Wavell Room Audio Reads Wavell Room

Over the past two decades, enhancing human performance capabilities for those operating in extremis contexts (i.e., Armed Forces, Emergency Services, and First Responders) has gained considerable traction in policy-making and scientific circles.
To operationalise this concept, the term Human Performance Optimisation (HPO) first emerged within the US Department of Defence (DoD) in 2006 as a conceptual framework to develop the performance capabilities of the military's most important asset - its people.1 Military tasks, by their very nature, place unique and intense physiological, psychological, and cognitive demands upon all Warfighters.
In addition, the contemporary operational environment is arguably more volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) than ever before2.
Indeed, the return of peer-on-peer conflict and the emergence of unconventional, asymmetric, and hybrid threats, combined with the scale and speed of technological change, has, and will, continue to make conflict a challenging and ever-evolving affair contested not only in the land, air, and maritime environments but also in the electromagnetic, cyber and space domains.3However, it is essential to note that while the character of conflict may change, its fundamental nature remains the same: it
is a human endeavour that is adversarial, dynamic, complex, and lethal.4
Given this reality, it is vital that every Warfighter, irrespective of gender, age, rank, or trade, is prepared for the demands of the contemporary operational environment. The importance of developing human performance capabilities for such demands was succinctly put by US Army Colonel (ret.) John Collins who stated that "Humans are more important than hardware, and their quality is more important than their quantities".
This point was again highlighted more recently by the British Army Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Patrick Saunders, who stated that "We need 'warfighters' - whether they are cyber specialists, drone pilots or infantry soldiers - to be stronger, faster, more intelligent and more resilient." To achieve this laudable objective, the Armed Forces must develop appropriate training strategies to enable military personnel to perform to their full potential.
Indeed, lessons learned over the past two decades have been internalised, resulting in a considerable improvement in the training, competence, motivation, and overall combat effectiveness of the Warfighter.5HPO represents part of this evolution and has been defined in the literature as "the process of applying knowledge, skills, and emerging technologies to improve and preserve the capabilities of military personnel to execute essential tasks".
Fundamentally, HPO aims to leverage evidence-based information and best practices to make the Warfighter as resilient, capable, agile, and lethal as possible.6 In addition, due to a reduced size and budget, the Armed Forces cannot afford large numbers of non-deployable personnel. Therefore, a secondary aim of HPO is to improve individual career longevity and reduce injury rates.
It is Nothing New
Preparing the Warfighter for success on the battlefield is nothing new. Indeed, numerous historical examples of military leadership emphasise the same ideas promoted within this article. However, our collective understanding of the optimal approach to achieve this aim has improved considerably, driven by developments in applied sports science, physiology, psychology, and cognitive neuroscience. To conceptualise HPO, the Warfighter should be viewed as a human platform.
This approach allows for the routine monitoring, analysis, and development of critical human performance capabilities no different from traditional military platforms (i.e., weapon systems, vehicles, or ISTAR assets). However, to adopt such an approach, it is essential to define critical aspects of human performance.
This typically is done using the Biopsychosocial model whereby human performance capabilities are split into

"I don't want to get any messages saying, 'I am holding my position.' We are not holding a Goddamned thing. Let the Germans do that. We are advancing constantly and we are not interested in holding onto anything, except the enemy's balls. We are going to twist his balls and kick the living shit out of him all of the time."
General George S Patton, June 1944
The debt owed to those who liberated Western Europe from Nazi oppression will underpin the D-Day 80 Commemorations. Although D-Day was essential to victory in Europe, it was not an end in itself. Study of the wider war to liberate Northwest Europe places D-Day in context and helps the military professional understand the link between the operational and strategic levels of war.
One method of undertaking this study is through educational wargaming which enables learning through active participation, rather than passive receipt of information. This short read, part three of three of this mini-series, will outline how this learning experience can be achieved through use of a COTS wargame.
Success on D-Day allowed the Allies to secure a firm bridgehead. The resulting campaign was a brutal attritional struggle that led to the destruction of German forces in Normandy and a dramatic breakout across France. Subsequent attempts for a quick advance into Germany failed in the face of logistical constraints and German resistance - most notably at Arnhem in September 1944. A German winter counter-offensive in the Ardennes followed and achieved surprise but was subsequently defeated.
In Spring 1945 a deliberate Allied offensive breached the German defences, crossed the Rhine and the German Army surrender in May 1945. How did the Allies win? Interactive study using the wargame 1944: D-Day To The Rhine offers the military professional the opportunity to answer this question.
