MODELLING & SIMULATION HYBRID WARFARE Researches, Models and Tools for Hybrid Warfare and Population Simulation

The Hybrid Warfare phenomena, which is the subject of the current research, has been framed by the work of Professor Agostino Bruzzone (University of Genoa) and Professor Erdal Cayirci (University of Stavanger), that in June 2016 created in order to inquiry the subject a dedicated Exploratory Team, which was endorsed by NATO Modelling & Simulation Group (a panel of the NATO Science & Technology organization) and established with the participation as well of the author. The author brought his personal contribution within the ET43 by introducing meaningful insights coming from the lecture of \u201cFight by the minutes: Time and the Art of War (1994)\u201d, written by Lieutenant Colonel US Army (Rtd.) Robert Leonhard; in such work, Leonhard extensively developed the concept that \u201cTime\u201d, rather than geometry of the battlefield and/or firepower, is the critical factor to tackle in military operations and by extension in Hybrid Warfare. The critical reflection about the time - both in its quantitative and qualitative dimension - in a hybrid confrontation it is addressed and studied inside SIMCJOH, a software built around challenges that imposes literally to \u201cFight by the minutes\u201d, echoing the core concept expressed in the eponymous work. Hybrid Warfare \u2013 which, by definition and purpose, aims to keep the military commitment of both aggressor and defender at the lowest - can gain enormous profit by employing a wide variety of non-military tools, turning them into a weapon, as in the case of the phenomena of \u201cweaponization of mass migrations\u201d, as it is examined in the \u201cDies Irae\u201d simulation architecture. Currently, since migration it is a very sensitive and divisive issue among the public opinions of many European countries, cynically leveraging on a humanitarian emergency caused by an exogenous, inducted migration, could result in a high level of political and social destabilization, which indeed favours the concurrent actions carried on by other hybrid tools. Other kind of disruption however, are already available in the arsenal of Hybrid Warfare, such cyber threats, information campaigns lead by troll factories for the diffusion of fake/altered news, etc. From this perspective the author examines how the TREX (Threat network simulation for REactive eXperience) simulator is able to offer insights about a hybrid scenario characterized by an intense level of social disruption, brought by cyber-attacks and systemic faking of news. Furthermore, the rising discipline of \u201cStrategic Engineering\u201d, as envisaged by Professor Agostino Bruzzone, when matched with the operational requirements to fulfil in order to counter Hybrid Threats, it brings another innovative, as much as powerful tool, into the professional luggage of the military and the civilian employed in Defence and Homeland security sectors. Hybrid is not the New War. What is new is brought by globalization paired with the transition to the information age and rising geopolitical tensions, which have put new emphasis on hybrid hostilities that manifest themselves in a contemporary way. Hybrid Warfare is a deliberate choice of an aggressor. While militarily weak nations can resort to it in order to re-balance the odds, instead military strong nations appreciate its inherent effectiveness coupled with the denial of direct responsibility, thus circumventing the rules of the International Community (IC). In order to be successful, Hybrid Warfare should consist of a highly coordinated, sapient mix of diverse and dynamic combination of regular forces, irregular forces (even criminal elements), cyber disruption etc. all in order to achieve effects across the entire DIMEFIL/PMESII_PT spectrum. However, the owner of the strategy, i.e. the aggressor, by keeping the threshold of impunity as high as possible and decreasing the willingness of the defender, can maintain his Hybrid Warfare at a diplomatically feasible level; so the model of the capacity, willingness and threshold, as proposed by Cayirci, Bruzzone and Gunneriusson (2016), remains critical to comprehend Hybrid Warfare. Its dynamicity is able to capture the evanescent, blurring line between Hybrid Warfare and Conventional Warfare. In such contest time is the critical factor: this because it is hard to foreseen for the aggressor how long he can keep up with such strategy without risking either the retaliation from the International Community or the depletion of resources across its own DIMEFIL/PMESII_PT spectrum. Similar discourse affects the defender: if he isn\u2019t able to cope with Hybrid Threats (i.e. taking no action), time works against him; if he is, he can start to develop counter narrative and address physical countermeasures. However, this can lead, in the medium long period, to an unforeseen (both for the attacker and the defender) escalation into a large, conventional, armed conflict. The performance of operations that required more than kinetic effects drove the development of DIMEFIL/PMESII_PT models and in turn this drive the development of Human Social Culture Behavior Modelling (HCSB), which should stand at the core of the Hybrid