
Philipp Jan Schäfer
Political scientist and Co-Director of the German Wargaming Center at Helmut Schmidt University, specializing in security policy and international relations.
1
APPEARANCES
1
PODCASTS
012
DEC 30
JAN 6
JAN 13
JAN 20
JAN 27
FEB 3
FEB 10
FEB 17
FEB 24
MAR 3
MAR 10
MAR 17
MAR 24
MAR 31
APR 7
APR 14
APR 21
APR 28
MAY 5
MAY 12
MAY 19
MAY 26
JUN 2
JUN 9
JUN 16
JUN 23
JUN 30
JUL 7
JUL 14
JUL 21
JUL 28
AUG 4
AUG 11
AUG 18
AUG 25
SEP 1
SEP 8
SEP 15
SEP 22
SEP 29
OCT 6
OCT 13
OCT 20
OCT 27
NOV 3
NOV 10
NOV 17
NOV 24
DEC 1
DEC 8
DEC 15
DEC 22
DEC 29
JAN 5
JAN 12
JAN 19
JAN 26
FEB 2
FEB 9
FEB 16
FEB 23
MAR 2
MAR 9
MAR 16
MAR 23
MAR 30
APR 6
APR 13
APR 20
APR 27
MAY 4
MAY 11
MAY 18
MAY 25
JUN 1
JUN 8
JUN 15
JUN 22
JUN 29
JUL 6
JUL 13
JUL 20
JUL 27
AUG 3
AUG 10
AUG 17
AUG 24
AUG 31
SEP 7
SEP 14
SEP 21
SEP 28
Jul 22, 2026
Episode 5: Moment of Truth
34:53
35:20
35:31
35:37
36:21
36:25
36:33

Karolina DrüthenHOST
What do we do with the results? At Welt, we've turned them into this podcast, and you've hopefully so far enjoyed listening to it, but what does the research community take away from it? We put that question to our war game adjudication, our white cell, Philipp Jan Schäfer and Josef Werbovský, who run the German Wargaming Center at Helmut Schmidt University of the German Armed Forces in Hamburg.

Philipp Jan SchäferGUEST
What we primarily wanted to examine with this scenario was how decisions are made inside a simulated cabinet.

Philipp Jan SchäferGUEST
If we had tried to model everything perfectly, we would never have discovered the blind spot we found.

Philipp Jan SchäferGUEST
The real question here was: How do people respond to an escalation they didn't even recognize as an escalation because they've never seen anything like it before?

Karolina DrüthenHOST
Philipp Jan Schäfer believes this reflects a pattern that is typical of Germany

Philipp Jan SchäferGUEST
GermanyThe idea that the world should function according to rules-based order is a very German way of thinking.

Philipp Jan SchäferGUEST
We assume there are rules ideally rooted in international law, and if there aren't, we still believe we know how the other side will behave because we project our assumptions onto them.