1. Break-Out Scenario Proposition Marcus Franzen

2. Purpose 3-day Strategic implications have unpredictable, immediate and long-term effects. Make better leaders through scenario driven events that leaders can fall back on if ever placed within a real-word experience.

3. Scenario (Act 1) UN and NATO have combined to create a special committee and are having a special meeting to discuss with international leaders how actions of the Caucasus Region state leaders affect the international community. The recent actions of the regional states have created an instable regional political environment and downtrodden corporate economic benefits. States must announce non-secretive/open communications must to lift them out of this long-term crisis to affect regional stability and economic growth for better standing with NATO, UN, and the international Community. Using Regional and Strategic assessments, each state will brief this special committee on their way forward.

4. Scenario (Act 2) The environment will fast-forward 6 months to a year and the white cell will present a new scenario based off our monkey wrench and the participants way forward. Using Updated Regional and Strategic assessments, each state will brief this special committee on their adjusted way forward.

5. Scenario (Act 3) The environment will fast-forward 6 months to a year and the white cell will present a new scenario based off the participants way forward. (end of training) Conduct AAR to show how we must incorporate our thoughts into the Civil-Military Arena

6. Generic Timeline DAY 1: – Intro and Breakdown into player roles – Overview of read-ahead Packet – States work on way ahead Day 2: – States brief way ahead Immediate feedback from international community – Break – ACT 2 – Monkey wrench given to participants while we fully evaluate implications of the states way ahead – States re-evaluate way ahead after receiving updated packet Day 3: – States brief adjusted way ahead Immediate feedback from international community – Break – ACT 3 – States work on their portion of AAR while we fully evaluate implications of the states adjusted way ahead – States submit AAR (3 good/3 Bad) – AAR, distribute AAR to participants and evaluators and dismissal

7. Teams: – Committee (class members) Committee Chair International committee (# vary) Secretary/recorder (x 2) – Advisors to the states (class members) – States (Participants) NATO and/or UN Diplomat (can be split if enough people) Leader of the state Minister of State (Secretary of State equivalent) Minister of Defense (Secretary of Defense equivalent) Auxiliary Cabinet/Ministry members Players (50 people) – Break-out class (20) – Participants (30) Rest of JSOMA Various atendees States – Georgia – Russia – Azerbaijan – Armenia – Iran – US – Turkey

8. Deliverables for elective – Read ahead packet Regional assessments Strategic assessments Way Forward Shell Scenario – Updated Scenario Evaluated Way Forward Catastrophic/cataclysmic monkey- wrench (e.g. Turkey affects region by immediate Civil War/Government overthrown) – Evaluated Adjusted Way forward – AAR Deliverables for participants – Way Forward ( 1 slide MIN to distribute, 3 slides MAX) – Adjusted Way forward – 3 good/3 bad for AAR Can move to a SOF flavor scenario instead of a diplomatic/state run scenario. Lead through the military if we use influence of Kurdish people from “Kurdistan”