Small wars in the age of Clausewitz: the watershed between partisan war and people's war

Around the time of Clausewitz’s writing, a new element was introduced into partisan warfare: ideology. Previously, under the ancien régime, partisans were what today we would call special forces, light infantry or cavalry, almost always mercenaries, carrying out special operations, while the main action in war took place between regular armies. Clausewitz lectured his students on such ‘small wars’. In the American War of Independence and the resistance against Napoleon and his allies, operations carried out by such partisans merged with counter-revolutionary, nationalist insurgencies, but these Clausewitz analysed in a distinct category, ‘people's war’. Small wars, people's war, etc. should thus not be thought of as monopoly of either the political Right or the Left.

The ecology of crusading: investigating the environmental impact of holy war and colonisation at the frontiers of medieval Europe

The Crusades in the Near East, eastern Baltic and Iberian Peninsula (in the context of the Reconquest/reconquista) were accompanied by processes of colonisation, characterising the expansion of medieval Europe and resulting in the creation of frontier societies at the fringes of Christendom. Colonisation was closely associated with — indeed, depended on — the exploitation of local environments, but this dimension is largely missing from studies of the crusading frontiers. This paper, the product of a European Science Foundation Exploratory Workshop on 'The Ecology of Crusading' in 2009, surveys the potential for investigating the environmental impact of the crusading movement in all three frontier regions. It considers a diverse range of archaeological, palaeoenvironmental and written sources, with the aim of situating the societies created by the Crusades within the context of medieval colonisation and human ecological niche construction. It demonstrates that an abundant range of data exists for developing this largely neglected and disparately studied aspect of medieval frontier societies into a significant research programme.

‘Victory in a Nuclear War? A Comparison of NATO and WTO War Aims and Strategies’

Given the danger of the unbearable catastrophe of nuclear war, NATO in the mid-1950s abandoned any war aim of achieving victory in an all-out war with the Soviet Union or the Warsaw Treaty Organisation. Instead, it adopted the war aim of a cease-fire or war termination. By contrast, the WTO clung on to the war aim of victory - expressed even in terms of the survival of slightly more Soviet citizens than NATO citizens, after unprecedented losses of life in nuclear exchanges - until the mid-1980s when under Gorbachev the concept of victory in nuclear war was abandoned.

Healing the wounds of war: memories of violence and the making of history in Zimbabwe's most recent past.

How does a society less than two decades after a liberation war which involved large sections of the population come to terms with the memories of violence and war — a war in which there was no clear distinction between insurgent and counter‐insurgent, liberator and oppressor and in which the majority of the casualties can be found among the rural civilian population? This was a predicament not exclusive to Zimbabwe, but one which also applies to Mozambique, South Africa and, more recently, to Rwanda. Since its independence Zimbabwe has been a prime example of successful reconciliation. Ranger has argued that spiritual healing has contributed importantly to coming to terms with the trauma of war through turning violence into history. Here it will be argued that an analysis of the intersections between memories of violence, healing, and history reveals a twofold process. Social healing is made possible by a shift from conviction and compensation to revealing without convicting. At the same time healing provides an arena for communities in which competing and contesting memories of violence are renegotiated. Through these processes sense is being made of the past; history is being made.

The neoliberal way of war: a critical analysis of contemporary British security in policy and practice.

Dominant paradigms of causal explanation for why and how Western liberal-democracies go to war in the post-Cold War era remain versions of the 'liberal peace' or 'democratic peace' thesis. Yet such explanations have been shown to rest upon deeply problematic epistemological and methodological assumptions. Of equal importance, however, is the failure of these dominant paradigms to account for the 'neoliberal revolution' that has gripped Western liberal-democracies since the 1970s. The transition from liberalism to neoliberalism remains neglected in analyses of the contemporary Western security constellation. Arguing that neoliberalism can be understood simultaneously through the Marxian concept of ideology and the Foucauldian concept of governmentality – that is, as a complementary set of 'ways of seeing' and 'ways of being' – the thesis goes on to analyse British security in policy and practice, considering it as an instantiation of a wider neoliberal way of war. In so doing, the thesis draws upon, but also challenges and develops, established critical discourse analytic methods, incorporating within its purview not only the textual data that is usually considered by discourse analysts, but also material practices of security. This analysis finds that contemporary British security policy is predicated on a neoliberal social ontology, morphology and morality – an ideology or 'way of seeing' – focused on the notion of a globalised 'network-market', and is aimed at rendering circulations through this network-market amenable to neoliberal techniques of government. It is further argued that security practices shaped by this ideology imperfectly and unevenly achieve the realisation of neoliberal 'ways of being' – especially modes of governing self and other or the 'conduct of conduct' – and the re-articulation of subjectivities in line with neoliberal principles of individualism, risk, responsibility and flexibility. The policy and practice of contemporary British 'security' is thus recontextualised as a component of a broader 'neoliberal way of war'.

The Cold War and its aftermath in the Americas: the search for a synthetic interpretation of U.S. policy

More than two decades have passed since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the transfer of the Cold War file from a daily preoccupation of policy makers to a more detached assessment by historians. Scholars of U.S.-Latin American relations are beginning to take advantage both of the distance in time and of newly opened archives to reflect on the four decades that, from the 1940s to the 1980s, divided the Americas, as they did much of the world. Others are seeking to understand U.S. policy and inter-American relations in the post-Cold War era, a period that not only lacks a clear definition but also still has no name. Still others have turned their gaze forward to offer policies in regard to the region for the new Obama administration. Numerous books and review essays have addressed these three subjects—the Cold War, the post-Cold War era, and current and future issues on the inter-American agenda. Few of these studies attempt, however, to connect the three subjects or to offer new and comprehensive theories to explain the course of U.S. policies from the beginning of the twentieth century until the present. Indeed, some works and policy makers continue to use the mind-sets of the Cold War as though that conflict were still being fought. With the benefit of newly opened archives, some scholars have nevertheless drawn insights from the depths of the Cold War that improve our understanding of U.S. policies and inter-American relations, but they do not address the question as to whether the United States has escaped the longer cycle of intervention followed by neglect that has characterized its relations with Latin America. Another question is whether U.S. policies differ markedly before, during, and after the Cold War. In what follows, we ask whether the books reviewed here provide any insights in this regard and whether they offer a compass for the future of inter-American relations. We also offer our own thoughts as to how their various perspectives could be synthesized to address these questions more comprehensively.