessed 25 August 2020).

Brands

. Paradoxes of the gray zone. E-NOTES. Foreign Policy Research Institute, 5 February 2016. Available at: https://www.fpri.org/article/2016/02/paradoxes-gray-zone/ (accessed 27 September 2020).

Krepinevich

Watts

Work

. Meeting the Anti-Access and Area-Denial Challenge. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2003.

Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies. Countering Anti-Access/Area Denial Challenges: Strategies and Capabilities. Event Report. Singapore: S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, 1 December 2017.

Reichborn-Kjennerud

Cullen

. What is hybrid warfare? Policy Brief. Norwegian Institute for International Affairs, January 2016.

10.

Hunter

. Political warfare and the grey zone. Projecting National Power. SR 142. Australian Strategic Policy Institute, August 2019.

11.

Wither

. Making sense of hybrid warfare. Connections Q J 2016; 15(2): 73–87.

12.

Freedberg

Jr . Cyber warfare in the grey zone: Wake up, Washington. Breaking Defense, 9 April 2019. Available at: https://breakingdefense.com/2019/04/cyber-warfare-in-the-grey-zone-wake-up-washington/ (accessed 27 September 2020).

13.

Gerasimov

. The value of science is in the foresight: New challenges demand rethinking the forms and methods of carrying out combat operations. Translated by Coalson R. Mil Rev 2016; 96(1): 23–29.

14.

Tulak

. Hybrid warfare and new challenges in the information environment. ResearchGate, October 2015.

15.

Hicks

. Russia in the gray zone. Commentary. Center for Strategic and International Studies, 25 July 2019. Available at: https://www.csis.org/analysis/russia-gray-zone (accessed 25 August 2020).

16.

Liang

Xiangsui

. Unrestricted Warfare. Beijing: PLA Literature and Arts Publishing House, February 1999.

17.

Patalano

. When strategy is ‘hybrid’ and not ‘grey’: Reviewing Chinese military and constabulary coercion at sea. Pacific Rev 2019; 31(6): 811–839.

18.

Fravel

. China’s new military strategy: ‘Winning informationized local wars’. China Brief 2015; 15(13): 3–7.

19.

Erickson

Kennedy

. Tanmen militia: China’s ‘Maritime Rights Protection’ vanguard. The National Interest, 6 May 2015. Available at: https://nationalinterest.org/feature/tanmen-militia-china’s-maritime-rights-protection-vanguard-12816 (accessed 10 June 2020).

20.

Erickson

Kennedy

. Irregular forces at sea: Not ‘merely fishermen’– shedding light on China’s maritime militia. Center for International Maritime Security, 2 November 2015. Available at: http://cimsec.org/new-cimsec-series-on-irregular-forces-at-sea-not-merely-fishermen-shedding-light-on-chinas-maritime-militia/19624 (accessed 29 April 2020).

21.

ABS-CBN News. Philippines verifying reported Chinese harassment of local fishers. ABS-CBN News, 20 April 2017. Available at: https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/04/20/17/ph-verifying-reported-chinese-harassment-of-local-fishers (accessed 25 August 2020).

22.

CSIS. South China Sea Incident Tracker. CSIS iDeas Lab, Center for Strategic and International Studies. Available at: https://csis-ilab.github.io/cpower-viz/csis-china-sea/ (accessed 27 September 2020).

23.

Krepinevich

. Why AirSea Battle? Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2010.

24.

Krepinevich

Watts

Work

. Meeting the Anti-Access and Area-Denial Challenge. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2003.

25.

Defense Intelligence Agency. Iran Military Power: Ensuring Regime Survival and Securing Regional Dominance. Washington, DC: US Government Publishing Office, 19 November 2019. Available at: http://www.dia.mil/Military-Power-Publications (accessed 10 September 2020).

26.

Defense Intelligence Ballistic Missile Analysis Committee. Ballistic and Cruise Missile Threat. Wright-Patterson, OH: National Air and Space Intelligence Center, June 2017.

27.

Nadimi

. The counterintuitive role of air defense in Iran’s anti-status quo regional strategy. Policy Analysis. POLICYWATCH 2748. The Washington Institute, 11 January 2017. Available at: https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/the-counterintuitive-role-of-air-defense-in-irans-anti-status-quo-regional (accessed 29 April 2020).

28.

Gray

. Cyber threats to navy merchant shipping in the Persian Gulf. The Diplomat, 5 May 2016. Available at: https://thediplomat.com/2016/05/cyber-threats-to-navy-and-merchant-shipping-in-the-persian-gulf/ (accessed 28 March 2020).

29.

Cordesman

Lin

. The Iranian Sea-Air-Missile Threat to Gulf Shipping. Centre for Strategic and International Studies, February 2015.

30.

United States Institute of Peace. Timeline: US–Iran naval encounters. The Iran Primer. Original: 29 August 2016. Updated: 22 January 2018. Available at: https://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2016/aug/29/timeline-us-iran-naval-encounters (accessed 10 September 2020).

