10. Military security and the state Flashcards
What defines ‘new wars,’ and what characterizes them?
New wars’ refer to conflicts from the late 20th to early 21st century, characterized by clashes between Western globalist values and Balkan ethnic particularism, challenging traditional parameters and involving ethics, global policy, and humanitarian ideology.
How does Ulrich Beck view ‘new wars,’ and what term does he use to describe them?
Ulrich Beck views them as ‘post-national wars,’ challenging traditional parameters and involving ethics, global policy, and humanitarian ideology. He terms them ‘post-national wars.’
What ideological justifications are behind ‘new wars’.
Ethical motivations portray ‘new wars’ as ‘humanitarian wars’ with overwhelming technological superiority, symbolized as ‘military executions.’ Western powers justify force through humanitarian fundamentalism,
abandoning the traditional Westphalian principle of non-interference.
How is the transition from ‘modern war’ to ‘global war’ argued in the chapter?
The chapter argues for a shift from ‘modern war’ to ‘global war,’ accelerated by events like 9/11. This transition involves not just strategic changes but also a subversion of international law and a return to ancient warmongering rhetoric.
What historical events are considered pivotal in the transition to ‘global war’?
Events like 9/11 are seen as a historical shift from the modern to the global era, with global terrorism and U.S. military actions as pivotal moments.
How does the concept of warfare evolve from ancient to modern times?
Modern warfare originated in the 17th century as a response to the Westphalian system, forming the basis for national, territorial, and sovereign states. The new warfare is viewed as global in a normative sense, operating outside UN prohibitions.
How is the new warfare characterized in terms of sovereignty and regulation?
The new warfare is viewed as global in a normative sense, operating outside the prohibitions set by the Charter of the United Nations on the ‘private’ use of international force (jus ad bellum) and the laws of war (jus in bello) established by the modern international legal system.
What is the ideological aspect of global warfare, and how is force justified?
Global warfare is considered ‘global’ in an ideological sense, with Western powers appealing to universal values. Force is justified through humanitarian fundamentalism, emphasizing a duty to uphold human rights globally, abandoning the traditional Westphalian principle of non-interference.
How are the justifications for warfare in ‘new wars’ characterized, and what principles are revived?
The justifications are deemed regressive, resembling ‘just causes’ from the doctrine of bellum justum. The notion of a ‘just war’ is revived, and the use of force is considered legitimate even in cases of ‘supreme emergency’ and ‘evil objectified in the world.’
What doctrinal shift occurred after the Cold War, and what did it entail?
There was a shift away from containment, marked by the Cheney-Wolfowitz draft paper and subsequent official documents like the National Security Strategy (NSS) of 2002. This shift emphasized preemptive and preventive strikes against perceived threats.
How is the emerging doctrine characterized, and what are its goals?
The emerging doctrine emphasizes achieving absolute security through overwhelming military superiority. It aims to maintain a substantial power gap to discourage challenges to U.S. dominance, leading critics to describe it as imperial.
What arguments do neo-imperialists present, and who are some proponents?
Neo-imperialists argue for more expansive goals and assertive foreign policy, echoing historical imperialism. Proponents include Max Boot and others who believe the world finds American power attractive.
What criticisms and challenges are directed at the imperial doctrine?
Critics question the effectiveness of the doctrine’s reliance on absolute military security, citing events like the 9/11 attacks. Skepticism is raised about the assumption that the world desires to emulate the American model, and concerns about potential counterbalancing of U.S. power.
How is the neoconservative imperial project critiqued, and what principles does the critique emphasize?
The neoconservative imperial project is critiqued for deviating from true conservatism, being characterized as radical, egotistic, and contrary to limited government principles. Advocates call for a return to authentic conservatism, emphasizing limited government and fiscal responsibility.
What alternative strategy is proposed in response to the neoconservative project?
The proposal suggests a more restrained approach where the U.S. acts as a last resort rather than the first in global affairs. It advocates a shift from unilateral dominance to a more humble and conservative approach, questioning the necessity of being the first nation to respond to global issues.
