War and Peace

A WAR SIMULATION WHICH INTRODUCES THE STUDENT TO THE OPPORTUNITIES AND RISKS NATIONS ENTERTAIN WHEN MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT WAR AND PEACE
 

History of the Model's development

Original Plan

The project started with a STELLA model which would calculate the results of decisions made by four teams about whether to wage peace or war with one another. Decisions would be communicated as 0's or 1's, with 0 indicating a decision to wage peace (in effect, not go to war), and 1 indicating a decision to wage war.

These decisions would be translated into additions or reductions to Military Strength, with Peace Dividends if all four nations decided to wage peace, and Total War Consequences if all decided to wage war.

All additions or subtractions to or from a nation would be in terms of Military Strength. We made the rationalization that changes in military strength have economic spinoffs for the citizens of the nations. Thus, changes in military strength are indicators of economic strength. However, we bounded the model within the military sector of the nation, and did not consider social, economic or other sectors.

The game was designed to be played from one classroom computer.

Pedagogical Payload of the Game

Each element of the original model was rather simple, which allowed for open­ended decision­making. The game could cover any number of time periods; we chose twelve. At each interval, students would assess the consequences of their last decision, as well as those of the other three nations. They would discuss and record their rationalization for the next choice, then communicate this to either the teacher, or student(s) who play the role of U.N. Arbitrators. The model is illustrated in Figure 1 .

We anticipate that the discussions associated with decision­making and assessment of consequences will force students to view decision­making as more than a simple choice between two alternatives. They will have to "plan ahead" by considering the effects of decisions by all countries on their cumulative military strength. This means that they will have to learn to assess past performance to predict performance in the future. These assessments will involve more than a simple tabulation of wins and losses. For instance, the graphical and numerical feedback they receive upon each decision allows them to fine tune their decisions, and evaluate with some precision the effects of each decision they make. They also receive feedback about the effects of their opponents' decisions which they incorporate into their decision­making.
 

Unanticipated consequences of "The Plan"

We tested a two­stock prototype of the model, and it performed as predicted. We then went on to build the four­stock model. While establishing connectors between stocks and converters in the model, we became aware of the exponential growth of "spaghetti" on our monitor. We plugged on, convinced the model would work. However, attempting to cover all possible combinations and permutations of decisions resulted in an unwieldy structure, one we were not certain we could document. Eventually, even though we were sure the model worked (the two­stock model consistently produced predictable results), we decided to simplify it.

Simplifying a Model is Instructive!

The process of simplifying the model developed into unexpectedly valuable learning. Evaluating and combining converters simplified the general appearance of the model, and provided a good opportunity to practice lengthy logical statements. This, in turn, clarified the nature of the model in our minds.

Description of the Model

WAR-AND PEACEis a simulation of the effect on military strength of choosing to remain at peace or go to war. It can be played by two teams and one teacher, two decision­making teams and one "arbitration" team, or two or more combinations of these if two or more computers are available in the classroom.

Players work from the Authoring Layer
Figure 2.

Each team uses a slider to choose to either Make Peace (= 1) or Make War (= 0). A Graph and two Number Bars display data as it is generated. Students can open the tables if they wish. The Time Specs are set for an dt of 1 and pause interval of 1. This causes a pause between each iteration, during which teams can use their sliders to make new decisions. The Run Bar is used to continue play.

Students document their decisions and rationales on the student WAR-AND PEACE worksheet. On completing the simulation, these worksheets facilitate the ensuing class discussion.

Sector Diagram

The STELLA model is built around three Sectors

(Figure 3).

Two of the sectors represent the two nations, Transylvania and Moldavia. Students have an opportunity to learn about these two countries and develop data bases of relevant demographic information. Other neighboring countries can be easily substituted in the simulation. The third sector is that of a United Nations Arbitration Team, which adjudicates peace dividends and total war consequences.
 

Sector 1, Transylvania

The Transylvanian Sector 
(Figure 4)

is organized around a Stock, Military_Strength_Transylvania and a Converter, cost. The Stock has only one flow, an Inflow, Additions_to_Strength. Costs are calculated based on whether decisions are for peace or war, the military strength ratios of the two nations, and the "judgement" of an U.N. Arbitration Team.

