When the world's at stake,
go beyond the headlines.

The U.S. military is going through its “reps and sets” via training, exercises, and wargames to make sure it is ready for a major war. The defense industrial base is only just getting started on serious wargaming, and that needs to accelerate.

Soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and guardians will need a durable industry — defense and otherwise — that can stay in the fight, especially a fight involving China, because it would likely be protracted and costly. The COVID-19 pandemic showed how easily commercial supply chains falter under stress, a problem that will be far worse in wartime.

Testing industry through different types of wargames, involving both military personnel and representatives from industry, is critical. These should simulate complex military scenarios and their commercial dimensions, forcing collaborative problem-solving. They should use real data that reflects the real capacities of different companies and their supply chains. Failing to address policy constraints, supply chain bottlenecks, and competing military and civilian needs before a conflict arises will leave American forces unprepared, especially against a major adversary like China.

Wargaming is vital because it realistically tests the resilience of the defense industrial base by forcing participants to counter deliberate, adversarial actions in a dynamic environment. For example, a scenario might involve a Chinese team conducting coordinated missile strikes against critical manufacturing plants and logistics hubs, severely degrading the production and delivery of advanced fighter aircraft or missiles. Alternatively, a Russian player could deploy cyber operations specifically designed to disable manufacturing lines at major defense contractors, creating sudden shortages of essential military equipment. Another scenario could feature an adversary leveraging diplomatic and economic pressure to convince neutral countries — such as Switzerland, Brazil, South Africa, or Singapore — to embargo the export of raw materials or critical technologies essential for the U.S. defense industrial base. By directly incorporating active opposition into gameplay, wargames will allow defense industrial executives to rigorously explore how adversarial disruption will impact their ability to function and make decisions during wartime. These games can also put them in the position of the adversary, compelling players to creatively identify vulnerabilities and exploit weaknesses in the defense industrial base, thereby fostering a deeper understanding of strategic risks and necessary protective measures.

The government should integrate industry engagement in wargaming in three ways. First, industry partners should contribute their expertise during the planning phase. Leaders and experts from prime vendors and non-traditional companies ought to contribute to these endeavors. Not enough defense planners and military leaders have sufficient knowledge of market economies and specific industrial capabilities. Incorporating industry insights into capabilities, dependencies, and scalability from the start will make the wargames more realistic and useful. Mixing the expertise from prime vendors who have worked with the Defense Department for decades with start-ups that have new technology and ideas, will generate a more diverse pool of solutions and concepts. Companies all along the spectrum, from big to small, and traditional to non-traditional, sharing information and perspectives with government planners, wargame designers, and military leaders, would ensure they are all partners in the process.

Second, industry should send their executives with experts who have deep and relevant knowledge to participate directly throughout exercises. I have observed wargames hindered by the absence of appropriate industry expertise. Consistent participation by knowledgeable stakeholders enables better problem-solving. In order to solve problems, relevant stakeholders have to be involved. To be sure, industry leaders will bring their own biases into the room. Many will be going to be incentivized to portray certain information that can ultimately help them gain more business. But players always bring their own biases into the room. And by including as many companies of different types as possible in the room, the Defense Department will hear from many different types of industry voices and perspectives, mitigating this problem.

Third, industry should help develop actionable solutions after the wargame. Often, wargames identify problems without producing clear solutions. Industry partners, viewing supply chains and industrial capacity differently than government agencies, can offer unique, practical recommendations. On one occasion, an industry participant proactively provided a document with valuable solutions drawn from his expertise, significantly aiding final reports. Leveraging industry’s vast expertise is crucial for developing effective strategies. And these future wargames need to connect solutions to tangible outcomes that are shareable with all government agencies and industrial partners.

Collaborative wargaming between government and the defense industry is essential. By jointly exercising scenarios focused on industrial base capacity, both sides can understand requirements, identify deficiencies — in commodities, plans, policies, or materials — and develop solutions before a crisis. Section 859 of the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act called for “a demonstration exercise of industrial mobilization and supply chain management planning capabilities in support of one or more operational or contingency plan use cases.” The first tabletop exercise held in response to this, which I attended in January 2025, only looked at policies between the government and industry, leaving out military roles in the scenario.

Congress should build on this in the next National Defense Authorization Act and mandate the games I describe here and also direct funding to pay prime vendor and non-traditional companies for attending. Currently, they are volunteering their time when they attend. It’s true that companies have a financial interest in engaging with their customers, including via wargames, but when companies are asked to do something over and over again without being paid, in my experience, they do not send their most experienced people for the problem set. In order to truly get after this problem, the Defense Department needs the most experienced leaders from industry at these games.

Understanding current gaps allows the nation to procure, manufacture, stockpile, or invent necessary items. The U.S. defense industry currently has untapped strength; it needs rigorous exercise through realistic wargaming to build the capacity required for the world to prevail in future conflicts. Industrial partners and stakeholders need to look closely at the U.S. economy and military decision-making process together before a near peer threatens the U.S. homeland.  Proactively looking at what the U.S. defense industrial base needs will ensure that regulating authorities and policies are developed or reconstituted to match the current global operational picture.

Sandra R. Thomas is an Army logistics officer with over 18 years of logistics experience both in the continental United States and in combat. Her expertise from her current role as the defense industrial base chief on the Joint Staff for the director of logistics has given her insight into wargaming, policy, and data analytics. She has also published in National Defense and Exceptional Release.  She was also published with a team of data analysts researching the threat of limited U.S. access to critical materials, commissioned by the Department of Homeland Security. The views expressed here are her own and do not represent those of the Joint Staff, the Department of Defense, or any part of the U.S. government.

Image: Midjourney