Summary: William Lind looks at a demonstration of our military’s greatest weakness. Let’s hope no foe discovers and exploits it.
“Fake Military Exercises“
By William Lind at Traditional Right.
Posted with his generous permission.
The mice of the Washington foreign policy establishment are trying to nibble around the edges of President Trump’s successful summit with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un. One of their squeaks is that the President gave up too much when he ordered the suspension of major U.S.-South Korean military exercises. The June 16 New York Times reported that:
“’You could probably cancel a single major exercise, like this one (Ulchi Freedom Guardian, planned for August) without doing major damage to the alliance and its readiness,’ said Robert Daly, director of the Kissinger Institute on China and the United States at the Wilson Center.
“But that cannot become the standard… If several major war games were cancelled for more than a year, the impact could be significant, officials said.”
Balderdash. Giving up our joint war games with South Korea entails no military risk what so ever. Why Because the games are fake.
The reasons are two. First, the enemy or Opposing Force (OPFOR) is trivial. It is tiny, ill-armed and amounts to little more than a tethered goat. It bears no relation to North Korea’s armed forces. Second, the exercises are scripted. The OPFOR has to lose; it’s in the script. Real war is not scripted. What makes war is the “independent, hostile will of the enemy.” That is scripted out in these so called “war games”. They may be games (with rigged outcomes), but they are not war.
A timely book speaks directly to the Korean war games. American Cobra Pilot
“Before heading to my stateroom (on the U.S.S. Bonhomme Richard), I attended a preliminary briefing for the exercise and as I scan my notes it dawns on me that I haven’t taken anything down on the enemy situation.I understand we were going to do some shooting at one of the southern ranges in the vicinity of Pohang. But there is no mention of the enemy. Nothing, the word “enemy” isn’t even written…
“Luckily, as if almost from heaven above, my inbox populates and I read words of my salvation from our executive officer… ‘Everyone needs to realize this is NOT a tactical exercise. This is a political exercise to show that even in fiscally constrained times we (Uncle Sam) can still throw together a dozen ships and do a beach assault with all of our toys. What actually makes it to the beach is mostly irrelevant…’
I breathe a sigh of relief… There just isn’t an enemy situation. None. My life is so much easier now…”
Later in the book, when Capt. Groom offers a detailed description of the exercise, he writes,
“I found out after the exercise that there was actually a small contingent of South Korean soldiers playing the role of the enemy on the beach. They dug some shallow holes about 50 meters from the water and waited to be run over. I don’t know if they did their homework on that one, but even by the battle of Okinawa, the Japanese figured out it was more advantageous to move into the center of the island and wait. But then again that would make it hard if not downright impossible to get a picture of both the opposing force and the amphibious landing at the same time.
“Taking pictures is of course the main goal of the exercise. The pictures are then edited and reported on by the propaganda division of the Marine Corps, the Public Affairs Office.”
It is typical that Washington foreign policy types would accept this show as real. They know nothing about war, and they peddle the same kind of baloney themselves, in a city where one hand washes the other. But the fact of the matter is exactly as President Trump stated it: we lose nothing by cancelling the Korean war games, and we save many millions of taxpayer dollars.
Sadly, the factors that make the Korean exercises poor simulations of war affect almost all U.S. military training. The OPFOR is trivial and even that small force is constrained to follow a script in which it just sits there and gets pounded.
Decades ago, on a visit to the Army’s supposedly premier school, the School of Advanced Military Studies at Ft. Leavenworth (God help us if it is), the students were playing a war game set in the Persian Gulf. The OPFOR was two majors with a tiny force. I met with them and suggested some things they could do, small as their force was, that would cause the Americans some problems. They got excited but said, “we have to ask permission.” (Obviously, this was not the Kriegsakademie.) They came back to me and said, “We were told, just follow the script.”
There is an old military saying, ‘you fight the way you train.’ We will, whether we want to or not.
————————————-
Another example of fake military exercises: vs. Iran
Military exercises are valuable tools, but only if we learn from them. Simulations discovered the weaknesses the German’s used to gut France’s defenses in 1940 and the tactics Japan used to successfully attack Pearl Harbor in 1941. Today our military leaders have the same closed mind that led to those great defeats.
In 2002 Lt. General Paul van Riper of the Marines commanded the opposing force in the most elaborate war game the U.S. military has ever held, Millennium Challenge 02. He devised a way to win, allowing Iran to defeat the combined US military. He was ordered to throw the game. He refused. So they faked the games without him. A real opponent in a real war won’t be so obliging.
- During Millenium Challenge 2002, by Ed Beakley (Project White Horse), posted at the Defense & the National Interest (DNI).
- What we should have learned from MC02, by Dag von Lubitz, posted at DNI.
- Recommended reading: an autopsy of the 2002 Millennium Challenge war games.
- War games, the antidote to “Victory disease.”
- The Achilles’ Heel of military simulations.
About the author
William S. Lind’s director of the American Conservative Center for Public Transportation. He has a Master’s Degree in History from Princeton University in 1971. He worked as a legislative aide for armed services for Senator Robert Taft, Jr., of Ohio from 1973 through 1976 and held a similar position with Senator Gary Hart of Colorado from 1977 through 1986. See his bio at Wikipedia
Mr. Lind is author of the Maneuver Warfare Handbook
He’s perhaps best known for his articles about the long war, now published as On War: The Collected Columns of William S. Lind 2003-2009
- Posts at TraditionalRight.
- His articles about geopolitics at The American Conservative.
- His articles about transportation at The American Conservative.
For More Information
Ideas! For ideas about using Holiday cash, see my recommended books and films at Amazon.
If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See all posts about William Lind’s work, about North Korea, and especially these…
- War games, the antidote to “Victory disease.”
- Are war games a competitive edge of conventional forces vs. non-state 4GW foes?
- The Achilles’ Heel of military simulations.
William Lind collected essays about modern war
On War:
The Collected Columns of William S. Lind 2003-2009
Sadly, most of these articles about are as relevant today as the day they were written. From the publisher …
“On War is a seven-year collection of columns written by the father of 4th Generation War theory while observing the U.S. invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq. It is an intriguing account of a war in progress, as seen through the eyes of a military theorist able to anticipate events with an almost prophetic degree of accuracy.
“Throughout the book, 4GW theory is defined, described, and refined as events in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places demonstrate the theory’s utility in making sense of current events and predicting future ones. The inevitable failure of the New Iraqi Army and the U.S.-installed al-Maliki government is explained years in advance, as is the rise of the Islamic State and other 4th Generation forces presently battling for power in post-occupation Iraq.
“Lind also makes an ominous, but compelling case for the gradual spread of 4th Generation chaos and the decline of the state throughout the world, including in the United States of America. Featuring a Foreword by the brilliant Israeli military theorist Martin van Creveld, On War is a fascinating book that is a must-read for every military professional, wargamer, and amateur student of the art of war.
“In one of the key passages of the book, Lind writes: ‘4th Generation war is the greatest change since the Peace of Westphalia, because it marks the end of the state’s monopoly on war. All over the world, state militaries are fighting non-state opponents, and almost always, the state is losing.'”
