|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
091918
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
It is widely believed that the human impact of civil conflict in the present era is especially destructive. Proponents of the 'new wars' thesis hold that today's conflicts are fuelled by exclusive identities, motivated by greed in the absence of strong states, and unchecked by the disinterested great powers, resulting in increased battle severity, civilian death and displacement. The ratio of civilian to military casualties is claimed to have tilted, so that the overwhelming majority of those killed today are civilians. Using systematic data that are comparable across cases and over time we find that, contrary to the 'new wars' thesis, the human impact of civil conflict is considerably lower in the post-Cold War period. We argue that this pattern reflects the decline of ideological conflict, the restraining influence of globalization on governments, and the increasing rarity of superpower campaigns of destabilization and counter-insurgency through proxy warfare.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
145026
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Critics of globalisation suggest that growing free-market conditions generate anomie, leading ultimately to what some term ‘new wars’ and new insecurities. Others argue that liberal economies dissuade violence since people gain from peace. This study argues for a micro perspective that views predatory economic policies driving higher investment in rebellion-specific capital, such as shadow economic activity that easily translates into insurgency in weak-state settings. Investment in the shadows determines survivability against superior state forces, and survivability determines rebellion, by definition. Using civil war onset data from 1970 to 2013, as well as the Global Peace Index (GPI) and several of its individual components, which capture societal insecurity above and beyond the absence of armed violence, this study finds that countries that are more capitalistic have a lower risk of civil war and societal insecurity. The results are robust to alternative models, testing methods, and uphold when examining several relevant subcomponents of the index, such as internal conflict, violent crime, homicides, ease of access to small arms, and political instability. Surprisingly, democracy tends not to be associated with peace but associates with increased criminality whereas strong autocracy reduces it, suggesting that capitalism, more than democracy, associates with conditions favourable to societal security, independently of a country’s level of development.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
160052
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article argues that we are living through a period when political institutions are out of step with dramatic, economic and social changes. In similar periods in the past, war has often played a key restructuring role. But contemporary wars are much less likely to achieve this. The main agents of change are social movements and new forms of communication. The article concludes that we need new forms of global governance and some critical rethinking of academic discipline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
106367
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The identification of intra-national armed conflict as a leading problem for the international community in the 1990s produced a wave of novel research into civil wars. Though these new civil war studies soon began to claim a degree of consensus on several key questions, the very concept and ontology of civil war has been implicitly and explicitly contested. An examination of the politics of naming civil wars likewise reveals the extent to which varying and sometimes conflicting definitions of civil war are still in circulation among various observer types. Instead of adjudicating these disputed definitions of civil war, this article details the way in which particular conceptions of civil war produce their object of analysis. The recent Algerian conflict stands as an excellent case study in the politics of naming civil wars and the ways in which the conceptual frameworks of the new civil war studies make Algeria into a civil war. To go beyond the contested definition of civil war, the new civil war studies should not judge the viability of concepts of mass armed violence - whether civil war or so-called new wars - on their alleged coherence with particular representations of history. Concepts of mass violence should instead be judged in relation to the political goals from which they obtain their warrant in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
097067
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article discusses the importance for armed groups of arms acquisition from government sources. It considers how arms transfers are treated by the "new war" and globalization literature, and how they focus on cross-border transfers at the expense of domestic procurement. Despite the attention given to the international arms trade, in reality it is by theft, ambush, and corruption that most rebel groups source weapons and ammunition. Evidence from conflicts around the world indicates a preference for this type of arms acquisition over foreign sources, in part because the importation of weapons requires money and sponsorship. Bringing together examples of conflicts where domestic procurement has been crucial, it highlights conditions that favor targeting government-sourced weapons, particularly during the early stages of a conflict. The article ends with a discussion of the policy implications of its findings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
127155
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
069420
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
097736
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines the literature on 'new wars' as it evolved in Germany, Great Britain and the USA. In order to gain an overview of this heterogeneous field of research five hypotheses are derived concerning characteristics of 'new wars': (1) the erosion of the state's monopoly on the use of force; (2) the political economy of 'new wars'; (3) 'new wars' as asymmetric wars; (4) 'new wars' as identity-based wars; and (5) terrorism within the framework of 'new wars'. The concluding section addresses critiques, provides a brief summary and proposes future research.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
107897