Warfare modelling and simulation efforts. Multi Layers models are fundamental to evaluate Strategies and Support Decisions: currently there are favourable conditions to implement models of Hybrid Warfare, such as Dies Irae, SIMCJOH and TREX, in order to further develop tools and war-games for studying new tactics, execute collective training and to support decisions making and analysis planning. The proposed approach is based on the idea to create a mosaic made by HLA interoperable simulators able to be combined as tiles to cover an extensive part of the Hybrid Warfare, giving the users an interactive and intuitive environment based on the \u201cModelling interoperable Simulation and Serious Game\u201d (MS2G) approach. From this point of view, the impressive capabilities achieved by IA-CGF in human behavior modeling to support population simulation as well as their native HLA structure, suggests to adopt them as core engine in this application field. However, it necessary to highlight that, when modelling DIMEFIL/PMESII_PT domains, the researcher has to be aware of the bias introduced by the fact that especially Political and Social \u201cscience\u201d are accompanied and built around value judgement. From this perspective, the models proposed by Cayirci, Bruzzone, Guinnarson (2016) and by Balaban & Mileniczek (2018) are indeed a courageous tentative to import, into the domain of particularly poorly understood phenomena (social, politics, and to a lesser degree economics - Hartley, 2016), the mathematical and statistical instruments and the methodologies employed by the pure, hard sciences. Nevertheless, just using the instruments and the methodology of the hard sciences it is not enough to obtain the objectivity, and is such aspect the representations of Hybrid Warfare mechanics could meet their limit: this is posed by the fact that they use, as input for the equations that represents Hybrid Warfare, not physical data observed during a scientific experiment, but rather observation of the reality that assumes implicitly and explicitly a value judgment, which could lead to a biased output. Such value judgement it is subjective, and not objective like the mathematical and physical sciences; when this is not well understood and managed by the academic and the researcher, it can introduce distortions - which are unacceptable for the purpose of the Science - which could be used as well to enforce a narrative mainstream that contains a so called \u201ctruth\u201d, which lies inside the boundary of politics rather than Science. Those observations around subjectivity of social sciences vs objectivity of pure sciences, being nothing new, suggest however the need to examine the problem under a new perspective, less philosophical and more leaned toward the practical application. The suggestion that the author want make here is that the Verification and Validation process, in particular the methodology used by Professor Bruzzone in doing V&V for SIMCJOH (2016) and the one described in the Modelling & Simulation User Risk Methodology (MURM) developed by Pandolfini, Youngblood et all (2018), could be applied to evaluate if there is a bias and the extent of the it, or at least making clear the value judgment adopted in developing the DIMEFIL/PMESII_PT models. Such V&V research is however outside the scope of the present work, even though it is an offspring of it, and for such reason the author would like to make further inquiries on this particular subject in the future. Then, the theoretical discourse around Hybrid Warfare has been completed addressing the need to establish a new discipline, Strategic Engineering, very much necessary because of the current a political and economic environment which allocates diminishing resources to Defense and Homeland Security (at least in Europe). However, Strategic Engineering can successfully address its challenges when coupled with the understanding and the management of the fourth dimension of military and hybrid operations, Time. For the reasons above, and as elaborated by Leonhard and extensively discussed in the present work, addressing the concern posed by Time dimension is necessary for the success of any military or Hybrid confrontation. The SIMCJOH project, examined under the above perspective, proved that the simulator has the ability to address the fourth dimension of military and non-military confrontation. In operations, Time is the most critical factor during execution, and this was successfully transferred inside the simulator; as such, SIMCJOH can be viewed as a training tool and as well a dynamic generator of events for the MEL/MIL execution during any exercise. In conclusion, SIMCJOH Project successfully faces new challenging aspects, allowed to study and develop new simulation models in order to support decision makers, Commanders and their Staff. Finally, the question posed by Leonhard in terms of recognition of the importance of time management of military operations - nowadays Hybrid Conflict - has not been answered yet; however, the author believes that Modelling and Simulation tools and techniques can represent the safe \u201ctank\u201d where innovative and advanced scientific solutions can be tested, exploiting the advantage of doing it in a synthetic environment

