Are we still living in a Westphalian world?

[jmm99]

For me, I like to use "populace-based conflicts" and "state-based conflicts" as the two broad "genus" of conflict. The first is either "intra" to some state or occurs where there is not state structure at all. I do not believe that Clausewitz applies very well to such conflicts and many of our frustrations with this family of conflicts is due to our desire to force them to fit within a Clausewitzian framework.

Agreed that one cannot take a 19th century source and attempt to apply it verbatim to modern situations. In short, Clausewitz cannot be read as a "bible"; I'm not a Clausewitz "fundamentalist".

I get your "populace-based conflicts" and "state-based conflicts" dichotomy, I think. Using my shorthand:

VSA01 (Violent State Actor) vs. VSA02 = "state-based conflict"

VSA01 vs. DVNSA01 (Domestic Violent Non-State Actor) = "populace-based conflict"

What would you call this one:

VSA02 vs TVNSA01 (Transnational Violent Non-State Actor; which may or may not be "affiliated" with DVNSA01)

in "populace-based conflicts" and "state-based conflicts" terms, or do we need a third classification ?

You are looking at this from a policy-military strategy standpoint - that's an endorsement, not a criticism.

I'm, as I write, looking at this from a Laws of War standpoint. There we have something of the same dichotomy - internal and external - and where the rules (of engagement, and other rules) are relatively clear in purely internal cases ("populace-based conflicts") and in purely external cases ("state-based conflicts").

The devil is in the "unpure" cases; e.g., VSA02 vs TVNSA01 - which in the real world would be even more "unpure" with added actors (a "wicked" problem).

--------------------------------------
PS: Stan,

I would also suggest that you look at post-United Nations war. Here there is a kink in the armor of the Sovereignty created by being a party to the United Nations conventions. Again, this is based on the political context of the war.

Agreed. After thinking about it briefly, Question: When acting in its Chapter VII mode, is the UN best described as a VSA (albeit a superstate ?) or TVNSA (a super NGO ?) - practical application: the mix of warring "entities" in the Northeast Congo.

Regards

Mike