This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: f such values. It is
aimed at civilians, and uses such primitive methods as suicidal bomb attacks
or ethnic cleansing. These two approaches to the conduct of war, i.e. technological supremacy and terrorism, can be seen as competing or complementary. The clash between them is most striking when in the process of humanitarian interventions these two different styles of warfare meet. This is
what Hassner calls the conflict between the bourgeois and barbarian.
The second dynamic element in the new war paradigm, according
to Hassner, is the blurring of the distinction between the police and the
army. The tasks set before the international stabilization forces calls for a
redefinition of the role of a soldier, whose major objective is not to conquer the enemy but to protect human rights in the endangered regions. It
is difficult, however, to avoid the analogy between the stabilizing forces
and the colonial armies, which calls the motivation behind such humanitarian intervention into question.
The ambivalence of the possible moral evaluation of contemporary war leads many theoreticians to contradictory conclusions. Chaunu
(1996-1997) points out that the decline of inter-state wars and a disintegration of nation-states may lead to a return to intra-state anarchy and
brutal social violence. Keegan (1994) states that although conventional
war may soon come to an end, violence is unlikely to cease to exist,
therefore governments will need well-trained armies to fight internal disturbances of ethnic or criminal origin. However, the training of such armies will differ significantly from the present day model and should be
informed by the oriental tradition of war. Hassner (2000) criticizes both
these approaches, as Chaunu’s model seems too radical as a prediction of
historical developments, while Keegan does not give convincing arguments for the thesis that a bourgeois-based army and criminal or terrorist
organizations should abandon their present styles of warfare and turn to a
style alien to either of them.
Finally, Hassner (2000) concludes his deliberations on the changing nature of war by presenting a model proposed by van Creveld (1991),
who, similarly to Chaunu and Keegan, advocates the end of inter-state
wars. Unlike them, though, he suggests that conventional wars will transform into a large number of low-intensity military conflicts. This prediction would seem a very likely development, if the Gulf Wars had not falsified it so quickly. 84 Chapter III Reflecting on 9/11, Hassner (2002a) perceives this terrorist attack
as a stimulus for a radical change in the philosophical paradigm of the
contemporary world. A change from the world of Locke and Kant to that
of Hobbes, Nietzsche and Marks. By the world of Locke, Hassner understands a world dominated by a free market economy, whereas the Kantian world was ultimately to be a democratic federation of states, in which
every person is a citizen of the world. The fall of the Twin Towers put an
end to these...
View Full Document