The Transylvanian portion of the STELLA model is based on a single stock, Military_Strength_Transylvania, which exponentially accumulates Military Strength. It has one flow, Additions_To_Military_Strength. The fraction which Additions_To_Military_Strength increments during one dt is determined by the cost converter.

The value of cost is determined by the decisions of the two nations. If both nations elect for peace, then cost receives an initial value of 1. If both nations elect for war, then cost's initial value is 0. If one side elects for war, and the other for peace, the side electing for war receives an initial value of 1, and that electing for peace 0. (Recall that WAR-AND PEACEmodels the result of military decision­making, which has both military and economic consequences.)

These initial values are added to a number determined by two converters, Decision_Evaluator and Decision_ Consequences. Decision_Evaluator and Decision_ Consequences represent the U.N. Arbitration Team in the simulation. The decisions made by both nations are added, and the sum is used to determine the consequence of these decisions. The value of this consequence number is 1 if both nations elect for peace, ­1 if both elect for war, and 0 if neither of these conditions are met. (When nations are at peace, resources remain within the economy; when they are at war, resources are expended and lost. If one nation makes a unilateral decision to wage war on another, then it will initially acquire resources from the other nation.) The number is communicated to the cost converter as Decision_Consequences.

Another converter, Strength_Ratio_TM, compares the Military Strength of the other country, Moldavia, with that of Transylvania, using a graphic function, 
(Figure 5).

This graphic function generates a multiplier whose value ranges from 0 to 0.5, and permits a realistic inclusion of the effect of relative military strengths of nations.

The shape of the graphic function curve was determined by considering the advantage or disadvantage to a country of increasingly disproportionate differences in military strengths. As proportional differences increase in value, the country with the larger military strength enjoys an increasingly larger military advantage. The strength ratio function recognizes this phenomenon, and incorporates it into the model.

Sector 2, Moldavia

This sector functions in the same way as that of Transylvania. With enough experience in STELLA modeling, a model incorporating four nations should be feasible, a larger model possible. With enough nations chosen from those playing an active role in world politics, the model might provide students with some insight into the fact that there have been only two World Wars, followed by many local, clearly bounded, wars.

Critical study of these phenomena should supply young people with the tools they need to consider the possibility of an end to war.

Sector 3, U.N. Arbitration Team

The U.N. Arbitration Team

component of the model functions to evaluate the two nations' decisions. If both nations opt for peace, then a "peace dividend" is assigned, which is the value of the decisions. Since a decision to wage peace is indicated by a 1, then a 2 signifies satisfaction of the requirements for a peace dividend. This dividend is a 3% increase in military strength, and is transmitted by the Decision_Consequences converter to the individual cost converters. If both nations decide to wage war, then their economies will suffer, and they "pay" a total war consequence of ­1. If only one nation wages war, the U.N. team assigns no consequence.
 
 
 

Model Diagram
Model Equations

Moldavia

Military_Strength_Moldavia(t) = Military_Strength_Moldavia(t ­ dt) + (Additions_to_Strength_2) * dt INIT Military_Strength_Moldavia = normal(5,1.4)

DOCUMENT: This is a STOCK which indicates Moldavia's accumulated military strength. It starts as a random number between 0 and 5 with a normal distribution and sd of 1.4. This random number is generated by the CONVERTER, Moldavian_Start.

INFLOWS:

Additions_to_Strength_2 = Military_Strength_Moldavia*Cost_2

DOCUMENT: This is a FLOW, which increases Military_Strength_Moldavia by a factor generated by the CONVERTER, Cost_2. The value of Military_Strength_Moldavia is increased by the factor which results from multiplying Military_Strength_Moldavia by Cost_2.