The map for 1944: D-Day To The Rhine extends from the French Atlantic coast to Western Germany. Units are armies or corps and turns represent a month. Set-up shows how the Germans attempted to defend the region. The Allies are not committed to invading Normandy. Other options are available but come with commensurate variations in air support and German responsiveness.
The Allied invasion will almost certainly succeed. This illustrates the immense and wide-ranging preparatory effort the Allies devoted to ensuring success. A subsequent breakout can be more problematic and will reflect player decision making. The Allied invasion of southern France - Op DRAGOON - opens up a new area of operation to the south of the game map.
Ends, Ways and Means
Balancing "Ends, Ways and Means" are integral to success and reflect the game's strategic level focus. Allied victory is determined by the "End" chosen. These range from the swift capture of Berlin through to securing Western Germany and isolation of the industrial Rhur region. In this way the game confronts the player with the historical choices the Allies faced. Central to the representation of "Means", is the use of resource points. These provide replacements and enable movement and combat.
A fixed amount is given each turn, mirroring the capacity of the invasion beaches. German occupied ports can be captured to increase this amount. The Allied player faces a decision on whether success can be achieved with the fixed capacity available, or if resources must be invested to first liberate ports and increase resources.
The game models "Ways" through the use of resource points for movement and combat. Units can move and fight in any order and this forces the player to think about sequencing of operations.
The overall effect of these game mechanisms forces the player to confront the tensions inherent in balancing "Ends, Ways and Means." Thus the player gains some experiential insight into the historical situation, such as the prioritisation of Op MARKET-GARDEN over clearance of the Scheldt estuary, which occurred in September 1944.
Chance
The "chance" inherent in the nature of war

The rise of China and the security dilemma that it presents is viewed as inevitable by significant sections of the UK policy community. Central to this is China's strong economic base, which has generated the diplomatic, informational, military and economic levers necessary for it to challenge the US-led 'rules-based' order designed to perpetuate Western power post-World War Two.
However, while China is a formidable adversary and should not be underestimated, we should not be blind to the weaknesses in China's economic structure and risk overestimating its strengths and constraining ourselves conceptually. In particular, we should be cautious in using gross indicators to calculate relative power and economic growth, as in isolation these approaches can be misleading.
This article compares competing methods of measuring power, before examining that while China is likely to overtake the US in terms of gross real GDP, this is not an effective metric for assessing relative power when used in isolation.
Despite economic headwinds, China will still overtake the US in terms of real GDP
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is the market value of all "final goods and services produced in a specific period" in a country. Real GDP accounts for price inflation against the GDP of a chosen base year, therefore only rising output increases GDP, not inflation. This metric of real GDP benefits from being the most commonly used indicator of an economy's overall size, growth and general health, meaning that there is significantly more data available for comparative analysis.
Although China has significant demographic, capital and productivity challenges, this is unlikely to prevent China from overtaking the US in real GDP. China has capitalised upon lower relative wage costs due to its large population, a central driver of its economic growth over the last 50 years.
The 1978 economic reforms permitted private businesses while liberalising foreign trade and investment, since which China has experienced enormous economic growth, even compared to other rapidly growing "Asian Tiger" economies. From 1978 to the onset of the 2008 global financial crisis, China's real GDP grew by a factor of 17.
The 2008 crisis reduced this breakneck growth, with China's annual real GDP growth between 2015 and 2018 falling below 7% for the first time since 1991. This was compounded by further shocks from the recent Covid pandemic and the CCP's "zero Covid" policy. Chinese policy post-2008 has increasingly relied upon state investment, improving technology and expanding domestic consumption of finished products.
This transition from the previous export economic focus is assessed to be "hedging" against reduced exports due to increasing competition and international pressures such as tariffs. Nonetheless, China's real GDP should still increase 5.7% annually to 2025 and 4.7% annually until 2030, according to Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) forecasts.
Although there are reasons to doubt these figures - including the provision of misleading data by the Chinese state, and upcoming shocks such as increased nearshoring of supply chains and property market debt bubbles - the overall trend is clear. Chinese real GDP is on course to overtake the US by 2030.
How can power be measured between states?
There are three main approaches to measuring power in international relations; control over actors, control over outcomes and control over resources. In the case of control over actors, power is usually defined as an actor's ability to shape world politics following its interests.
However, Nye argues that it is impossible to measure this ability systematically because it would require a comprehensive understanding of each actor's influence and interest over a potentially infinite number of events. This means that the power over outcomes approach is issue-specific, with analysis not often transferable to other situations.
Therefore, it is only useful for retrospective analy

What is the military recruitment dilemma?
