| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
As the state loses not only its Weberian monopoly over legitimate violence, but also its control over military initiative and dominance of military technology, what forces lead the redefinition of the ends and means of armed violence? If non-state armed groups are understood as the new owners of war, how must our understanding of the artefacts of violence adapt as well? This article examines the effects of changes in the legitimacy of violence on its physical manifestations. Weapons technologies have ceased to be an independent variable of violence and become consequences of strategic and doctrinal choice. As states lose the ability to use technology to regulate warfare, technological virtuosity no longer is defined by the state, but by the initiators of violence. It follows that the most important violent technologies no longer are state-generated. They are adaptations and creations by terrorists and insurgents. This transformation affects priorities and possibilities for control over violent technology. Innovative statist methods - as developed through the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) and UNSC 1540 - remain highly relevant, as do Westphalian concepts such as export control and disarmament. Recognizing limits to their effectiveness in an environment where rules are set by non-state actors as much as by states themselves, however, is crucial
|