Cost_2 = (IF(Mil_Decision_Moldavia) = 0 and Mil_Decision_Transylvania = 1 then 1*(Strength_Ratio_MT) else if (Mil_Decision_Transylvania) = 1 and Mil_Decision_Moldavia = 1 then 1 else if Mil_Decision_Moldavia = 0 and Mil_Decision_Transylvania = 0 then Strength_Ratio_MT else 0) + Decision_Consequences

DOCUMENT: The calculation of cost is made based on the decisions of the two nations. If both nations elect for peace, then cost is given an initial value of 1. If both nations elect for war, then cost's initial value is 0. If one side elects for war, and the other for peace, the side electing for war receives an initial value of 1, and that electing for peace 0. These initial values are added to a number determined by two CONVERTERS, Decision_Consequences and Decision_Evaluator. This number is 1 if both nations elect for peace, ­1 if both elect for war, and 0 if these conditions are not met.

Mil_Decision_Moldavia = 0

DOCUMENT: This CONVERTER receives the decision of Moldavia to wage war or peace. It is entered from the map level via a slider. A number is entered at each pulse of the simulation. This number, and that of Transylvania, are then used to generate other components of the CONVERTER, Cost.

Strength_Ratio_MT = GRAPH((Military_Strength_Moldavia/Military_Strength_Transylvania)) (0.00, 0.00), (0.273, 0.0375), (0.545, 0.075), (0.818, 0.105), (1.09, 0.138), (1.36, 0.168), (1.64, 0.215), (1.91, 0.282), (2.18, 0.328), (2.45, 0.37), (2.73, 0.41), (3.00, 0.485)

DOCUMENT: This number is a ratio of military strengths of the two nations. If two nations wage war, then that with the greater military strength will have an advantage. This ratio produces that advantage. Because it is a ratio, it also penalizes a nation with lesser military strength.

Transylvania

Military_Strength_Transylvania(t) = Military_Strength_Transylvania(t ­ dt) + (Additions_to_Strength) * dt INIT Military_Strength_Transylvania = normal(5,1.4)

DOCUMENT: This is a STOCK which indicates Transylvania's accumulated military strength. It starts as a randomly generated number between 0 and 5 with a normal distribution and sd of 1.4. This number is generated by the CONVERTER, Transylvanian_Start.

INFLOWS:

Additions_to_Strength = Military_Strength_Transylvania*cost

DOCUMENT: This is a FLOW, which increases Military_Strength_Transylvania by a factor generated by the CONVERTER, Cost. The value of Military_Strength_Transylvania is increased by the factor which results from multiplying Military_Strength_Transylvania by Cost.

cost = (IF(Mil_Decision_Transylvania) = 0 and Mil_Decision_Moldavia = 1 then 1*(Strength_Ratio_TM) else if Mil_Decision_Transylvania = 1 and Mil_Decision_Moldavia = 1 then 1 else if Mil_Decision_Transylvania = 0 and Mil_Decision_Moldavia = 0 then (Strength_Ratio_TM) else 0) +Decision_Consequences

DOCUMENT: The calculation of cost is made based on the decisions of the two nations. If both nations elect for peace, then cost is given an initial value of 1. If both nations elect for war, then cost's initial value is 0. If one side elects for war, and the other for peace, the side electing for war receives an initial value of 1, and that electing for peace 0. These initial values are added to a number determined by two CONVERTERS, Decision_Consequences and Decision_Evaluator. This number is 1 if both nations elect for peace, ­1 if both elect for war, and 0 if these conditions are not met.

Mil_Decision_Transylvania = 0

DOCUMENT: This CONVERTER receives the decision of Transylvania to wage war or peace. It is entered from the map level via a slider. A number is entered at each pulse of the simulation. This number, and that of Moldavia, are then used to generate other components of the CONVERTER, Cost.

Strength_Ratio_TM = GRAPH ((Military_Strength_Transylvania / Military_Strength_Moldavia))

(0.00, 0.00), (0.273, 0.0375), (0.545, 0.075), (0.818, 0.105), (1.09, 0.138), (1.36, 0.168), (1.64, 0.215), (1.91, 0.282), (2.18, 0.328), (2.45, 0.37), (2.73, 0.41), (3.00, 0.485)

DOCUMENT: This number is a ratio of military strengths of the two nations. If two nations wage war, then that with the greater military strength will have an advantage. This ratio produces that advantage. Because it is a ratio, it also penalizes a nation with lesser military strength.

