In Defence of New Wars

Mary Kaldor

doi:10.5334/sta.at

Abstract

This article reviews the literature on ‘new wars’. It argues that ‘new wars’ should be understood not as an empirical category but rather as a way of elucidating the logic of contemporary war that can offer both a research strategy and a guide to policy. It addresses four components of the debate: whether new wars are ‘new’; whether new wars are war or crime; whether the data supports the claims about new wars; and whether new wars are ‘post-Clausewitzean’. It argues that the obsession with the ‘newness’ of wars misses the point about the logic of new wars; that there is a blurring of war and crime but it is important to address the political elements of new wars; that, although the data should be used with caution, it does seem to offer support for some elements of the new war thesis; and that the argument is indeed post-Clausewitzean because new wars are not ‘contests of wills’ but more similar to a mutual enterprise. It concludes that the debate has greatly enriched the overall argument.

Highlights

Global systems of the 20th century were designed to address inter-state tensions and civil wars
Because the ‘old’ is enshrined in the concept of the ‘new’ the term enables us to grapple with the overall logic that is inherent in contemporary violent conflicts and that makes them different in kind from ‘old wars’
It can be argued that in the Westphalian era of sovereign nation-states, a realist interpretation had more relevance than it does today. This conceptual distinction is not quite the same as the way I originally described ‘new wars’ in terms of the involvement of non-state actors, the role of identity politics, the blurring of the distinction between war and crime as well as the fact that, in new wars, battles are rare and violence is mainly directed against civilians (Kaldor 2007)

Summary

Mary Kaldor*

It argues that ‘new wars’ should be understood not as an empirical category but rather as a way of elucidating the logic of contemporary war that can offer both a research strategy and a guide to policy It addresses four components of the debate: whether new wars are ‘new’; whether new wars are war or crime; whether the data supports the claims about new wars; and whether new wars are ‘post-Clausewitzean’. It argues that the obsession with the ‘newness’ of wars misses the point about the logic of new wars; that there is a blurring of war and crime but it is important to address the political elements of new wars; that, the data should be used with caution, it does seem to offer support for some elements of the new war thesis; and that the argument is post-Clausewitzean because new wars are not ‘contests of wills’ but more similar to a mutual enterprise It concludes that the debate has greatly enriched the overall argument

Introduction

Findings

Conclusion