Stalingrad -- Decisions Under Fire

Point in Time: Early November, 1942

Stalingrad, USSR

The Soviet Army has been backed up against the Volga River after the August push by the units of the German Sixth to seize the city of Stalingrad. The fighting has been fierce and the Soviets appear to be on the verge of having to abandon their position and retreat across the Volga.




Resupply for the Soviets has been almost non-existent due to German air strikes that scuttled dozens of ships and barges rendering the river impassable in both directions. Stalingrad is located deep into the Soviet Union and the German's supply chain is over extended As winter approaches, decisions must be made. Will there be a winner and a loser?

Sense Making

In June of 1941 Germany launched a massive attack on the Soviet Union. The front reached from the Baltic States in the north to the Black Sea in the south. Rapid advances across the flat expanses of the Soviet Union's western republics were matched by a strategic retreat by the Soviet forces that resulted in the Germans coming within site of Moscow as the winter arrived. The rapid Soviet retreat had allowed the Germans to push deep into Soviet territory without establishing sufficient supply lines.

The harsh winter dictated that the Germans retreat. The costly retreat caused the Germans to focus instead on the oil fields of the southern Soviet Union. In the spring of 1942 Hitler ordered three million troops to secure the oil fields. Against the advice of his military staff, Hitler diverted part of his forces to attack the city named for his nemesis, Josef Stalin. Hitler expected Stalingrad to be under German occupation by early September.

Stalin and his staff had repulsed the German offensive on Moscow by letting the immense distances of the Soviet Union render the German logistical support mechanisms almost impossible to maintain. When Hitler directed the German forces towards Stalingrad, Stalin, apparently offended, ordered the Soviet defenders to dig in. Countless Soviet lives were lost as Stalin's orders were followed.



Decision Making

In early November in Stalingrad there are two players with two choices. The Germans with low supplies and insufficient troop numbers must choose between maintaining a focused attack on the city or maintaining defensible flanks. The Soviets with currently low supplies, can either retreat across the Volga or attack the apparently poorly defended German flanks to the north and south of the city.

The winter factors into the choices. Deep within Soviet territory, the Germans are unlikely to maintain good logistical support when winter settles in. The oncoming of the coldest season, though likely to kill many Soviet citizens and soldiers, can mean the frozen Volga can support truck traffic for supplies of food, munitions, and troops. The Germans elected to concentrate their best troops at a central point to maintain their attack thus leaving poorly trained troops spread thinly at their flanks.

The Soviets attacked the weak German flanks and in a pincer move, trapped the Germans within Stalingrad. Another look at two players and two choices might be possible when considering the turned tables of the now besieged Germans.

How modeling can help

Stepping back and simplifying the players, the history leading to the conflict, and their position at a given point in time, can allow the modeler to understand the possible outcomes for a given event. Using an historical event gives an actual outcome that can be contrasted to the other possible outcomes for purposes of becoming more comfortable at analysis of a crisis situation such as war. Boin et al. (2005) note that their analysis is restricted to crisis management in democratic settings.

I might suggest that in the case of war, democratic systems are compromised and more closely resemble the more streamlined organs of an autocratic state. In the case of Stalingrad, two autocratic dictators fought a battle in what could be considered a clash of outsized egos. While their powerful egos may have contributed to the cause of the battle, the strategic choices of the military leaders bear examination. In war many of the issues that stress civilian government are usurped by the military leadership. Similar removal of democratic systems has to occur when peaceful societies are confronted by non-war crises.

Considerations of framing the event (Boin et al., 2005) also become factors to consider when evaluating both the German and Soviet actions in 1942. Maintaining public support for war is essential for keeping a steady stream of conscripts ready for battle (Baird 1969). Propaganda by both sides also was essential for supporting international assistance and furthering broader diplomatic goals (Kimball 1996).

