Premium
The New War Thesis and Clausewitz: A Reconciliation
Author(s) -
Banta Benjamin R.
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
global policy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.602
H-Index - 33
eISSN - 1758-5899
pISSN - 1758-5880
DOI - 10.1111/1758-5899.12722
Subject(s) - underpinning , argument (complex analysis) , scholarship , foundation (evidence) , ideal (ethics) , epistemology , positive economics , work (physics) , spanish civil war , political science , law and economics , state (computer science) , sociology , law , philosophy , economics , computer science , engineering , mechanical engineering , biochemistry , chemistry , civil engineering , algorithm
Mary Kaldor's work constitutes an exceptionally sustained, cohesive, and also broadly aimed argument for often radical – and generally cosmopolitan – changes to state's approaches to security. Informing the project's various proposals is a theoretical foundation derived from earlier work on ‘new war’. This ‘new war thesis’ holds that the nature of war has changed from involving a Clausewitzian logic of extremes to one of ‘persistence and spread’. This thesis is presented as an ideal type that should inform scholarship and policy. The essay finds fault with the way this foundation is constructed, in particular its rejection of Clausewitz. Rather than reject the new war thesis, though, the essay shows that a reconciliation between it and the Clausewitzian theory of war is not only possible, but results in more cogent arguments for the policy proposals Kaldor contends are the real test of the theoretical underpinning of her project.