70Received 26.03.2021.
Acknowledgements. This paper has been supported by the RUDN University Strategic Academic Leadership Program.
Abstract. In this article, the author raises the question of using wargames as a method of research in international relations. The paper analyzes the extensive historiographic base devoted to the issue of adapting classic military-historical simulation games to other fields of science, including international studies. The author thoroughly analyzes the experience of the Western academic community in applying wargames to obtain empirical data in researches on various topics and issues. The paper describes the main characteristics of wargames as a research methodology, mentions primary advantages and potential disadvantages while providing extensive examples of both. The author concludes that wargame is a valuable research tool, which allows the study of a wide range of topics, including those where the use of other research methods is impossible or limited. One of the bottom-lines of the article is that wargames can be considered both a qualitative and a quantative method of research, which makes imitational modeling a potential answer in the ongoing argument on the methodology more suitable for social sciences and international relations in particular. The author also pays special attention to the applicability of wargames to the subject sphere of international relations and touches upon the issue of the future of this mechanism in scientific research, taking into account the existing global trends. In particular, the author speaks of the objective need to develop unified mechanisms for the implementation of wargames in the digital environment, which would solve many potential issues and risks affecting the validity of the obtained results, and, in general, would simplify the use of wargames for scientific purposes. One of the important conclusions that are drawn in the paper is the objective need to digitalize existing wargames, which would allow to avoid existing complications of organizational nature, make wargaming more accessible and applicable to various types of research in the international relations studies.
Keywords: wargame, international relations, decision-making process, political science, world politics, quantative analysis methods, qualitative analysis methods
REFERENCES
1. Kreps S.E., Schneider J. Escalation Firebreaks in the Cyber, Conventional, and Nuclear Domains: Moving beyond Effects-Based Logics. Journal of Cybersecurity, 2018, vol. 5, no. 1. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3104014 (accessed 08.03.2021).
2. Fenenko A. Statistics Versus History. International Trends, 2018, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 56-83. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17994/IT.2018.16.3.54.3
3. Istomin I., Baikov A., Khudolei K. International Relations: Science without a Method? International Trends, 2019, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 63-90. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17994/IT.2019.17.2.57.4
4. Degterev D.A. “Second Big Debate” in the Context of the Russian International Relations Science Making. International Trends, 2019, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 43-62. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.17994/IT.2019.17.2.57.3
5. Smith R. The Long History of Gaming in Military Training. Simulations & Gaming, 2010, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 6-19.
6. Kharinin A.I., Kharinina L.V. Board Military and Historic Game as a Form of Historic Reconstruction. Science Journal of VolSU. History. Area Studies. International Relations, 2020, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 126-140. (In Russ.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu4.2020.1.11
7. Hilgers P. War Games: A History of War on Paper. Boston, MIT Press, 2012. 240 p.
8. Wojtowicz N. From Sandboxes to Laboratories: Evolution of Wargaming into a Method for Experimental Studies. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 2019, vol. 9, issue 12, pp. 399-404.
9. Lin-Greenberg E., Pauly R.B.C., Schneider J. Wargaming for Political Science Research. SSRN. 2020. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3676665 (accessed 29.02.2021).
10. Pauly R.B.C. Would U.S. Leaders Push the Button? Wargames and the Sources of Nuclear Restraint. International Security, 2018, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 151-192.
11. Abbasi M.A., Shamanth K., Filho A.A.J., Liu H. Lessons Learned in Using Social Media for Disaster Relief-ASU Crisis Response Game. Salerno J., Yang S.J., Nau D., Chai S.K., eds. International Conference on Social Computing, Behavioral-Cultural Modeling, and Prediction. College Park (Maryland), Springer, 2012, pp. 282-289.
12. Oriesek D., Schwarz J. O. Business Wargaming: Securing Corporate Value. London, Routledge, 2008. 152 p. ISBN‑13:978-0566088377.
13. Banks M.H., Groom A.J.R., Oppenheim A.N. Gaming and Simulation in International Relations. Political Studies, 1968, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1-17.
14. McDermott R. Experimental Methodology in Political Science. Political Analysis, 2002, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 325-342.
15. Lin-Greenberg E. Wargame of Drones: Remotely Piloted Aircraft and Crisis Escalation. SSRN. 2020. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3288988 (accessed 11.03.2021).
16. Schneider J. Cyber Attacks on Critical Infrastructure: Insights from War Gaming. War on the Rocks. July 26, 2017. Available at: https://warontherocks.com/2017/07/cyber-attacks-on-critical-infrastructure-insights-from-war-gaming/ (accessed 20.03.2021).
17. Kertzer J.D. Microfoundations in International Relations. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 2017, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 81-97.
18. Perla P.P., McGrady E. Why Wargaming Works. Naval War College Review, 2011, vol. 64, no. 3, art. 8. Available at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/nwc-review/vol64/iss3/8 (accessed 14.03.2021).
19. Barabas J., Jerit J. Are Survey Experiments Externally Valid? American Political Science Review, 2010, vol. 104, no. 2, pp. 226-242.
20. Reddie A.W., Goldblum B.L., Lakkaraju K., Reinhardt J., Nacht M., Epifanovskaya L. Next-Generation Wargames. Science, 2018, vol. 362, no. 6421, pp. 1362-1364.
21. Oberholtzer J., Doll A., Frelinger D., Mueller K., Pettyjohn S. Applying Wargames to Real-World Policies. Science, 2019, vol. 363, no. 6434, pp. 1406-1406.
22. Caffrey M.B.Jr. On Wargaming: How Wargames Have Shaped History and How They May Shape the Future. Naval War College Newport Papers. Rhode Island, Naval War College Press, 2019. 445 p.
23. Juha-Pekka N., Juhani H., Sormunen J., Rantapelkonen J. Wargame as a Combined Method of Qualitative and Quantitative Studies. Journal of Military Studies, 2014, vol. 5, issue 1, pp. 20-37. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1515/jms-2016-0187 (accessed 06.02.2021).
24. Shlapak D.A., Johnson M.W. Reinforcing Deterrence on NATO’s Eastern Flank. RAND Corporation. 2016. Available at: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1253.html (accessed 06.02.2021).
25. Wong Y.H., Yurchack J., Button R., Frank A. et al. Deterrence in the Age of Thinking Machines. RAND Corporation. 2020. Available at: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2797.html (accessed 06.02.2021).
26. Jensen B., Banks D. Cyber Operations in Conflict. Lessons from Analytic Wargames. Berkley, Center for Long-Term Cybersecurity, 2020. Available at: https://cltc.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Cyber_Operations_In_Conflict.pdf (accessed 06.02.2021).
27. Kofman M. Fixing NATO Deterrence in the East or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love NATO’s Crushing Defeat by Russia. War on the Rocks. May 12, 2016. Available at: https://warontherocks.com/2016/05/fixing-nato-deterrence-in-the-east-or-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-natos-crushing-defeat-by-russia/ (accessed 30.03.2021).
28. Mueller K., Shlapak D.A., Johnson M.W., Ochmanek D. In Defense of a Wargame: Bolstering Deterrence on NATO’s Eastern Flank. War on the Rocks. June 14, 2016. Available at: https://warontherocks.com/2016/06/in-defense-of-a-wargame-bolstering-deterrence-on-natos-eastern-flank/ (accessed 30.03.2021).
Registered in System SCIENCE INDEX
No comments