References:

Baird, Jay W., "The Myth of Stalingrad." The Journal of Contemporary History, July 1969. JSTOR. Western Washington Univ. Lib., Bellingham, WA. Jan. 24, 2008
http://www.links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-0094%28196907%294%3A3%3C187%3ATMOS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A


Boin, Arjen, et al. The Politics of Crisis Management. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005


Fann, William Edwin M.D., Review of Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege, 1942-1943, by Antony Beevor. American Journal of Psychiatry Dec. 2001
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/158/12/2099


Kimball, Warren, F., "Stalingrad: A Chance for Choices." The Journal of Military History, Jan. 1996. JSTOR. Western Washington Univ. Lib., Bellingham, WA. Jan. 24 2008
http://www.jstor.org/sici?sici=0899-3718%28199601%2960%3A1%3C89%3ASACFC%#E2..0.CO%3B2-H

2007 Myanmar Standoff

Juxtaposed with what can easily be described as a tumultuous nineteenth and twentieth century in Myanmar/Burma, the twenty-first century began riddled with controversy. The military junta that has been in power since the country was freed from British rule in 1948 has met much citizen resistance over the last fifty-nine years, most recently in late 2007. In mid-late August, in a response to a rise in fuel costs, a socially and economically repressed people of Myanmar rallied in protest. The protests started small and were met with violent force from the heavy-handed militant government. In initial rallies activists were merely beaten and arrested, but on September 5th soldiers fired bullets into the crowds temporarily disbanding protests and injuring several people.
It was at this point in time that the countries monks got involved. Monks in Myanmar, as in most Southeast Asian countries, are very power social leaders. It can be said that – socially in Myanmar - monks are more influential than the government and the only thing that gives the government legitimacy is a conditional acceptance from the monks. That said, when the countries monks took over the reigns of protest following the September shootings, a breath of significantly different air was breathed into this most recent social uprising. The protests grew in what was a tense eye-to-eye battle of the two most powerful groups in Myanmar (the government and the monks). What followed was a game of intimidation, standoffs, demands, etc. It all ended – presumably temporarily – in late September with a violent victory by the government; protests ended and thousands fled the country in exile and/or as refuges.

Making Sense
Although these recent events were sparked by a rise in fuel prices, the decades-old underlying drive behind them was to lash out against a repressive government. Perhaps many of the civilians who participated in the original protests thought it was about a rise in fuel prices, but to the educated organizers and to the outside world it can be viewed simply as the most recent straw that has again broken the camels back. Many of the protest organizers belonged to a pro-democracy group called the “88 generation students.” Many members of this group were immediately arrested, presumably because of their deeper understanding of their countries repression. When the monks became involved it was in response to what we would consider a basic civil rights violation. At that point the movement became overtly about ending/limiting oppression. I don’t think that it was the monks’ realistic intention to overthrow the militant government with protests; so much as it was to send a message to back off of the people. The different standoffs that took place over the tense twenty-three day period would determine whether this message would be accepted or rejected.

Decision Making
The players in this game had a number of choices, repercussions and end results to consider. Ultimately the militant government flexed its muscles and the monks/people were left with little choice but to back down or be violently dealt with. The government’s victory rings hollow in that the main repercussion of their actions are set in the future; future aggressive behavior from their citizens as well as possible future military action from the outside world.

I will model this conflict as a two-player game involving the monks and the government of Myanmar.

References:
Lee, Roger A. “The 2007 Pro-Democracy Uprising in Burma/Myanmar.” The History Guy. http://www.historyguy.com/myanmar-burma_uprising_2007.htm. 25 January 2008.

“Q & A: Protests In Burma.” BBC New. 2 October 2007. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7010202.stm. 25 January 2008.

Yangtze River Crisis in loom of 2008 Summer Olympics in China

The Yangtze River is the third longest river in the world and indubitably the most important in China's history and future. It is the thought of as the divider between Northern and Southern China and empties into the Pacific Ocean in one of the countries most prominent cities, Shanghai. The river supports roughly 1/3 of China's 1.2 billion people and over 40 % of its agricultural output. It currently also supplies around 40 % of the countries industrial output mainly through the Gezhou Dam and now in its second stages the notorious Three Gorges Dam, which is considered one of the most environmentally detrimental projects of the new millennium.

With the Olympics less than six months away China is trying to revolutionize the hydrological infrastructure of the country to accommodate such a demand for development in Beijing. They are diverting water from the southern rivers, mainly the Yangtze, to the parched north region who's main tributary, the Yellow River, is often not running in the dry season. Beijing has been experiencing droughts every year during the dry season, every winter, for the past decade. Beijing is trying to maintain a somewhat "green" image for the 2008 summer olympics and are using Beijing as a showcase for the international competition of not only their athletes but of architecture and technology as well. However, with every advancement that China is making towards their Olympics seems to be taking resources away from some other part of the country and hurting its people in general.

