Introduction. The research of theoretical principles of the impact of local conflicts on the global economy requires an economic understanding of such strategic phenomena as the arms race, the creation of international alliances and the economic effects of military spending. The risks, threats and challenges of direct and indirect losses received by both sides of the conflict also have a negative impact on both third parties and the global economy as a whole. As a result, global leaders and actors involved in conflicts reflect on the effectiveness of their participation in the confrontation. That is why the analysis of local conflicts and assessment of their value in the global economy, given the direct participation of Ukraine in one of these, actualizes the research topic. The purpose is to analyze global changes that provoke local conflicts and research of the cost of local conflicts in the global economy. Methods. In the research process, a set of research methods and approaches were used: monographic and graphical methods, methods of system analysis, systematization, classification, logical, theoretical and generalizations. Results. The unfair distribution of the benefits of globalization threatens conflicts at the regional, national and international levels. Civil or internal wars became widespread, and these “new” wars became clear only in the context of political, economic, and military globalization. There is a correlation between rising war spending and increasing quantity of conflicts. The cost of conflict in the global economy is extremely high, because in addition to the destruction of families, communities and countries, conflicts have negative global economic consequences. The war in Ukraine has significantly affected its economy and financial system, leading to significant material losses due to the physical destruction of housing, infrastructure, social and industrial facilities. Conclusions. Global leaders and key global actors must act quickly and prevent escalation of local conflict. The protection of civilians and their property and the provision of humanitarian and medical assistance should be a priority for participants involved in existing conflicts. A favorable direction for overcoming local conflicts is “investment in humanity”, namely investment in stability, local infrastructure, in order to diversify resources and increase their efficiency. An audit of the costs and benefits of the parties to the conflict will help to understand that the economically they have short-term gain in times less than the income they would have received in the absence of these conflicts.

The Correlates of War project scrupulously collects information about disputes between the countries over a long historical period together with other data relevant to the character and reasons of international conflicts. Using methods of modern Data Science implemented in the R statistical software, we investigate the datasets from the project. We study political, economic, and religious factors with respect to the emergence of conflicts and wars between the countries. The results obtained lead to certain conclusions about variances and causalities between the factors considered. Some unpredictable features are presented.

Because they are chiefly domestic conflicts, civil wars have been studied primarily from a perspective stressing domestic factors. We ask, instead, whether (and how) the international system shapes civil wars; we find that it does shape the way in which they are fought—their “technology of rebellion.” After disaggregating civil wars into irregular wars (or insurgencies), conventional wars, and symmetric nonconventional wars, we report a striking decline of irregular wars following the end of the Cold War, a remarkable transformation of internal conflict. Our analysis brings the international system back into the study of internal conflict. It specifies the connection between system polarity and the Cold War on the one hand and domestic warfare on the other hand. It also demonstrates that irregular war is not the paradigmatic mode of civil war as widely believed, but rather is closely associated with the structural characteristics of the Cold War.

From Angola and Liberia to Iraq and the Congo, wars have taken place in resource rich countries full of poor people. In Wars of Plunder Philippe Le Billon explores how resources have shaped recent conflicts, and what the international community has tried to do about it. Focusing on key resources-oil, diamonds, and timber-he argues that resources and wars are linked in three main ways. First, resource revenues finance belligerents, a trend that has become all the more conspicuous since the withdrawal of Cold War foreign sponsorship in the late 1980s. Although the 'War on Terror' has redefined military assistance and the internationalisation of war, many belligerents continue to rely on and profit from 'conflict resources'. Second, resource exploitation generates conflict. As global demand for raw materials has sharply increased, competition over critical resources such as oil has resulted in a flurry of 'resource conflicts', from local community struggles against mining multinationals to regional and international tensions. Third, economic shocks and poor governance sharply increase the risk of war (the 'resource curse'). While today's resource boom is a major economic opportunity for resource rich but poor countries, reliance on resource exports often implies sharp economic downturns. Not all resources are the same, however, and effective responses are at hand. Sanctions, military interventions and wealth sharing have helped bring an end to conflicts, yet only deeper domestic and international reforms in resource governance can stop the plunder.

There has been, especially since the end of the cold war, greater emphasis on the roles of regional international organizations in conflict management. With the increased spate of armed conflicts over the past two decades, demand for conflict management has consequentially increased. Though interstate wars evidently declined since the post-cold war, but intrastate wars and civil conflicts have increased both in number and variety. Beyond traditional civil wars, the international system has experienced a relatively new phenomenon in form of failed or disrupted states. Such also foster instability in regions as well as carrying a human toll that often exceed that from civil wars. Global organizations have been overburdened with these challenges, resulting in limited attention to some areas as well as donor fatigue. The UN and leading states have seemingly ignored certain civil wars and failed states. This leaves gap that has assumed the concern of regional organizations, many of which cannot afford to ignore the conflict and civil wars at their doorsteps. How well conflict matters have been handled in conflict-torn zones by regional organizations has been a concern in the International Relation scholarship. Therefore, to probe the capabilities and effectiveness of regional international organizations in conflict management, and the challenges that assail their new roles as conflict managers in the international system, forms the concern of this paper.