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While Carl von Clausewitz has generally been respected as one of the most profound philosophers of war, his expertise has been regarded as somewhat limited if not even irrelevant to the so-called 'new wars' of the post-Cold War world. Many scholars in international relations have claimed that 'new wars' are essentially 'post-Clausewitzian' and 'post-trinitarian' in nature, meaning that they are no longer fathomable through a Clausewitzian framework. However Clausewitz's earlier writings were nearly exclusively dedicated to guerrilla warfare, or what he called 'small wars'. These writings have been largely overlooked by many analysts of contemporary conflicts. By drawing on his rare and untranslated writings, the article uncovers a critical part of Clausewitz's expertise in asymmetric warfare and shows that, far from being irrelevant in an age where interstate warfare is increasingly being replaced by conflicts between states and semi-/non-state actors, Clausewitz's philosophical writings actually shed new light into the particular interactive dynamics generated during wars waged under conditions of asymmetry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
173762
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This study explores the “black box” of face-to-face violence during terror attacks. It is based upon visual analysis of a representative sample of terror attacks that occurred in Israel during 2015–2016, a period which is labeled “The Intifada of Individuals.” We offer a new method for this purpose by using available materials that military sociologists can retrieve and employ when they use the “macro”-level framework in their study of “micro”-level actions. The abundance of audiovisual devices allows a new perspective of belligerent friction typical of “New Wars.” Our methodology includes a combination of video and audio materials from open sources. Our analysis untangles the complexities of belligerency by minimizing the overall occurrences to the actions of the antagonist, the disrupter, and the crowd. We discuss our understandings for policy making concerning armament of civilians and overcoming the manipulation of terror attacks by media, government, and terrorists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
165096
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This special issue explores military strategy in the twenty-first century. The articles scrutinise strategy from three perspectives: the study of strategy, and how our understanding of strategy has changed over time; new areas for strategic theory, i.e., areas where the development of war has made strategy become more important, such as peacekeeping operations and cyberspace; and the makers of strategy, more specifically why states choses suboptimal strategies and how wars in the twenty-first century influence strategy makers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
087822
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Over the last 18 years or so, much of the debate about modern warfare has been about whether it should be described as 'old' or 'new'. However, there has not been a definitive answer as to which best reflects war in the modern world. Increasingly, the alternative arguments are polarised into opposing camps. Indeed, it would be fair to say that there is little in the way of debate at all. By revaluating the strengths and weaknesses of each argument, this paper aims to reinvigorate that discussion by examining whether changes in the way we understand war are really required. Finding that the ideas are not in fact mutually exclusive, it suggests that future research could benefit from a combined approach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
052815
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
110077
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The unravelling of the security environment associated with the Cold War has spawned an active and energising debate, in military and academic circles, about the extent to which the nature and character of war has changed. This study will consider the arguments posed by three of the most influential commentators, in the West at least; Martin Van Creveld, Mary Kaldor and General Sir Rupert Smith. Their contributions are all the more interesting as they have markedly different theoretical approaches. Critiquing their respective arguments and juxtaposing them with historical precedent and contending academic theory, it will be possible to assess the veracity of their respective claims. This is a non trivial debate, particularly given the constrained fiscal situation currently afflicting Western governments. Indeed, if true, the profound changes in the nature of war proposed by the literature will have important ramifications for future decisions in the West regarding military policy and procurement. The study will seek to demonstrate that whilst the debate is valid and commendable, it suffers from a tendency to emphasise change over continuity. Attempts to posit neat and tidy paradigmatic visions of the future are likely to be dashed by an enduring complexity associated with our strategic experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
106369
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While Håvard Strand's rejoinder to 'Deconstructing civil wars' is a welcome invitation to dialogue, its criticisms are grounded in a fundamental misreading of my article. Here I will attempt to address the sources of confusion, which stem from poor execution on my part and some theoretical blinders on the part of the author of the rejoinder. This response will clarify my ethical and theoretical concerns with the way in which mass intra-territorial armed violence has been studied recently, and then reinforce my proposed warrant for a pragmatic (read: political) turn in the civil war/new war debate. This intervention will conclude by suggesting that the present debate highlights the need for a third estate in political studies, one that operates between political science and political theory: politiography.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
158648
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The article rethinks the relationship between human trafficking as organised crime and child recruitment as a war crime. After analysing the records of 132 cases of child and adolescent recruitment brought before Colombia’s ordinary justice system between 2008 and 2016, it became clear that the youngsters involved had performed activities both directly and indirectly related to the conflict, but also that they had been exploited and maltreated, with no control over their situation. Reassessment of the relationship between human trafficking and child recruitment could result in more effective justice for this population by shedding light on alternate ways to construct reparation and reintegration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
146914
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The formation of doctrine and strategy is usually regarded as the exclusive province of the major powers. Small states and their militaries have little choice but to conform. This article, however, argues that small, developed states possess an unprecedented opportunity independently to form doctrine and pursue strategy. The reasons are a worldwide trend of devolution in political power and a concomitant democratisation of violence and reduction in the scale of military means and conflict. However, seizing this opportunity is powerfully constrained by the tyranny of outmoded ideas of how war and strategy work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|