U.N. Arbitrators

Decision_Consequences = If Decision_Evaluator = 2 then 1.03 else if Decision_Evaluator = 0 then ­1 else 0

DOCUMENT: This CONVERTER calculates consequences from the joint decisions of the representatives of both nations. If both nations choose to wage peace, then their decisions are added (1 + 1) to produce 2. This is then transmitted to their Cost CONVERTERs as a 3% dividend. If both nations elect to wage war, then there is a consequence for waging total war, and the factor, ­1, is transmitted to their Cost CONVERTERs. If only one nation elects to wage war, then there is no consequence made by this CONVERTER.

Decision_Evaluator = Mil_Decision_Transylvania+Mil_Decision_Moldavia DOCUMENT: This CONVERTER is used to add the results of the Military Decisions made by representatives of both nations. It is then transmitted to the CONVERTER, Decision_Evaluator, to consequent the nations' decisions.

Running the Simulation

Simulation Directions

First, the class must be organized into groups. These directions assume that you have only one computer. If you have a class of 24, then six groups of four or eight groups of three will work. You will find the arrangement of groups which best fits your students and your delivery.

Explain the background of the simulation and demonstrate how the map layer works. If you plan to teach STELLA, or if your students are using it already, a discussion of the rationale for each converter will be fruitful. You can then make and test any modifications which the students suggest.

Organize the groups so that an even number will play the roles of Transylvania and Moldavia. Start the simulation and show or project the starting conditions. Ask students to record their decisions and rationales on the WAR-AND PEACEworksheets. Each group then decides what their decision will be. One pair of groups registers their decisions by passing them to you. (Note: You can have an odd number of groups, and assign one to be the U.N. Arbitration Team. They will then enter decisions and commence play.) Use the sliders to enter the decisions. Ensure that the decisions register as 0.0 or 1.0. Don't use fractional decisions.

When decisions are entered, click the play button on the Run Bar. Show or project the effects of the decisions to Military Strength. Students then discuss and record the consequence of the decisions.

Students then repeat this process, moving from one pair of groups to another. This means that different groups will actually be entering decisions onto the computer each turn. Encourage on­going discussion during this evolution.

At the end of the simulation, review it with your class. Ask them which tactics and strategies seemed to work and which did not, then relate their experiences to real world events.

Direct each team to formulate a set of strategies and tactics which will benefit their nation most. Then run the simulation again, but this time with one pair of groups playing an entire sequence. Pairs of groups not playing will work on the final problem while awaiting their turns.

When all group pairs have finished, engage the class in an evaluative assessment of the exercise. Then assign the class to work in their pairs of groups to discover real world information which supports or refutes either the premises of the simulation, or the premises of their final strategies and tactics. Alternatively, you can assign the class to research real world information which bears on their response to the final problem.
 

Follow Up

Discuss the simulation and your class' response with your administration. Ask them to assist you to find and approach granting sources in order to acquire a classroom set of computers and STELLA software. Include your students in this process!

We'd like feed­back on our simulation, as we would like to expand the model to address 85 or more nations which have the option to wage peace or war, make alliances, etc. Might this model mimic recent world events, in which world wars have waxed then waned, but local conflicts persist?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

WAR-AND PEACE Q & A SHEET

Team Names:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Time 1 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 
 

Time 2 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 
 

Time 3 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 
 

Time 4 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 
 

Time 5 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 
 

Time 6 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 
 

Time 7 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 
 

Time 8 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 

Time 9 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 
 

Time 10 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 
 

Time 11 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:

Time 12 Decision (Circle one): Peace War

Rationale for decision:
 
 
 

Consequence of decision:
 
 
 
 

ASSESSMENT:

1. Which strategies and tactics seemed to work for you?
 
 
 
 
 

2. Which didn't work?
 
 
 
 
 

3. Formulate strategies and tactics which will assure you of increasing military strength.

4. Use these plans to perform one complete simulation. Evaluate the results here.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

5. Final Problem: If all nations decided for continuous peace, what happens to their resources?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Are these results realistic? Why or Why not?