Military Exercise

A military exercise is a scenario-driven, multi-echelon, multi-task training event in which military resources are employed to prepare forces for the conditions of combat.⁷ Exercises allow armies to train control functions, test communications, and rehearse movement and maneuver without committing to actual operations.⁷ Of the available options, live training exercises most closely replicate combat conditions and are the most effective and valuable, though they are demanding on unit and installation resources.⁷

Types and resource intensity

The United States Army recognizes fifteen foundational types of training exercise under Field Manual 7-0, Training, varying in training audience, internal or external evaluation, training environment, and resource needs.⁷ These can be grouped into categories such as live-fire exercises, command post and staff exercises, and maneuver exercises, or alternatively by similar resource intensity.⁷ Commanders manage land and range allocation, available time, fuel, and repair costs by integrating virtual, constructive, and mixed training environments into the unit training plan alongside live exercises.⁷

The least resource-intensive forms are the COMMEX, MAPEX, and TEWT, which can meet their training objectives with fewer personnel, less equipment, and less time.⁷ A COMMEX is used to employ and test communications equipment and to train commanders, staffs, and small-unit leaders in command, control, and communications procedures.⁷ A MAPEX, conducted using maps and digital displays, allows commanders and staffs to train control functions without deploying the unit; a rehearsal of concept (ROC) drill is a subcategory that synchronizes unit actions using overlays, terrain models, or sand tables.⁷ A TEWT, or tactical exercise without troops, has unit leaders and staffs work through mission requirements on actual terrain while considering potential threat actions, giving commanders an opportunity to coach subordinates on using terrain and employing combined arms assets.⁷

More demanding are the CPX, STAFFEX, STX, LFX, and FCX, which vary in complexity according to echelon, integration of combined arms, evaluation, and the use of live fire.⁷ A command post exercise (CPX) is a multi-echelon event focused on communication, command and control, and command-post procedures, conducted in garrison or in the field and often prompted by a tactical scenario and a Master Scenario Events List — a chronologically sequenced outline of the events participants must respond to.⁷ A STAFFEX may likewise be supported by a simulation, but concentrates on a unit staff and its functions and competencies.⁷ A situational training exercise (STX) is a task-based, limited exercise focused on movement and maneuver and designed to train a collective task or battle drills, while a live-fire exercise (LFX) integrates maneuver with the employment of organic and supporting weapon systems using full-caliber or subcaliber ammunition to train and evaluate a unit’s ability to coordinate multiple direct and indirect weapon systems.⁷ A fire coordination exercise (FCX) trains the integration of direct and indirect fires using a reduced force, such as a combined arms battalion fielding only command, platoon leader, and platoon sergeant vehicles alongside a mortar and scout section.⁷ The most resource-intensive forms are the field training exercise (FTX), EXEVAL, combined arms live-fire exercise (CALFEX), mission rehearsal exercise (MRE), and warfighter exercise (WFX), whose complexity grows with the number of maneuvering elements, evaluators, training objectives, and the possible inclusion of live-fire conditions.⁷

Ethical and psychological dimensions

Modern missions have introduced ethical complexities not seen in previous operations, including unconventional, asymmetric conflicts against shadowy, ill-defined enemies and morally ambiguous objectives more akin to combating organized crime than to conventional war between states.¹ Insurgents rarely wear uniforms, retreat into the safety of local populations, and may deliberately play against the ethical standards of Western societies in order to provoke disproportionate retaliation, while increased contact with local civilian populations creates additional cultural stress for service members.¹ Military ethicists have concluded that the ethical challenges of such missions are not well addressed by current military ethics educational programs.⁴ Researchers at Defence Research and Development Canada have proposed integrating scenario-based operational ethics training into high-intensity military field exercises as an adjunct to traditional instruction, arguing that it enhances both mission effectiveness and soldiers’ psychological well-being.¹⁴

Major contemporary exercises

Large multinational exercises serve both training and deterrence functions. The United States European Command’s DEFENDER series, conducted by U.S. Army Europe and Africa, comprises Saber Strike, Immediate Response, and Swift Response; DEFENDER 24 was linked to NATO’s Steadfast Defender exercise and ran from 28 March to 31 May 2024.⁷ DEFENDER 24 was the largest U.S. Army exercise in Europe, involving more than 17,000 U.S. and 23,000 multinational service members from more than 20 Allied and partner nations, among them Croatia, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.⁷ Within it, soldiers of the 2nd Cavalry Regiment conducted combat arms training during Saber Strike 24 at the Bemowo Piskie Training Area in Poland in April 2024.⁷

The U.S. Air Force conducts recurring exercises such as Red Flag-Alaska, which integrates joint and coalition forces into a realistic threat environment using the largest combat training range in the world, and Freedom Shield, during which the Seventh Air Force tested its ability to command and control airpower when its primary Air Operations Center was unavailable, dispersing personnel and capabilities across multiple locations in what is known as distributed operations.⁹ Other recent Air Force events include Operation Deterrent Viking II, an explosive ordnance disposal exercise hosted at the Baumholder Military Training Area in Germany, and Ready Tiger, designed to test airmen’s ability to rapidly deploy, sustain operations, and generate airpower in simulated austere environments.⁹

In the Indo-Pacific, the United States and the Philippines have staged the annual Balikatan exercise — “shoulder-to-shoulder” in Tagalog — for more than 20 years, during which it shifted from low-key counterterrorism training to rehearsing for a full-blown regional conflict.¹⁰ The 2026 iteration was the largest yet, featuring rocket launchers, troops, a multi-nation naval show of strength, and drone target practice against dummy unmanned aerial vehicles, and drew warnings from the Chinese government that the participating nations were “playing with fire” and that the drills were provocative and destabilizing.¹⁰

Exercises are routinely scheduled and publicized by national defense ministries: the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defence publishes weekly lists of sponsored low-flying air exercises by fast jets, rotary, and transport aircraft within the UK low flying system.¹¹

Training environments

Live exercises are increasingly supplemented by virtual and simulated environments.¹² Tactical augmented reality and virtual reality training simulate realistic combat scenarios for combat training, targeting, and decision-making, while Synthetic Training Environments use simulation technology to train entire units in complex combat environments without the risk of live operations.¹² Basic military training programs incorporate field exercises throughout: Army Basic Combat Training, a 10-week program conducted at sites such as Fort Benning, Fort Jackson, Fort Leonard Wood, and Fort Sill, places heavy focus on soldier fundamentals, combat fitness, weapons training, and field exercises.¹² Air Force Basic Military Training, a seven-and-a-half-week program at Lackland Air Force Base, features the PACER FORGE, a two-day scenario-based deployment designed to reinforce and evaluate trainee skills, alongside “gas chamber” training for operating in a chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear contaminated environment.¹² Marine Corps Basic Recruit Training culminates in “The Crucible,” a 54-hour endurance test, and Navy Boot Camp ends with Battle Stations, an intense evaluation of how recruits react to a variety of naval scenarios.¹²