Why are After Action Reviews not considered critiques?

After Action Reviews (AARs) are designed to provide a comprehensive examination of an event or training exercise, emphasizing learning and improvement rather than assigning blame or determining success or failure. The core purpose of an AAR is to analyze what happened during the operation, identify lessons learned, and suggest ways to improve future performance.

While AARs may indeed touch on successes and failures, their primary focus is on understanding the processes and decisions made, allowing for constructive feedback that can inform future actions. By not categorizing these reflections as critiques that label an event as wholly successful or unsuccessful, AARs create an environment conducive to open discussion and continuous improvement. This distinguishes them from critiques, which often carry a more adversarial tone aimed at evaluation rather than growth.

The other options, while touching on various aspects of AARs, do not accurately encapsulate the fundamental reason for their distinction from critiques. AARs aim for a holistic understanding rather than a binary assessment, fostering a culture of learning and development within military training environments.