31.

International Crisis Group. Strait of Hormuz. Flashpoint, 23 April 2020. Available at: https://www.crisisgroup.org/trigger-list/iran-us-trigger-list/flashpoints/hormuz (accessed 10 September 2020).

32.

Gunzinger

Dougherty

. Outside-In: Operating from Range to Defeat Iran’s Anti-Access and Area-Denial Threats. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2011.

33.

Lacey

. Battle of the Bastions. War on the Rocks, 9 January 2020. Available at: https://warontherocks.com/2020/01/battle-of-the-bastions/ (accessed 28 March 2020).

34.

Leimbach

. DoD intermediate force capabilities: Bringing the fight to the gray zone. Information Brief. Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate.

35.

Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate. Intermediate Force Capabilities: Bridging the Gap Between Presence and Lethality. Executive Agent’s Planning Guidance 2020. Washington, DC: Department of Defense, March 2020.

36.

League of Nations. Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare. Geneva, 17 June 1925.

37.

International Safety Research. Summary Report 2: Capability Analysis. Force Protection Requirements for the Canadian Surface Combatant. Report 7.11, CORA Task 019, ISR Report W7714-156105-T019 7.11, Version 2.0. DRDC-RDDC-2017-C057. 20 March 2017.

38.

NATO, STO-TR-SAS-094. Analytical Support to the Development and Experimentation of NLW Concepts of Operation and Employment. Final Report. AC/323(SAS-094)TP/676, April 2017.

39.

Human Rights Watch. Off Target: The Conduct of the War and Civilian Casualties in Iraq. New York: Human Rights Watch, December 2003.

40.

Joint Staff J7. Joint and Coalition Operational Analysis. Reducing and Mitigating Civilian Casualties: Enduring Lessons. Suffolk, VA: Joint Staff J7, 12 April 2013.

41.

Shortland

Sari

Nader

. Recounting the dead: An analysis of ISAF caused civilian casualties in Afghanistan. Armed Forces Soc 2019; 45(1): 122–139.

42.

United Nations. Afghanistan: Annual Report on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict 2010. Kabul, Afghanistan: United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan and Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, March 2011.

43.

Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate. Strategic Plan 2016–2025: Science and Technology Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Program. Washington, DC: Department of Defense, 2016.

44.

US Naval War College. War Gamers’ Handbook: A Guide for Professional War Gamers. Newport, RI: US Naval War College, November 2015.

45.

Longley-Brown

. Successful Professional Wargames: A Practitioner’s Handbook. History of Wargaming Project, 2019.

46.

UK Ministry of Defence. Wargaming Handbook. London: Ministry of Defence, 2017.

47.

Appleget

Burks

Cameron

. The Craft of Wargaming: A Detailed Planning Guide for Defene Planners and Analysts. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2020.

48.

Caffrey

Jr . On Wargaming, How Wargames Have Shaped History and How They May Shape the Future. Newport Papers 43, US Naval War College, Newport, RI, January 2019.

49.

Shlapak

Johnson

. Reinforcing Deterrence on NATO’s Eastern Flank: Wargaming the Defense of the Baltics. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2016.

50.

PAXsims. Bear Rising: A Matrix Wargame. Briefing Pack. Available at: https://paxsims.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/bear-rising-briefing-pack-1.pdf (accessed 5 March 2020).

51.

PAXsims. Bear Rising Matrix Game. Available at: https://paxsims.wordpress.com/2019/10/18/bear-rising-matrix-game/ (accessed 5 March 2020).

52.

International Safety Research. Summary Report 1: Vignettes, Scenarios and Tasks. Force Protection Requirements for the Canadian Surface Combatant. Report 7.06, CORA Task 019, ISR Report W7714-156105-T019 7.06, Version 2.0. DRDC-RDDC-2017-C054, 17 March 2017.

53.

International Safety Research. Wargame Documentation. Force Protection Requirements for the Canadian Surface Combatant. Report 7.13, CORA Task 019, ISR Report W7714-156105-T019 7.13, Version 2.0. DRDC-RDDC-2017-C058, 14 March 2017.

54.

von Clausewitz

. On War. London: Penguin Classics, 1982.

55.

Blidberg

. The Development of Autonomous Underwater Vehicles: A Brief Summary. New Hampshire: Autonomous Undersea Systems Institute, 2001. Available at: http://wpressutexas.net/cs378h/images/d/de/ICRA_01paper.pdf (accessed 5 March 2020).

56.

Nissenbaum

Peker

Marson

. Turkey shoots down Russian military jet. Wall Street Journal, 24 November 2015. Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/turkey-shoots-down-jet-near-syria-border-1448356509 (accessed 17 September 2020).

57.

BBC.com. Turkey’s Downing of Russian Warplane – What We Know. BBC News, 1 December 2015. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-34912581 (accessed 27 September 2020).

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.74 MB

Wargaming the use of intermediate force capabilities in the gray zone

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material