Long Term Changes in Voting Power and Control Structure following the Unification of Dual Class Shares

We follow the evolution of ownership structure in a sample of 80 Israeli companies that unified their dual-class shares in the 1990s, and compare it with a control sample of firms that maintained their dual share structure at least until 2000. Our main findings are as follows. First, controlling shareholders offset the dilution of voting rights they incurred upon unification by: 1) increasing their holdings prior to the unification (ex-ante preparation), and 2) by buying shares afterwards; by the end of the sample period their voting power was only marginally lower than in the control sample. This suggests that marginal voting rights are important to controlling shareholders even beyond the 50% threshold. Second, share unifications were not associated with much change in the identity of controlling shareholders. Third, the proportion of firms affiliated with pyramidal business groups in the sample of unifying firms was lower than in the population of listed firms as a whole and not different from that in the control sample, suggesting that pyramidal ownership structures did not replace dual class shares. Finally, unifying firms did not exhibit a substantial improvement in their performance and valuation in comparison with the control sample. We conclude that the regulatory attempt to enforce one share-one vote yielded, at best, a minor improvement in corporate governance.Dual class shares, corporate governance

Human Cultures through the Scientific Lens

"This volume brings together a collection of seven articles previously published by the author, with a new introduction reframing the articles in the context of past and present questions in anthropology, psychology and human evolution. It promotes the perspective of ‘integrated’ social science, in which social science questions are addressed in a deliberately eclectic manner, combining results and models from evolutionary biology, experimental psychology, economics, anthropology and history. It thus constitutes a welcome contribution to a gradually emerging approach to social science based on E. O. Wilson’s concept of ‘consilience’. Human Cultures through the Scientific Lens spans a wide range of topics, from an examination of ritual behaviour, integrating neuro-science, ethology and anthropology to explain why humans engage in ritual actions (both cultural and individual), to the motivation of conflicts between groups. As such, the collection gives readers a comprehensive and accessible introduction to the applications of an evolutionary paradigm in the social sciences. This volume will be a useful resource for scholars and students in the social sciences (particularly psychology, anthropology, evolutionary biology and the political sciences), as well as a general readership interested in the social sciences.

Who Decides on Public Expenditures? A Political Economy Analysis of the Budget Process: The Case of Argentina

The budget process is increasingly considered key for reform efforts to improve fiscal outcomes. In this paper we embark on a political economy analysis of the budget process in Argentina, in the spirit of the IDB project “Political Institutions, Policymaking Processes and Policy Outcomes” in order to understand who determines budget outcomes in Argentina. In particular, we seek to characterize the institutional framework that regulates the budget preparation, approval, implementation and control. Furthermore, we identify which actors are involved both formally and informally in the process at each stage, and seek to understand their incentives and interactions. We find that the President has a de facto role that is much more powerful than what the laws and institutions of the budget process stipulate. However, the rigidity of the budget process, together with other constraints such as macroeconomic shocks, fiscal rules, agreements with International Financial Institutions (IFIs) and the influence of other actors such as governors, legislators and lobbies - have limited the ability of the Executive to substantially modify the budget process. Furthermore, compared with the period of high inflation of 1983-1991, in the past decade we have witnessed dramatic improvements in the institutionalization of the budget process, both in political and administrative terms. These reforms have accompanied a strong improvement in fiscal outcomes in the 1990s compared with the 1980s, and provided some of the tools necessary to limit the depth of the recent crisis and regain macroeconomic stability.

The role of fiscal rules and institutions in shaping budgetary outcomes

The Workshop "The role of fiscal rules and institutions in shaping budgetary outcomes" organized by the Directorate-General for Economic and Financial affairs of the European Commission on 24 November 2006 in Brussels aimed at enriching the debate on the fiscal arrangements and improving the understanding of their functioning. This Economic Paper contains all the paper presented in this event that was organised in four sessions. A first set of papers mainly focus on the impact of numerical fiscal rules on budgetary outturns. Other paper deal primarily with the appropriate design of fiscal rules and institutions. An additional group of papers addresses the relationship between the fiscal governance approach adopted by the EU Member States and their institutional and political frameworks. Finally the remaining presentations relate more directly to policy experiences. fiscal rules, budget, institutions.fiscal rules, budget, institutions, Ayuso-i-Casals, Deroose, Flores, Moulin

'Agrarwende' : cognitive-normative approaches to policy change in German agro-biotechnology

In the year 2000, Germany's biggest post-war food crisis, BSE, changed the terms of the public debate on agro-biotech significantly. Before the BSE-crisis, Germany's policy had been predominantly driven by a neo-liberal framing of biotechnology as a central tool for innovation and international competitiveness. After BSE, biotechnology policy became caught up in a broader reform effort to change agricultural and food policies - the ''Agrarwende''. This thesis concerns the question of the policy shift in agricultural biotechnology as it developed in Germany between the years 2000 and 2004 as a result of the Agrarwende. It analyzes why the BSE crisis had an effect on the German agrobiotech subsystem, how it affected regulation and to what extent it led to the . institutionalization of new types of socio-political practices and relationships. To fulfill this purpose the thesis uses cognitive-normative frameworks, in particular Maarten Hajer's discourse analytical framework and Paul Sabatier's advocacy coalition framework. By looking at the German case of agro-biotech regulation the thesis asks, how can policy change be explained and illuminated by the use of these two theories? What are their relative or different contributions to the study of policy change? Are these approaches contradictory or complementary? It can be concluded that, over the years, a great deal has changed in German agricultural biotechnology policy with regard to legislation, the political institutions and the actors involved in the subsystem. The cognitive normative frameworks applied both contributed to a better understanding of the policy process and policy change. In the analysis, Hajer's concepts were found to have more strengths and fewer weaknesses than Sabatier's. Being rooted in different theory traditions, the two approaches showed contradictory as well as complementary features. There was, in any case, much to be gained from looking at the interaction between discourse and belief dynamics

