Download
Download eBook for Free
| Format | File Size | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| PDF file | 1.9 MB | Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience. |
Purchase
Purchase Print Copy
| Format | List Price | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Add to Cart | Paperback54 pages | $23.00 | $18.40 20% Web Discount |
An important objective of the Conventional Forces Europe negotiations is achieving a stable military balance at equal, relatively low, force levels. This Note describes simulation and gaming experiments that were part of a larger policy analysis identifying important variables affecting stability in NATO's Central Region in such a regime. Experiments focused primarily on theater parity at levels ranging from 45 to 18 equivalent divisions (EDs), despite negotiated parity in some Atlantic-to-the-Urals aggregate. Overall, it was difficult for the Pact to do well at theater parity in the range of 45-27 EDs. As force levels dropped, however, outcomes became increasingly sensitive to assumptions, particularly those regarding tactical prowess (intelligence, timeliness, mobility, etc.). This suggests that such factors may merit greater emphasis when planning for a low-force-level environment.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Note series. The note was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1979 to 1993 that reported other outputs of sponsored research for general distribution.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.