International RelationsWeek 5

[read Baylis et. al. (2008) chapter 12]

Brendon Taggbrendon@umt.edu.my

1

The changing character of war

Change in nature of war since cold war?

In some places obsolete?

Elsewhere, it takes different forms

DefinitionsWright: ‘violent contact between distinct but similar entities’

Clausewitz: ‘act of force intended to compel our opponents to fulfil our will … continuation of political intercourse with … other means’

Webster: ‘usually open and declared hostile conflict between states or nations’

Bull: ‘organised violence carried on by political units against each other’

Wright: ‘conflict among political groups, especially sovereign states, carried on by armed forces of considerable magnitude, for a considerable period of time’

(Baylis et. al. 2008: pp. 213-214)

The nature of warFrom Western perspective

-for a reason

-a form of political behaviour

-but need to widen definition of politics

World no longer state-centric

-NGOs, IGOs, media play a role

Involves destruction, but also co-operation

States emerged from need to organise early war

Modern warfare

NationalismBureaucraticCentralisedIndustrial revolutionSecularMassive armies

Governed by rules

http://www.rwilt.com/wwi.htm

Changes in warfare

End cold war = change in international system

-end of many wars

-less clearly defined threats

-US hegemony

-disarmament -onto global arms market

-communications technologies; cyberwar?

RMA

‘Revolution in Military Affairs’

-operations fast, precise and selective

-changes whole character of war

But

-oversimplifying complexities of war

-asymmetric responses

-assumes state-centred model

Postmodern war

Shift from production to informationTransfer state functions to private authoritiesMedia shapes (constructs?) how we see conflicts

Modernity’ based on mode of production‘Post-modernity’ reflects mode of information

Virtual wars?- not for Kosovan/ Serbian victims- 2003 Iraq- Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Liberia

New warsdisintegration of states; struggle for power

95% of armed conflict inside states

Role of identity

Gender (roles for women) and age (child soldiers)

DR Congo, Sudan, Bosnia-internal challenge; external challenge

Just War Doctrine

Use of violence though war - justifiable?

UN Charter

Nuremburg tribunal

Human nature unchanging

(good and evil)

Key principles

Jus ad bellum

(just recourse to war)

Jus in bello

(just conduct in war)

Jus ad bellum (just recourse)

Just cause

Legitimate authority

Jus ad bellum (just recourse)

Just intentions- Revenge- Reluctance and restraint

(Double effect)To reconcile an evil act with a good act

killing attacker acceptable as long as not desired

later extended

-collateral harm to civilians and their property

-safeguards

Jus ad bellum (just recourse)

Public declaration (of causes and intent)

Proportionality (more good than evil results)

Last resort

Reasonable hope of success

Jus in bello (just conduct)

Discrimination (non-combatant immunity)

-class

-function

Jus in bello (just conduct)

Proportionality (amount and type of force used)

Summary

Jus ad bellum (just recourse to war)

Just cause

Legitimate authority

Just intentions

Public declaration (of causes and intent)

Proportionality (more good than evil results)

Last resort

Reasonable hope of success

Jus in bello (just conduct in war)

Discrimination

Proportionality (amount and type of force used)