Sense Making:

To understand why their is a crisis in the Yangtze River is not hard when to neglect when researching the conflict surrounding the Three Gorges Dam which is the largest Hydroelectric Project in human history. Thought by some to be the savior of China as an emerging world power and other as the biggest economic and environmental mistake by the country in the twenty first century.

The dam has been envisioned for centuries by some of Chinas and the worlds great engineers in the past but it was not until Li Ping proposed a plan and it was approved in 1992. Construction began 2 years later and was planned to be completed in 2009 but due to unexpected concerns it was pushed back to 2011. It was partially functional in 2004 and has cost around 22.5 billion dollars thus far.
The environmental impacts of this project are of great concern to not only the ecological health of the Yangtze River Basin. Soil levels have been depleted throughout the region and it has decimated agricultural production and natural ecosystems. Along with this soil loss on one side of the dam, there is sedimentation on the other and could cause dam failures in the future without expensive and extensive reparations. There is a build of algae blooms on the west side of the project as well that is killing off many endemic species. Already extinct are the Yangtze River Dolphin (although one was supposedly spotted last August) and the Finless Porpoise. Heavily threatened animals include the Sawtooth Paddlefish, Great White Crane and Yangtze River Sturgeon. Currently the river has been experiencing some of the worst droughts in the past century and it is causing problems that are rippling throughout the country.
The droughts are destroying While the profits of the company that owns the dam doubled their profits in 2004, over 1.5 million people were displaced due to planned flooding. Currently many of the shipping routes and ports along the Yangtze River are inaccessible due to the droughts. This is impeding repairing the already damaged large agricultural region in the basin.

Decision Making:
The players in this game are numerous and it is difficult to evaluate all possible options. The main player is the Chinese Government and their problem is to accommodate their growing population and the upcoming Olympic Games. To help mitigate the lack of water in Northern China, the government is hastily constructing a canal from the Hebei Province an agricultural region. The cost so far has been around 2.4 billion dollars and is expected to be above 5 billion by 2010.
The Olympic committee is another player that is driving this crisis and they insist that there will be adequate resources and infrastructure in Beijing in place by this summer.
The Yangtze Electric company, the ones responsible for Three Gorges, is one of the main players as well. Their actions have displaced millions and destroyed ecosystems. They need to reevaluate the impacts of their projects because it might be hurting the country more than helping it.


References:
"Deep Concern Over Three Gorges Dam" By Michael Bristow BBC News, Beijing BBC News 11/30/07
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7120856.stm#graphic

"Beijing Olympic water scheme drains parched farmers" By Chris Buckley BAODING, China, Jan 23/008 http://sport.guardian.co.uk/breakingnews/feedstory/0,,-7247373,00.html

"China will speed up Beijing water delivery for Olympic Games" Associated Press01/18/2008
http://sports.inquirer.net/breakingnews/breakingnews/view/20080118-113302/China-will-speed-up-Beijing-water-delivery-for-Olympic-Games

"Yangtze River" "Three Gorges Dam", Wikipedia.org

The Crisis of Africa's Invisible Children

This crisis deals with the Invisible Children of Africa, ravaged by war and starvation. In 1986, the President of Uganda, Tito Okello, an ethnic Acholi was overthrown by the NRA (National Resistance Army) led by present-day President Museveni. As Acholi’s, the dominant ethnicity in Northern Uganda, became fearful of their weakening political strength, many rebellion groups formed in order to maintain their strength and prevent any actions of retribution.



One of more successful rebel groups was lead by a radical man by the name of Joseph Kony whose extreme spiritual ideals roused fellow Acholi’s and whose guerilla warfare tactics seemed to terrify many into believing in his cause for fear of torture. Kony’s LRA (Lord’s Resistance Army), gained support in the beginning, especially from the rebel government in southern Sudan, the Khartoum Government which began to supply arms, soldiers, military tactics, and money to the rebel group of northern Uganda.

However, President Museveni was becoming as strong as ever and Joseph Kony and his Acholi followers started feeling weaker than ever. The LRA started instigating a method of killing fathers and mothers and kidnapping the children in small villages. Kony’s followers would target families of children primarily ages 7-14 as these are the most malleable ages. Kony and his commanders taught these children murder, death, extreme religious doctrines, and kill-or-be-killed techniques so as to start what many would hear in the media as a “Child Army”.

