Harry Kazianis has participated in many “war games” – scientific simulations of the course of war – over the years. In 2019 he participated in a simulation of a war between NATO and Russia – triggered on the territory of Ukraine. According to Kazianis, the simulation resulted in more than a billion deaths…
First of all: Report24 speaks out against any kind of war. War is always wrong. But in war the truth dies first. We do not tolerate the misplay of the synchronized system media.
In an article described on The Federalist Kazianis the findings from the research.
Harry J. Kazianis is Senior Director of Korean Studies at the Center for the National Interest. He also serves as executive editor of The National Interest publishing arm. Mr. Kazianis is a recognized expert on national security issues, foreign policy and national security challenges affecting North and South Korea, China, Asia Pacific and the United States. Kazianis is also a Fellow for National Security Affairs at the Potomac Foundation and a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the University of Nottingham (UK). He is considered a recognized scientist who has been involved in over 700 publications and is frequently cited.
In just three days, as I have done countless times over the past few years, a group of former and current senior US government officials from both political sides gathered to conduct the simulation of a NATO-Russia war in late 2019. In the course of what we called the 2019 NATO-Russia War, we estimate that a billion people died.
Harry J. Kazianis in The Federalist
In the simulation, Russia invaded Ukraine first, in a very similar way to what happened in reality. First, NATO got involved in the conflict, then beleaguered and cornered Russia used nuclear weapons, leading to an international escalation – nuclear war. In the end, a billion people were dead.
Clearly, NATO would have a massive conventional advantage in any war with Moscow and would ensure that Putin would lose in a direct fight. However, Russia has repeatedly stated that it will use nuclear weapons to defend its territory and regime if it feels existentially threatened. The purpose of our simulation was to find out: can we ever defeat Russian President Vladimir Putin in an armed conflict over Ukraine or the Baltic States and not start a nuclear war in the process?
Harry J. Kazianis in The Federalist
In all simulations over several years and with over 100 people involved who brought in completely different views and ideologies, there was always only one outcome: nuclear war.
The simulation of 2019 was eerily identical to the current start of the war:
Russia decided to invade Ukraine under the pretext that it had to defend Russian-speaking peoples who were being “oppressed” by Ukraine’s fascist government. The simulation assumed that Russia would be able to do this very quickly and that all military objectives would be achieved in about four days.
But Ukraine has been trained and upgraded by NATO and the US for decades. In the simulation, the country managed a heavy counterattack, which led to large losses on the Russian side. This resulted in a change of strategy: Russia would decide to demilitarize Ukraine. In the simulation there were massive attacks with rockets, cruise missiles and the Luftwaffe. After that, ground forces would move up to occupy the country.
The simulation assumed that a NATO member, in this case Poland, was attacked due to a mistake by Russia and that numerous civilian deaths were unintentionally caused. The consequences are economic sanctions and the exclusion of Russia from the banking system – something that in reality happened without this mistake.
In the simulation, a major cyber war then began, in which Russia managed to paralyze the power grid, banks and other infrastructure in Poland and “return the country to the Stone Age”. As a result, the conventional war with NATO begins, as Poland declares the alliance case. This initially declares a no-fly zone around Lemberg and protects the area with its own aircraft.
In the simulation, Putin’s Russia attacks all airfields and military installations around Lviv and orders an all-out cyber attack on the Baltic states to prevent an invasion from that direction. As a result, NATO invades Ukraine, which Russia responds to with the use of tactical nuclear weapons. NATO responds with the same means.
In retaliation, Russia attacks European cities with nuclear weapons, and NATO carries out retaliatory strikes. The consequences are total devastation and a billion deaths.
In every scenario I’ve been involved in, there’s a common theme: When Vladimir Putin feels hemmed in and decides that Russia is under direct threat, usually because of a mistake he makes on the battlefield, he decides to make that mistake compensate by escalation.
Harry J. Kazianis in The Federalist
Even if things never happen in reality as they do in a simulation, the chances of an escalation are extraordinarily high, even in the current conflict:
If Russia and NATO are drawn into direct conflict, Putin knows his regime would be defeated in a conventional struggle. This means that Russia will choose nuclear war.
Harry J. Kazianis in The Federalist
