| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The 'war on terror' has become the grammar of contemporary international relations. Analysis of the 'war on terror' has become overdetermined by broader discussion about the utility of organized violence following the end of the Cold War. This focus has led to a perception that the link between war and politics has been fundamentally weakened, if not entirely severed. This article argues that the 'de-politicization' of war thesis gets in the way of a more fruitful understanding of the relationship between international order and the occurrence and conduct of warfare. Paradoxically, policy that may stem from an analysis that depoliticizes armed conflict makes it more difficult to imagine the possibility of peace. Colonial-type wars are one instance of armed conflict which is asymmetrically depoliticized. The attempt to fit the 'war on terror' into a colonial war-shaped hole is unsustainable. Colonial warfare cannot provide solutions to postcolonial military challenges. This article argues for an understanding of the 'war on terror' as postcolonial war in which the political is very much present.
|