2. A Brief Disclaimer
This session will include
footage of a violent video
game, some bad language
and a cartoon television
featuring Barney the
Dinosaur!
4. This Week
• Feedback Week: Everyone to complete the
survey form please!
• Security: A Quick Recap
• The Changing Nature of War
1. Old Wars:
2. New Wars:
The War on Terrorism!
What Are We Afraid of? Terrorism in Culture
6. Security
• There is no single notion of security
• Conflict between individual, regional, national,
international and global objectives – unclear if
these are compatible.
• Clear threats that are not other states: substate actors, terrorism, breakdown of global
monetary system, global warming, nuclear
warfare/accidents. All are security issues!
7. Neo-Realism and Security
• States as the highest authority
• Security as the priority obligation of
government
• Self-help to secure state survival
• Permanent peace unlikely: war necessary to
prevent other from achieving hegemony – any
co-operation likely marred by cheating or
unfavourable relative gains
8. Neo-Liberalism and Security
• Institutions help achieve stability
– Information
– Reduce costs
– Bolster credibility
– Unlikely to eradicate war; but worthwhile to try
9. Constructivism and Security
• International politics shaped by ideas, as well
as power
• Shares many realist assumptions: anarchy, the
centrality of the state, and so on
• State structured by social relations; interests
other than self-preservation
• Importance of the rule of law
• Optimistic: States can pursue peaceful ends
10. Others and Security
• Critical Theory: States are diverse and should
be considered a part of the problem, not the
solution.
• Feminism: Rejects the masculinisation of IR
theory, arguing that women are often more
affected by war than men (p.239)
12. The Changing Nature of Warfare
‘For nearly 200 years, the tools and tactics of
how we fight have evolved with military
technologies. Now, fundamental changes are
affecting the very character of war. Who can
make war is changing as a result of weapons
proliferation and the fact that the tools of war
increasingly are marketplace commodities. By
extension, these affect the where, the when and
the how of war’ (Cebrowski & Garstka, 1998)
13. The Changing Nature of Warfare
• No single, straightforward definition of warfare
• There are different models, which represent
warfare at different stages
• One basic distinction is between ‘Old War’ and
‘New Wars’ – this provides a good way to
contextualise the inherrent challenges of the
War on Terror.
So We Begin With Old War!
15. Old War
So when you think of warfare, what images
come to mind?
Anything like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCEFOx5Hc2
Y&noredirect=1
16. Old War
• Classic image of warfare
State vs. State (Organised armies)
Defined Battlefield
Hegelian Social Contract between people and
state
• Commonly linked to Carl von Clausewitz
One extreme: war as a continuation of ‘Politik’
Other extreme: war as unconstrained violence
‘Real War’ exists on a scale between these points
17. Old War
Real War ‘occurs along a spectrum from the
mere threat of force, through wars tightly
limited in their scope by constraints of motives
of resources, to conflicts which are unlimited in
the sense that at least one of the antagonists is
unwilling to accept any outcome than the
complete overthrow of this adversary’ (Bassford,
1994, p. 324)
19. New War
Critics argue that Clausewitz: • Is a bloodthirsty dilatant, who advocated
wholesale slaughter…
• Overly accepting of the longevity and centrality of
the phenomenon of warfare…
• Is overly focused upon the state and neglects the
effect of legislative control…
And those ‘critics’ are Keegan (1993, p.6), Kaldor
(2010, p.271) and Van Creveld (191, p.50)
20. New War
‘It follows that, where there are no states, the
threefold division into government, army and
people does not exist in the same form. Nor
would it be correct to say that, in such societies,
war is made by governments using armies for
making war at the expense of, or on the behalf
of, their people’ (van Creveld, 1991, p. 50)
21. New Wars
• Shift in nature following the end of the Cold
War: end of the polarising threat of war.
• A conceptually ‘new’ form of warfare referring
to ‘a conflict between politically organised
groups involving large scale violence. This
definition excludes acts of violence in which
only one side is socially organised, for example
government repression or organised crime’
(Kaldor, 1997, pp. 7-8).
22. New War
Characteristics include: • Disregard for humanitarian law
• Breakdown of state monopoly over force
• Blurring of lines between combatant and noncombatant groups (targeting of civilians is now
common)
• Unclear ‘battlefield’ – fluidity of conflict
In summary: -
23. New War
‘First, the main protagonists and units of analysis of war, such
as state or non-state actors, public or private actors, terrorist
groups and warlords. Second, the primary motives of
protagonists, such as ideology, territorial secession or material
aggrandisement. Third, the spatial context: interstate, ‘civil’,
regional or global. Fourth, the technological means of violence
– the weapons and strategies of war. Fifth, the social, material
and human impact of conflict… Sixth, the political economy
and social structure of conflict… The term ‘new wars’ is
applied to a wide body of literature that argues or implies that
clear changes have occurred in the patterns of violent conflict
with reference to some or all of these variables’ (Newman,
2004, p. 174)
24. New War
• No longer distinctive in time and space’
(Kaldor, 2000): no specific times of war and
peace
• Asymmetrical: state vs. non-state
• Space-less: Spills across borders
• Violence often target civilians directly
– 80% of casualties/wounded are non-combatants
– Prevalence of sexual violence as a war-weapon
It is within this ‘new wars’ framework that we view
the phenomenon of terrorism!