Check it out! http://www.invisiblechildren.com/theMovement/





Sense Making: Joseph Kony’s rebel group, the Lord’s Resistance Army, has been receiving aid from the rebel Khartoum government of southern Sudan, terrorizing the bush, and kidnapping children for his “Child Army” for nearly 21 years. This has lead to what is now called the “Night Commuters” and “Invisible Children”. These night commuters, usually children ages 5-15, walk miles each night to sleep in a barracks guarded most likely by only one guard. They rise every morning to walk back to their villages just to keep themselves as well as their families safe. Peace talks in 1994 between Joseph Kony and Minister Betty Bigombe failed miserably and in 1996 the LRA hostilities against un-cooperative Acholi families and children escalated to a dangerous level. The government of Uganda realized peace talks were necessary and with the questionable interference by the ICC (International Criminal Court) in 2005, Kony and his followers continued the violence in fear of their safety, well-being, and lives. Basically running from the ICC and the Uganda government in lieu of talking of peace. Finally, in June 2006, the Vice President of Southern Sudan, Riek Machar, agreed to be a mediator AND ignore the ICC’s requests. This brought Acholiland one more step towards peace. Both players now had no excuse no to participate in negotiations and reach peace.

Decision Making: Since July 2006 the Ugandan government and LRA leaders have met in a series of ongoing talks mediated by the Vice President of Southern Sudan, Riek Machar. President Museveni proclaimed that if the hostilities ceased, he would grant Kony the safety he desired from the ICC. In early August, one of Kony’s military leaders whose sights were directly focused on peace since 2005, Vincent Otti, declared a unilateral ceasefire and asked the Uganda government to comply with his request. Another one of Kony’s LRA commanders Raska Lukwiya was killed in a battle on August 12, 2006. (Directly after Otti’s plea for a unilateral ceasefire.) On August 26, 2006 a treaty was signed. It stated that the LRA would leave Uganda and that the government of Uganda would not attack the LRA while they dismantled.

References: Allen, Tim. Wikipedia, Lord's Resistance Army http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord 23 January 2008

Boin , A., t'Hart, P., Stern, E. and Sundelius, B. The Politics of Crisis Management: Public Leadership under Pressure. First edition. Cambridge University Press, 2005.

http://www.invisiblechildren.com/home.php Invisible Children Website

The Disastrous Sinking of the U.S.S. Maine

On January 25, 1898 the USS Maine arrived at the Spanish port of Havana, Cuba. The ship was investigating claims that American interests were in danger and native Cubans seeking independence from Spanish rule were being abused. The ship entered the Spanish port with permission of the Spanish, and at 9:40 p.m on February 15th 1898 the USS Maine exploded. Two hundred and sixty of the ship's crew were killed. The potential crisis involves the possibility of war commencing between Spain and the U.S. The options available to each player in this conflict are declaring war, or retreating. This crisis is modeled immediately after the explosion on February 15th, 1898.
Two of the five critical tasks of crisis management were clearly implemented in this conflict (Boin, et. al. 2005), as described below:

Sense Making
Sense-making can help clarify the situation and will aid in the second step of crisis management, decision making. Initial investigations into the cause of the explosion concluded that an external mine had been planted and detonated on the hull of the ship. Based on this information, and the friendly ties between Cuba and the U.S at that point, Spain was blamed for planting the mine. Due to the fact the U.S. had received permission from Spain to safely enter the port, the U.S. considered this apparent provocation an act of war. After assessing the situation, the U.S. then sought to determine the most effective way to resolve the crisis.

Decision Making
President William McKinley initially preferred to pursue a diplomatic resolution. However, tensions between Spain and Cuba kept escalating and the U.S. set up a blockade around Cuba. This caused tensions to escalate even further, and on April 23rd, 1898 Spain declared war on the U.S, and the U.S. followed with a declaration of war two days later. The war ended August 13th 1898 with the signing of the Treaty of Paris, granting the U.S. possession of the Philippians Islands in return for a sum of $25 million dollars. Decision making in this context was a vital part of the war crisis. Effective decisions and negotiations eventually led to the termination of the war crisis.

Notes for Discussion/Response
An interesting aspect to this crisis was Cuba’s role. What if Cuba sunk the U.S.S Maine to instigate the U.S to act against Spain? Also, later investigations determined the cause of the explosion to be internal, an accident. However, close examination of the explosion site revealed the hull plates of the ship were bent inward, indicating an external cause. What really happened?

References
Boin , A., t'Hart, P., Stern, E. and Sundelius, B. The Politics of Crisis Management: Public Leadership under Pressure. First edition. Cambridge University Press, 2005.
"U.S.S Maine Frequently Asked Questions." Naval Historical Center. August 13, 2003. Department of the Navy. 24 Jan 2008 .

Blanchard Mountain Logging Crisis

In this logging controversy the protagonists are the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and a national coalition of evenvironmental groups known as the Northwest Ecosystem Alliance (NEA).


Sense Making

Landslide risks and land use management are key issues in the Blanchard Mountain Logging Crisis. Blanchard Mountain is located on the edge of Whatcom and Skagit Counties in the northwestern corner of Washington State. Of the 4500 acres that constitute Blanchard Mountain the upper 3000 acres have not been logged for over 70 years (and never been clear cut).

NWEA seeks to preserve the upper 3000 acres. Removing these trees may significantly and increase the risk of landslides in populated areas. A landslide in this region could destroy homes, wildlife habitat, and and a vital transportation link between Whatcom County and Skagit County (Chuckanut Drive). The forest has large stands of trees that range in age from 50 to 200 years, and provide habitat for many species. It also provides an important wildlife cooridor connecting the North Cascade mountain range with the Salish Sea.

The Washington State DNR has a state mandate to log Blanchard Mountain (and other state school lands) with timber sale proceeds going to state and local (Skagit County) school districts. The NWEA contends that Blanchard Mountain represents a unique environment and that clear cutting on its steep slopes would create a landslide hazard that would threaten homes, lives, an active salmon spawning stream (Oyster Creek).

Decision Making

The DNR and the NWEA convened to negotiate a consensus agreement for the fate of Blanchard Mountain. Eventually, a compromise agreement was reached in 2007. We will model the crisis as of Spring of 2006.

Northwest Ecosystem Alliance (NEA) and the Washington State DNR have the options of negotiating or not negotiating. By not negotiating the parties run the risk of not meeting any of their objectives. Bargaining and negotiation models will be used to model the strategic interactions of the stakeholders.

References
Boin , A., t'Hart, P., Stern, E. and Sundelius, B. The Politics of Crisis Management: Public Leadership under Pressure. First edition. Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Levy presents at the Border Regions in Transition Conference (Jan, 2008)

Western Washington University and the University of Victoria co-hosted the ninth international Border Regions in Transition (BRIT) Conference (Jan. 12-15).

Jason Levy co-presented two papers at this four day conference, a collaborative transboundary effort by Western’s Border Policy Research Institute and the University of Victoria School of Public Administration. The conference focused on North American and European border regions. Key topics included implications of post 9-11 security measures on borders and border regions, borderland culture, economic transactions, transportation systems and transborder governance arrangements around the world, with particular emphasis on Canada-United States boundary and marine security issues after 9-11.

Levy receives Cross-border Disaster Grant

Dr. Levy receives $17,917 from the Border Policy Research Institute to develop improved procedures for transboundary emergency management in the Cascadia border region. Dr. Levy is the Director of the Transborder Disaster Management Group and an Assistant Professor of Disaster Reduction and Emergency Preparedness at Western Washington University in affiliation with the Institute for Global and Community Resilience.

Transborder Emergency Preparedness Grant

The Transborder Disaster Management Group receives a CAD$ 12,000 (approximately US$ 11,790) research grant under the North American Research Linkages Program. Funding opportunities are available for students interested in transboundary crsisi management and emergency preparedness research.

Dr. Levy is the grant PI. He serves as an Assistant professor of Disaster Reducation and Emergency Preparedness at Western Washington University in affiliation with the Insitute for Global and Community Resilience. Dr. Gal-Or, Director,
Institute for Transborder Studies is a co-applicant and principal partner for the Canadian part of the research. She has worked extensively on developing academic and professional relationships in Canadian-US-Mexican borderlands.

To achieve a strengthened North American partnership, the funded proposal encourages trilateral disaster management cooperation through increased institutional and research partnerships and mobility. Greater cooperation and dialogue between the United States, Mexico and Canada, particularly at the academic level, enhances the economic and social benefits that accrue from disaster management investments, and contributes to enhanced disaster response capabilities across our borders.