SIMULEX 2008: Modeling Global Challenges and Preparing World Leaders
“O
n July 1, 2011, Russian forces enter Ukraine, Estonia and Latvia, several days after Moscow’s ultimatum to admit Russian peacekeeping forces to quell unrest is rejected.” Is this one of Nostradamus’s prophecies? No, this is move one of the Fletcher SIMULEX 2008 scenario developed by Fletcher Professor Robert L. Pfaltzgraff.
SIMULEX is an annual crisis management exercise in which participants assume the
roles of national policymakers faced with an international crisis. It traditionally involves war-gaming experts, Boston-area military fellows and Fletcher students. During three parts of the simulation exercise, participants go through several stages of a crisis: its first day, a week in, and 45 days later. At each stage student teams undertake measures to defend their side’s interests and achieve short-term and long-term goals. All the interaction between teams is conducted through an online interface, ICONS, which can be used to send messages, hold online conferences and take “actions”.
For the first time since its inception in1991, SIMULEX was devoted to Russia this year. According to the scenario of the October 24-25th simulation, resurgent Russia was increasingly exercising its influence over neighboring Ukraine, Latvia and Estonia in trying to protect the rights of the ethnic Russian population of these countries. In order to achieve its goals, Moscow staged cyber attacks, cut energy supplies and moved troops into all three countries. In this strategic environment six student teams (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, NATO/European countries, Russia, and the United States) had to make decisions on moving troops, coordinating humanitarian efforts, formulating foreign policy and maintaining relations with the media. To make the situation even more realistic, a team of controllers—consisting of military officers led by senior controller Professor Doug Campbell, Director of the Center for Strategic Leadership at the US Army War College—provided the students with incomplete information from “media” and “intelligence” sources.
At the first stage, Ukraine, Estonia and Latvia were essentially left alone against Russia
and were nearly defeated. By the second week however, the United States and NATO overcame their initial indecisiveness and moved in their troops to take part in the fighing forcing Russia to halt its advancement. However, in the later stage of the conflict, Moscow received support from Venezuela and nuclear-capable Iran, and moved its long-range bombers to Cuba. The conflict stopped short of becoming a global nuclear disaster when Russia threatened to use its entire arsenal if attacks against its navy continued. This move fortunately became the first step towards serious negotiations and a drawing down of arms.
According to the cease-fire agreements ending the conflict, Russia agreed to pull its troops out of the neighboring states in exchange for security guarantees and additional cultural autonomy for ethnic Russians in Eastern Europe. This conclusion was seen as a victory by all participants since each party reached its goal: the US and NATO forced Russian troops out of Ukraine, Latvia and Estonia; the three smaller European nations preserved their sovereignty and territorial integrity; and Russia managed to defend the rights of ethnic Russian minoritiess in neighboring countries.
Besides being a priceless learning experience in terms of crisis management, team work and strategic decision making, SIMULEX 2008 was encouraging as it resulted in an outcome that satisfied all parties of the conflict. This gives us reason to hope that the ability of Fletcher students to facilitate mutually acceptable agreements will be a real asset in an increasingly challenged global system.
Aleksey Dolinskiy F’09