Real War Games

I attended a preview of Channel 4's "Dispatches" program today, filming a Delphi technique simulation of the 48 hours after a possible Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear installations (the screening was for bloggers, so the show can be pre-hoopla'ed of course - its on at 8pm tonight, FYI ). The Grauniad sums up the simulation scenario and outcome quite well:

If Israel hit Iran's nuclear facilities, would Hezbollah, Iran's allies in Lebanon, join in to retaliate? Would America step in to help its best friend in the Middle East? This filmed simulation shows a group of Israeli ex-spooks, former politicians and military officials split into teams to role-play the consequences. I have not seen the full film, but was in the cutting room for a couple of days helping with translation and the scenes I saw were compelling. Team Israel, taking stock of Iranian missile attacks on civilian targets, makes the operational assumption that the situation won't spiral totally out of control.

It was interesting to me on 2 levels:

Firstly, for years we have run business simulations and business games, which spun out of these sorts of military simulations, which were themselves developed during World War 2 and refined during the Cold War. It was fascinating watching the military/political strategic game being played as the stakes are somewhat higher.

Secondly, the method used here for the simulation - it was essentially the "Delphi" technique where experts form the teams simulating the various players - Israel, USA, Iran and others. Works very well if its a well structured simulation, with good behand the scenes data collection and background briefings, and well refereed.The downside of the Delphi technique for business gaming is if everyone is too similar to each other (all the senior management from one particular company, for example) as "groupthink" emerges, and "bad" outcomes often cannot be easily imagined for a whole host of reasons, if "bad" impacts the participants.

In my opinion I saw this happening here, as the scenario outcome was the best case outcome for Israel. Not surprising as it was carried out by INSS, the Israeli Institute for Strategic Studies, and all the participants were Israeli experts. Typically, these sorts of games should be played with a varied list of participants, and even better with 3 forced scenario outcomes - best, worst, and an intermediate, and then one looks at the "what do you have to believe" for each outcome.

As an aside, it also said something to me about the Meedja today - I have pretty much stopped watching TV for news and analysis. I wish more current affairs news could be presented like this was, half an our of concerted fact and deep, often uncomfortable, unsanitised analysis. It was half an hour long, and looked at the issue in good depth from a number of angles - not just the simulation, but looked at how people in Israel and Iran may react, and how that may force the rational realpolitik out of a government's hands. Compare that to much of the "zero fact" stuff that passes for analysis on TV these days - either a presenter interrupting all the (carefully selected opposing position) pointyheads if they utter a statement longer than a soundbite, or the pointyheads opining sans data over each other in a babble, or a programme with some wholesome presenter or another tramping up and down picturesque scenery, but the content so dumbed down and spun out to hit the lowest common denominators.