26. Terrorism and Fear
Terrorism plays upon something primal; the need to
face ‘the threat’. Fear is most fearful when we
cannot see the full picture, and must respond
without full knowledge of what we are responding
to: ‘…if a power grid goes down we must respond
without knowing if it was the result of terrorist
attacks, a lightening strike or the act of a precious
California teenager’ (Bobbit, p.4)
27. The September 11th Attacks
Consider 9/11… It was initially unclear that the
U.S. was under attack: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtZKEjrSfg&noredirect=1
28. So What is ‘Terrorism’?
• Undermines the state by undermining its ability
to protect its citizens – its raison d’etre: supplants
the state of consent with a state of fear (Bobbit,
p.13)
‘…the use of violence by sub-state groups to inspire
fears, by attacking civilians and/or symbolic targets,
for purposes such as drawing widespread attention
to a grievance, provoking a severe response or
wearing down an opponent’s moral resolve, to
effect political change’ (p.367)
29. So What is ‘Terrorism’?
Balancing act: enough to remain visible, but not
enough to diminish support – terrorist seem willing
to use chemical weapons, however (2004: Ricin in
London raid; 2004/2007 Al Qaeda plan use of
Chlorine gas in Jordan and Iraq)
State-less: Although states such as North Korean
and Iran may fund terrorist action, any overt action
would be tantamount to suicide. The terrorist may
even be able to attack without state help –
parts/weapons available on the market
30. The Growth of International Terrorism
• Initially rare for terrorist activity to spread
beyond international boundaries, this begun
to change in 1968. Why?
The commercialisation
of air travel: Easy and
cheap to cross
boundaries; minimal
security; states freely
gave into to demands
posed by hijackers.
31. The Growth of International Terrorism
There were 5 terrorist hijacking in 1966, this
number rose to 94 in 1969. What other
development aided terrorist activity?
Television: This
provided an audience
for the attacks;
although as with all
programming this
audience appears to
tire of ‘repeats’.
32. The Growth of International Terrorism
Other notable influences have included: The Internet: Many terrorist organisation have
their own websites. The virtual presence of key
terrorist figures will often out-live their physical
presence. Exchange of information…
Computer and Printers: Low-cost manufacture
of leaflets and posters, reaching even web-free
areas.
Video: Campaign videos and recording of
attacks can be easily collated/disseminated.
33. Causes
• Culture: Defence of culture/traditions from the
threat Western materialism
• Economic: Strike against Western economic
imperialism that disadvantages the global South.
Also migrants, unable to achieve the aspirations
promised by the Western image.
• Religion: Attacks against spiritual bankruptcy of
the West – rebellion as spiritual purity (hard to
threaten this materially!), divine mandate for
violent acts…
35. Winning the War on Terror
• States must win a war of ideas: killing the
opponent and capturing territory will not end the
war
• Terrorism will often be provocative: state
responses must be proportion and, ideally, within
legal framework, retaining the moral high ground
(Guantanamo Bay as a terrorist recruitment tool!)
• Conspiracy theory that war on terror is a
governmental aim to establish Orwellian state
37. Is the US more secure?
Our conceptualisation of warfare and what it
means to be ‘at war’ require adjustment, as the
ongoing ‘War on Terror’ lacks many of the
characteristics of conventional warfare: No defined enemy that can be beaten
No specific battlefield
No realistic prospects for negotiation/peace
Lack of clear beginning and end
38. Winning the War on Terror
Bobbit (pp.17-19) notes that the objective of the
war on terror is not to conquer territory or to
silence an ideology, but to secure an
environment for states of consent and make it
impossible for enemies to impose states of
fear… To preclude a world in which fear, rather
than the consent of the governed, legitimises
the state
But how can we, as individual process the
terror threat?
41. Facts
Are bathtubs more or
less dangerous than
terrorists?
Since 9/11, worldwide
deaths from terrorism
equal the number of
people who drowned in
bathtubs in the US!
43. Participation
Creation of global military culture through the
military-industrial-media-entertainment-network…
There is a synergistic relationship with the forces of
production… 9/11 became a part of the ‘spectacle
of warfare’ – as you saw from Der Derian… Video
games, in particular, allow the player to be both
terrorist and ‘insurgency-hunter’
No Russian:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NMnnMRWJ0&noredirect=1
45. Next Week
Weapons of Mass Destruction
Howlett, Darryl, ‘Nuclear proliferation’ in John
Baylis, Steve Smith and Patricia Owens (eds.)
The Globalization of World Politics. An
Introduction to International Relations. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 382-97.
Exam Revision Strategies