Task Force on Political Science, Electoral Rules, and Democratic Governance

Electoral rules help to make democracy work. Small variations in them influence the type of democracy that develops. The field of political science has defined the study of why and how this happens. Political scientists have contributed to the world of electoral systems as scientists and as engineers. Taking stock of recent scientific research, this report shows that context modifies the effects of electoral rules on political outcomes in specific and systematic ways. It explores how electoral rules shape party systems, the inclusion of women and minorities, the depth and nature of political competition, and patterns of redistribution and regulation. It considers institutional innovations that could promote political equality. Finally, the report describes the diverse ways that political scientists are producing an impact on the world by sharing and applying their knowledge of the consequences of electoral rules and global trends in reform

Voice and silence in public debate: Modelling and observing collective opinion expression online

This thesis investigates how group-level differences in willingness of opinion expression shape the extent to which certain standpoints are visible in public debate online. Against the backdrop of facilitated communication and connection to like-minded others through digital technologies, models and methods are developed and case studies are carried out – by and large from a network perspective. To this end, we first propose a model of opinion dynamics that examines social- structural conditions for public opinion expression or even predominance of different groups. The model focuses not on opinion change, but on the decision of individuals whether to express their opinion publicly or not. Groups of agents with different, fixed opinions interact with each other, changing the willingness to express their opinion according to the feedback they receive from others. We formulate the model as a multi-group game, and subsequently provide a dynamical systems perspective by introducing reinforcement learning dynamics. We show that a minority can dominate public discourse if its internal connections are sufficiently dense. Moreover, increased costs for opinion expression can drive even internally well-connected groups into silence. We then focus on how interaction networks can be used to infer political and social positions. For this purpose, we develop a new type of force-directed network layout algorithm. While being widely used, a rigorous interpretation of the outcomes of existing force-directed algorithms has not been provided yet. We argue that interpretability can be delivered by latent space approaches, which have the goal of embedding a network in an underlying social space. On the basis of such a latent space model, we derive a force-directed layout algorithm that can not only be used for the spatialisation of generic network data – exemplified by Twitter follower and retweet networks, as well as Facebook friendship networks – but also for the visualization of surveys. Comparison to existing layout algorithms (which are not grounded in an interpretable model) reveals that node groups are placed in similar configurations, while said algorithms show a stronger intra-cluster separation of nodes, as well as a tendency to separate clusters more strongly in retweet networks. In two case studies, we observe actual public debate on the social media platform Twitter – topics are the Saxon state elections 2019, and violent riots in the city of Leipzig on New Year’s Eve in the same year. We show that through the interplay of retweet and reply networks, it is possible to identify differences in willingness of opinion expression on the platform between opinion groups. We find that for both events, propensities to get involved in debate are asymmetric. Users retweeting far-right parties and politicians are significantly more active, making their positions disproportionately visible. Said users also act significantly more confrontational in the sense that they reply mostly to users from different groups, while the contrary is not the case. The findings underline that naive reliance on what others express online can be collectively dangerous, especially in an era in which social media shapes public discourse to an unprecedented extent

Diplomacy as Pedagogy, Pedagogy as Diplomacy: Diplomatic Simulations, Constructivism, and the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda

Diplomatic simulations, or simulations of international or regional organizations (i.e. Model United Nations), present great opportunities that extend beyond the pedagogical value suggested by limited literature. Operationalizing constructivism as both a pedagogical and international relations theory illuminates the implications of diplomatic simulations on participants, diplomacy, and multidisciplinary research. To accomplish this, this exploratory study first performs a thorough literature review to synthesize relevant works. An exploratory content analysis is then employed on documents in a Model United Nations simulation to investigate its utility in accomplishing the United Nations’ 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, particularly Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4: Quality Education. Findings suggest that while diplomatic simulations develop skills and knowledge of international relations, they also impact actual diplomacy by disrupting ethnocentrism, exporting political agents, and norm diffusion. Diplomatic simulations can also be used as nontraditional data sources and research methods, providing a unique solution to resource-constrained research endeavors