Military recruitment is problematic. And a key issue is that people who get paid good money can't solve it. So after six months of analysing YouTube, Facebook, Linkedin, X, Instagram, and yes, even TikTok comments - perhaps I can. The military recruitment ideas below are not meant to be taken in isolation, and most, if not all of them can be done together.
If any Members of Parliament or the General Staff are reading this, please feel free to help yourselves, I know that your idea buckets must be completely barren now.
1. The Infant-Infantry
Very few militaries on the planet consider children to be the solution to their needs, but very few countries are mentally agile or brave enough to survive the modern world. The British military, however, knows that an SA80 in the hands of a 14-year-old Glaswegian is just as deadly as an AK-47 in the hands of any rascally Russian Vatnik.
From the trenches of Ypres, the decks of the imperial navies, the streets of Kampala and the Killing Fields of Cambodia - children have been an effective part of militaries. Some as young as nine have proven that they can carry ammunition, fit into tunnel systems and the mechanisms of aircraft, artillery and tanks, and in a pinch, they can step into any SO1 role with relative ease.
Because the minimum wage is so low for younger people, this could also be a very cost-effective measure. The UK could easily raise a battalion of these "ten-pound Privates" for about half the cost of a regular one. This solution is also popular with many overworked teachers, who pity those kids clogging up overcrowded classrooms and enduring worthless education. Their hearts desire Call of Duty, Fortnite, the open sea, sky, and glory in battle - not GCSEs!
2. The British Commonwealth Legion
The Enlistment of Foreigners Act 1854 gave the country the power it needed before, and by Jove, Parliament can honour us again. Whilst the concept may be a copy of the French Foreign Legion, just like the class system of the Normans, if it's good enough for the French, it's good enough for us.
The UK already has a long history of Commonwealth and Sepoy armies, and we used international units before to great effect (e.g. No.10 (Inter-Allied) Commando unit in WWII). This system will yield significant numbers, and such great savings, that it can't be passed up. Anyone who's served on Herrick operations knows we could've solved the whole thing in a year for a tenth of the price if only we had a Corps of Gurkhas.
Commonwealth soldiers have been fantastic, but we should open their opportunity to the whole world. Fitness and aptitude assessments, as well as English literacy testing, will be done overseas, and successful applicants will be given a one-way plane ticket and a space in basic training, after which they will fill one of the many empty bedspaces found all over the forces.
They will serve a four-year minimum contract, then with one or two lucky family members (we'll work out the details later) they'll have earned their place in the country. They can continue to serve in the forces or head into the green and pleasant land as a full UK citizen and resident.
3. National Service+
This one is a favourite of the older generation, and for good reason. Wimpy young adults won't be making cringe videos on TikTok when they are getting thrashed up and down Mt Tumbledown and sweeping pinecones outside the Commanding Officer's office.
Youths fighting outside Argos in Kilburn should be fighting international terrorists or the Americans outside the chow hall in Camp Lemonnier! And if they like choreographed dance instead, what better place than as the rear marker on the parade square of Horse Guards?
There won't be a piece of brass unpolished as everyone between the ranks of Corporal and Warrant Officer Class 2 is given a five-person work party, and every Officer rank is issued a batsman and a personal assistant. Watch as productivity doubles, triples, and quadr

There are not more than five primary colors…
yet in combination they produce more hues than can ever be seen.
~ Sun Tzu
With the first week of April 2024 being Autism Acceptance Week, this article aims to highlight the presence of autistic soldiers in the army and the benefits of-and challenges in-embracing neuroinclusivity.
There was a whopping 787% rise1 in the number of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) diagnoses in the UK between 1998 and 2018. The condition itself is not on the rise. It is, instead, increasingly understood, recognised, and then diagnosed. A key contributor to identifying autism is that every one of the 570,000 educators2 across the 29,000 schools in the country have been asked to take on a mindset that all teachers are a teacher of Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND).3
Because of the wholesale uptick of knowledge around autism, an awakening has been unfolding. A highly common theme begins as a parent's quest to understand their child's atypical behaviours soon reveals a startling revelation: many of these parents share a unique bond with said child. Prompted by the child's seemingly inexplicable behaviours in their early years, and flagged by attentive educators, families embark on an exploration of the condition and onto a seismic path of self-discovery.
This sheds light on thousands of individuals who had long-grappled with unexplained nuances in their own lives; huge numbers4 of UK adults are realising that they, too, are autistic.
Evolving diagnostic criteria, increased awareness, and improved access to diagnostic services have resulted in a late-diagnosis phenomenon and a sweeping tide of awareness cascading across the country, and indeed around the world. As individuals grapple with this newfound understanding, society is witnessing a profound shift in perception, empathy, and solidarity among people navigating the complexities of being neurodivergent.
