Simulation & Gaming
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Simulation & Gaming http://sag.sagepub.com/ War Gaming Peace Operations Roger Mason and Eric Patterson Simulation Gaming 2013 44: 118 originally published online 10 October 2012 DOI: 10.1177/1046878112455490 The online version of this article can be found at: http://sag.sagepub.com/content/44/1/118 Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: Association for Business Simulation & Experiential Learning International Simulation & Gaming Association Japan Association of Simulation & Gaming North American Simulation & Gaming Association Society for Intercultural Education, Training, & Research Additional services and information for Simulation & Gaming can be found at: Email Alerts: http://sag.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://sag.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://sag.sagepub.com/content/44/1/118.refs.html >> Version of Record - Mar 14, 2013 OnlineFirst Version of Record - Oct 10, 2012 Downloaded from sag.sagepub.com by ROGER Mason on May 5, 2014 What is This? SAG44110.1177/1046878112455490 455490Simulation and GamingMason and Patterson Simulation and Gaming 44(1) 118 –133 War Gaming Peace © 2012 SAGE Publications Reprints and permission: Operations sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1046878112455490 http://sag.sagepub.com Roger Mason1,2 and Eric Patterson3 Abstract Today’s military personnel fight against and work with a diverse variety of nonstate actors, from al-Qaeda terrorists to major nongovernmental organizations who provide vital humanitarian assistance. Furthermore, the nontraditional battle spaces where America and its allies have recently deployed (Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq) include a wide range of activities quite different from classic military campaign. How can the United States and its allies train its military personnel to think through the intersection of issues regarding working alongside and against nonstate actors, particularly in culturally sensitive environments? This article describes one such approach, the development of a war game for peace, designed for U.S. military officers and now utilized in the classrooms of several military colleges. More specifically, the article describes how reconstruction and stabilization operation decisions are modeled and worked through in the highly religious environment of contemporary Afghanistan through the use of an innovative board game, suggesting that this model can be applied to many other scenarios and classroom environments. Keywords active learning, Afghanistan, board game, course of action, culture, curriculum, facili- tator, faith-based, humanitarian, humanitarian assistance, indeterminacy, index, intel- ligence, kinetic, military, negotiations, NGOs, operations, post-conflict, provincial reconstruction, random events, relationships, religion, religious, stability, terrorists, war game for peace How can war game design techniques be adapted to introduce decision makers to late- and post-conflict reconstruction and stabilization strategies? How can a simulation focus attention on soft factors such as religion and culture? Such factors are 1LECMgt LLC, USA 2Walden University, Minneapolis, MN, USA 3Robertson School of Government, Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA, USA Corresponding Author: Roger Mason, 8640 Oakdale Ave. Winnetka, CA 91306, USA Email: [email protected] Downloaded from sag.sagepub.com by ROGER Mason on May 5, 2014 Mason and Patterson 119 increasingly important for the U.S. military because mission requirements for Western military forces have evolved from the original application of hard power to a wide spectrum of primary mission responsibilities, including stabilization, humanitarian operations, and post-conflict reconstruction (Flavin, 2008). Furthermore, for the past two decades, the United States has intervened in situations where religious and cul- tural sensitivities are inherent to the conflict: Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The question is, “How does one train for such operations, taking into account reli- gious and cultural sensitivities?” More specifically, how should military, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), or State Department personnel engage mullahs in Afghanistan? In complex operations where humanitarian agencies are in the field, how should U.S. representatives deal with faith-based organizations that provide vital services such as food, shelter, education, and health care? How much weight should U.S. policy makers accord to religious justifications for violence or peace? Furthermore, how should all of this be integrated into training? This article explains the result of careful deliberations on these questions: a board game simulation designed for use in professional military education and applicable in other government learning institutions. The game, officially titled Stabilization Operations in Highly Religious Societies, is the product of months of work led by LECMgt LLC, in conjunction with Georgetown University’s Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs. The shorthand title for the game is the Afghan PRT game. Now in use on multiple professional military education campuses, the game introduces students to how religious factors infuse other post- conflict, reconstruction, and stabilization dynamics, from economics to security to health care and social services. The Challenge From 2006 to 2011, the Henry R. Luce Initiative on Religion and International Affairs supported work at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service and Berkley Center on the nexus of religion and U.S. foreign and national security policy. Berkley Center leadership managed the effort, developing a range of teaching, research, and outreach products and activities. In 2009, the Berkley Center teamed with National Defense University’s Institute for National Security Ethics and Leadership to provide a symposium on religion and military affairs for faculty from U.S. war colleges and senior service schools. The symposium focused on themes for integrating religion and world affairs (e.g., reli- gion and development, religion and African security issues, religiously inspired ter- rorism) and how to integrate such into the existing curriculum. Feedback from participants indicated need for an active learning tool or simulation to support war college curricula. To this end, Dr. Eric Patterson of Georgetown University and Chaplain (Colonel) Eric Wester of National Defense University began investigating the possibility of war gaming peace, reaching out to simulation designers at LECMgt LLC, in Downloaded from sag.sagepub.com by ROGER Mason on May 5, 2014 120 Simulation and Gaming 44(1) California. The goal was to develop an active learning tool to familiarize military personnel with the nexus of religion and stabilization/reconstruction issues in highly religious societies. End User Requirements Key classroom application assumptions were based on the end user requirements. The game had to be easily learned by the instructor, such as by playing it at a faculty workshop. The game had to be portable, low tech, and adaptable to classrooms rang- ing from 5 to 20 individuals. The game would need appropriate, easy-to-access read- ahead and preparatory materials and should be set in a real-world, contemporary context. The use of the game for a single class of 2 hours precluded a high-tech, high-complexity game. The end user group would be a typical, 10- to 12-person seminar group at National Defense University or a military war college. The simulation would be used as an active learning tool supporting the existing (and hopefully evolving) curriculum. The objective would be to apply traditional war gaming design techniques, familiar to stu- dents at the Naval Post Graduate School (NPS) level, to war game peace operations. Most importantly, the game had to realistically introduce some of the challenges and opportunities for working in highly religious societies and/or culturally rich soci- eties. These are societies where religious and/or cultural actors and traditions may carry more weight than governmental authority such as those in the greater Middle East and Africa. Conversations among the game creators, Georgetown, and the National Defense University (NDU) settled on at least three ways that religious fac- tors would be included in the game. Design Parameters First, because the game is set in a future post-conflict Afghanistan, a number of religious inputs affect the play. The game would use event cards that announce situ- ations such as religious edicts by angry clerics or hostage taking by the Taliban. The use of cards provides the players a constantly changing list of contingencies that include cultural and religious factors. Second, one third of the players would repre- sent a religious, Western-based nongovernmental organization (NGO) and must work for reconstruction and peace from the role of a quasi-pacifistic religious orga- nization. The reader can imagine this dynamic, the intended class of participants are military officers, who in this instance are role-playing a faith-based organization skeptical of the U.S. military. Limited role-playing in a game provides the opportunity for personalization and decision making, which is absent in more traditional top-down pedagogical systems (Mitchell, 1998). By playing the role of someone different from themselves, partici- pants can learn to appreciate why similar actors (in past or future experience)