In short, the question is do war games increase the risk of conflict rather than counter it?Īnd how much riskier is it if those games are played out in an area where there is already a real war raging, like Europe? Another view is that far from being a deterrent, they can be seen by that same potential adversary as a risky escalation - not least because they are increasingly used to "field test" new systems - and therefore can cause instability. One is that they test the capability of resources and strategy, the integrity of co-operation between countries, and by demonstrating effectiveness to potential adversaries, it is argued, they contribute to stability around the world. There are different schools of thought about multinational joint military exercises. And to play war games when there is a real war going on is a very dangerous game to play indeed. They call them war games, but games are the very last thing they are.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |