02000nas a2200241   4500000000100000000000100001008004100002260000900043653001400052653001900066653001600085653001100101653001600112653001500128653001400143100001700157700002100174700001800195245008900213300001100302490000700313520143800320       2022                            d  c202210agrey zone10aHybrid threats10akriegsspiel10amatrix10anon-kinetic10anon-lethal10aWargaming1 aPeter Dobias1 aKyle Christensen1 aWilliam Freid00aGaming Intermediate Force Capabilities: Strategic Implications of Tactical Decisions  a97-1090 v213 a<p>This article reviews the development and tests of two Intermediate Force Capability (IFC) concept development hybrid wargames. The first wargame plays out a maritime Task Force’s ability to counter hybrid threats in the grey zone. The second wargame examines the ability of a NATO Task Group, deployed to a third country to train local security forces, to counter a hostile militia trained and supported by a neighboring country. IFCs offer a class of response between doing nothing and using lethal force in a situation that would be politically unpalatable. As such, the aim of the wargame series is to evaluate whether IFCs can make a difference to mission success against hybrid threats in the grey zone. This wargame series was particularly important because it used traditional game mechanics in a unique and innovative way to evaluate and assess IFC’s effects on strategic mission success. Specifically, the hybrid wargame series has demonstrated that IFCs have a high probability of filling the gap between doing nothing and using lethal force. IFCs have the potential to improve operational effectiveness by allowing for more restrained use of force to escalate/de-escalate a situation and increasing decision time and space for tactical decision-makers. Both counter-personnel and counter-materiel capabilities (including miniaturization) are needed to act effectively in the current hybrid threat environment.</p>