One of the core concepts behind Krav Maga is that of keeping solutions/techniques simple. Another of Krav Maga’s concepts demonstrates this in action i.e., if an attack is life threatening, attack the “attack”, if the attack is non-life threatening, attack the attacker e.g., if you are being choked or strangled clear the choke/strangle as a first priority however if the attack is a wrist or clothing grab (non-life threatening), start attacking the attacker, punching, kicking, striking etc., with the goal of preventing them from making another attack etc. This is a great, simple and straightforward heuristic, which theoretically means that you already know all the solutions to non-life-threatening attacks e.g., anyone grabs you, puts you in a hold or control position where an airway isn’t obstructed etc., start striking. However, responding combatively to every non-life-threatening attack has its issues, and in this article, I want to look at some of these, and why there are times that responding combatively, with strikes, punches and grabs may not be effective.

                I was/am a Judoka and for many years competed in the sport. Judo competitions take place in a sterile and sanitized environment. They take place on an eight-by-eight-meter mat area, with a safety area/border which is three meters deep. A judo bout (shiai), lasts four minutes and is won by an accumulation of points, a single throw when someone lands cleanly on their back, a pin or a submission etc. When the referee signals the start of the fight you close distance, battle for grips, go for a throw etc. There is no context or nuance to a Judo match. The environment is “artificial” from a real-life fighting perspective and is designed to highlight who is the better Judoka. Real life confrontations and violence are very, very different as there is a context within which physical conflicts occur. You can choose to ignore the context and just treat everything as if you are in a sterile/sanitized environment e.g., if someone grabs your wrist or clothing you punch/strike them i.e., respond combatively, however if you do you may have to deal with some of the consequences of doing so.

                Most physical violence is the result of social interactions that have gone bad e.g., you get into an argument with someone over something that has happened to them; they believe that you have somehow disrespected them, they are frustrated at something you have done or are doing, and/or they are trying to retain, attain, or reattain some status etc. If you go to “leave” that argument a person may try to grab you in order to stop you leaving, as they have more things to say to you. They may have gotten ahead of themselves and didn’t really mean to do this and they’re not actually intending to do anything further i.e., they reacted. Technically, from a legal point of view they have just engaged in assault and battery; they have engaged in unwanted touching/contact. At this stage it may be better to break the grip, stepping back and disengaging whilst putting distance between you. In de-escalation terms you are giving them an opportunity to be “wrong” i.e., to realize that what they did wasn’t acceptable. However, if your first response is to punch them in the face, you have escalated the situation beyond their initial physical escalation. You may now risk assault charges and having to defend your actions legally, at your own expense. There are those who will argue that it is better to be tried by twelve than carried by six, however if the person you are dealing with clearly lacks the means to kill you (you’re dealing with someone who is very old and in a poor physical condition), this isn’t a good pattern of thinking/decision making.    

                Obviously choosing to disengage rather than engage relies on you being able to make sense of the context you are in and make an effective decision about the solution you choose, but limiting yourself to one solution i.e., responding combatively may see you create a more complex problem for yourself, such as you defending your actions to a jury etc. I categorize techniques/solutions into two types: hard and soft e.g., do you require a “hard” solution (striking, hitting, using combatives etc.) or will a soft solution (such as breaking away and disengaging) be more effective. As well as classifying techniques/solutions this way I also classify/categorize them as falling into one of three groups: disengagement, combatives and control techniques. There are many situations where I might require “soft” solutions, such as break-away and disengagement techniques, due to the context I am operating in. If I am on my own in an unfamiliar bar/pub and I get into a verbal dispute/argument with someone and they grab my clothing and I start to punch/hit/strike them, then I may provoke their friends to come to their assistance will now be in a multiple attacker situation. Breaking away and disengaging may be more effective for my survival than attacking the attacker. Changing the context from a bar/pub to a workplace or family gathering and knocking seven shades out of someone – even if it was justified – might not go well for your career prospects, or your family relationships etc.

                Social violence is complicated and trying to fit one particular way of responding (combatively) to every potential context and environment, whilst making for a simple physical way of responding, may not always be appropriate and/or effective. Situations determine solutions, not the other way round. This doesn’t mean that disengagement solutions should be complicated but that they should exist alongside combative, as well as control ones. Krav Maga was/is a military system and was originally designed for some very straightforward contexts. Applying it in a civilian context means broadening responses so that they can be appropriate for the situations and scenarios that people are likely to face, rather than dictating to them that there is only one way to act and that is combatively. This means educating people to be aware of the threats and dangers they are facing and responding appropriately.