Soldiers on the Spectrum
While this article focuses specifically on autism for Autism Acceptance Week, there are a plethora of other conditions placing neurominorities among our ranks.5
The next time your Unit is on a CO's parade, three ranks in a hollow square, look left and right. It is likely that you will be stood amongst neurominorities, and a small number of those will be diagnosed or undiagnosed autistic soldiers. Autistic soldiers are serving throughout the organisation and scattered across the ranks. I know this because I am one.
A request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 also shows us that, as at February 2023, over four hundred MOD personnel were autistic.6 And since researchers estimate that there are more undiagnosed autistic people in the UK than there are diagnosed,7 it goes then that there are many serving soldiers out there grappling with the condition unbeknownst to them. I write with much conviction: the number of already serving late-diagnosed autistic personnel is certain to rise.
Recognising this inevitable trend, it is important for leaders to:
Gain an understanding of the unique experiences and perspectives that autism brings,
be sensitive to the challenges that autistic people face,
and foster a culture of complete acceptance in your workplace for people who think and experience the world differently.
With a wealth of emerging content out there on what autism is, I highly recommend grabbing a brew and doing an online search or AI GPT prompt on common autism myths. This is a valuable way of encouraging meaningful and progressive discourse in your workplace since myths around autism range from dismissive to dangerous. For instance, you might like to have a go at starting a conversation around whether or not 'everybody is somewhere on the spectrum'. Ask if there is truth in this statement.
Ask why people so readily believe it. Ask what the real-life implications may be for autistic people if this belief remains as pervasive as it is now. If you read that statement and instantly dismissed it

In light of a number of somewhat braying articles1 in the mainstream media suggesting excessive 'wokeism' is rife within the military, it seemed an opportune moment to investigate many of the claims of Defence surrounding the topic of Diversity and Inclusion.
By and large, there are now two common uses of the term 'diversity':
The first, more traditional usage is an indication of variety, used such as when highlighting the unrivalled diversity of life within the Amazon rainforest, or the splendid diversity of Heinz' current soup range.
The second, social definition, employed more formally by Defence within this context, refers to an action, being "the recognition of differences between individuals or groups".
In relation to this latter definition, a second element is attached, that of 'inclusion', which the organisation characterises as "the effect of good diversity management ensuring that all individuals, no matter what their unique differences feel they belong [and are therein able to contribute effectively] to the wider team." A prudent step, given that recognition alone without action would amount to no change.
Combined, Diversity and Inclusion within this context therefore seek to optimise the relationships (through inclusion) between all the members of the force, based off understanding and acknowledgement of each individual's identified differences (Diversity). In this sense, diversity is seen as a start state, and inclusion a vehicle of action by which to optimise it.
Challenges?
This dual meaning of the word presents challenges when discussing diversity, as the two meanings are frequently conflated, or employed as if synonymous, which they are clearly not. For the sake of clarity this article almost exclusively refers to diversity in the traditional sense, referring to the prevalence of numerous assorted entities.
The 'Defence Diversity & Inclusion Vision' sees "Defence harness[ing] the power of difference to deliver capability that safeguards our nation…". In so doing Defence relies upon variation to exploit a fundamental assumption: that 'difference' (traditional diversity) is 'powerful' (beneficial).
This assumption is frequently rolled out within the often-used sentiment, or indeed statement, that 'diverse teams produce better results', that 'diversity and Inclusion are operationally essential', or any of the other combinations of similar words to the same effect.
The benefits of diversity
This article investigates the veracity of that assumption, finding, as one might expect, that 'it's a bit more complicated than that', and that actually, poorly managed diversity can be a net negative. In so doing, a large number of academic studies have been interrogated to form this image, spanning numerous categories of diversity, including race, sex, ability, age, culture, cognition, education and nationality.
In making a generalised and reductive summary the author acknowledges that some nuance between specific groups will inevitably be lost, however has endeavoured to summarise the literature fairly thus:
There are many, many benefits of diversity within teams, but also numerous downsides that should not be ignored.2 Most significantly, diverse teams typically3 outperform homogenous groups in finding optimal solutions to complex problems, especially those that require creative or innovative solutions.4 Whilst this sounds ideal, you still have to pay the piper somewhere, and the compromise is that the more diverse a team, the less effectively it communicates.
Finding the 'sweet spot' can be challenging.5 Extremely diverse teams, being less cohesive and less coherent, are harder to control, and often take longer conducting both complex and simple tasks as a result. This all makes pretty logical sense, as people with increasingly different perspectives may proportionally struggle to understand each other.
By contrast, homogenous teams are generally much more effective at completing simple tasks or those with a clear, di