This article examines the nexus between international crises and civil wars. Based on the premise that not all simultaneous civil and international conflicts are related, the study aims to explore the circumstances in which civil wars affect violent escalation in international crises. The study identifies ‘composite’ crises – where the civil war is the core issue of the international dispute – as a unique subset of international crises. These crises are distinguished from ‘unrelated-civil war’ situations, in which the issues in the internal and international conflicts are separate. Using data from the ICB, COW, and UCDP/PRIO datasets, the article tests a dual-conflict argument, positing that interconnected issues and interactions between actors in composite situations inhibit moderate crisis management and aggravate interstate behavior. The findings show that while civil war in composite situations has a negative impact on crisis escalation, unrelated-civil war has an inverse impact on interstate relations in crisis.

The article examines the latest challenges to the system of collective security associated with political instability and economic turbulence. Their key prerequisites, factors and features of a global nature are determined. The origins of international conflicts are shown, with an emphasis on armed conflicts that turn into wars according to the logic of their progression and the practice of response. Examples of the international reaction to the actions of the aggressor in the form of political and economic, sectoral and individual sanctions and multi-channel internationally consolidated and bilateral aid to the country suffering from the war are given. The role of international patronage in the system of measures and tools to help countries that have become objects of military aggression is shown. The essential features of international patronage are defined as the establishment of a voluntarily initiated regime of care for objects in force majeure circumstances to eliminate or neutralize internal and external threats to their existence and development. Its types (political, economic, financial, social), types (internal, external), objects (state, regions, cities, sectors, enterprises, infrastructure, projects), subjects (foreign countries, international organizations, corporations, public organizations, political parties, individuals) and forms (direct aid, grants, consulting, mass media support, lobbying, monitoring) are distinguished and identified. Using the example of Ukraine, projects of international political, economic and military patronage over cities and regions that have undergone significant destruction are illustrated.

This article argues that an artificial superintelligence (ASI) emerging in a world where war is still normalised constitutes a catastrophic existential risk, either because the ASI might be employed by a nation–state to war for global domination, i.e., ASI-enabled warfare, or because the ASI wars on behalf of itself to establish global domination, i.e., ASI-directed warfare. Presently, few states declare war or even war on each other, in part due to the 1945 UN Charter, which states Member States should “refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force”, while allowing for UN Security Council-endorsed military measures and self-defense. As UN Member States no longer declare war on each other, instead, only ‘international armed conflicts’ occur. However, costly interstate conflicts, both hot and cold and tantamount to wars, still take place. Further, a New Cold War between AI superpowers looms. An ASI-directed/enabled future conflict could trigger total war, including nuclear conflict, and is therefore high risk. Via conforming instrumentalism, an international relations theory, we advocate risk reduction by optimising peace through a Universal Global Peace Treaty (UGPT), contributing towards the ending of existing wars and prevention of future wars, as well as a Cyberweapons and Artificial Intelligence Convention. This strategy could influence state actors, including those developing ASIs, or an agential ASI, particularly if it values conforming instrumentalism and peace.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00146-021-01382-y.

In the article the wars and conflicts are classified in terms of political science theory. The main attention is paid to paradigmal and conceptual interpretation of contemporary military conflicts in the international relations. These aspects of origins of conflicts and wars have been reflected in classic political science and postmodern concepts authors of which primarily are foreign scientists. Actually, all of them despite of their belonging to the different academic schools recognize states as the main subjects of military conflicts. Moreover, classification of wars and conflicts continues to be the main point in political science. Central point of political researches is a question of ways and means of regulating international conflicts. In this context the problem of transformation of local and regional conflicts in a full-scale (global) war is of special research significance. Emergence of nongovernmental subjects of world politics and new forms of wars caused the necessity to take correctives in analyses of these phenomena. Nevertheless, objective reasons of military conflicts as well as factors and possibilities of their transformation into full-scale wars don’t depend on the postulates of politology.

This paper provides a comprehensive survey and analysis of perspectives on international conflict, focusing on the causes and containment of wars. The study delves into the concept of the "security dilemma" and the paradoxical nature of the contemporary international system, as identified by Herbert Butterfield. It explores various theoretical responses to the question of war causation, categorizing them into psychological, sociological, and political theories. Each perspective attributes the causes of war to different factors, such as human nature, the internal organization of states, and the anarchical nature of the international system. The paper critically evaluates the relevance and limitations of each perspective, highlighting the interconnectedness of these causal factors in understanding the complexities of international conflicts. Moreover, it emphasizes the evolving role of military power and diplomacy in conflict management, considering the impact of modern military technology and the growing emphasis on conflict avoidance and prevention strategies. The study concludes by emphasizing the need for a multifaceted approach to conflict management, integrating diplomatic, economic, and psychological instruments of power, to effectively contain and resolve international conflicts in the global society.