2018
DOI: 10.1080/14702436.2018.1429218
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Surrogate warfare: the art of war in the 21st century?

Abstract: If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Nevertheless, the development that the use of both drones and the internet in warfare have undergone is remarkable and raises fundamental questions for the applicability of international law and the future of war. This is not to say that proxy or 'surrogate warfare' (as it recently has been termed) does not also rise substantial questions (Krieg and Rickli, 2019), but this article zooms in on the technological aspects of remote warfare that challenge international law, focusing on the distance to the battlefield more than the aspect of delegation.…”
Section: Remote Warfare's Challenges For International Lawmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, the development that the use of both drones and the internet in warfare have undergone is remarkable and raises fundamental questions for the applicability of international law and the future of war. This is not to say that proxy or 'surrogate warfare' (as it recently has been termed) does not also rise substantial questions (Krieg and Rickli, 2019), but this article zooms in on the technological aspects of remote warfare that challenge international law, focusing on the distance to the battlefield more than the aspect of delegation.…”
Section: Remote Warfare's Challenges For International Lawmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Problems surrounding conceptual employment of 'proxy wars' include the rejection of the analytical utility of the notion of 'proxy war' (San-Akca 2016; 2017), and its replacement with either new alternatives such as 'surrogate warfare' (Krieg and Rickli 2018) and 'vicarious war' (Waldman 2018), or established concepts such as 'sponsorship', 'delegation', 'substitution', 'empowerment', 'backing', 'external support' (for a full range Karlén 2016Karlén , 2017aKarlén , 2017b 5 . Rejecting and replacing 'proxy war' have been suggested without systematic justification and process (concept analysis), and in a normatively questionable way with clear pejorative undertones, again emphasising the need to discuss, firstly, what 'proxy' means.…”
Section: Is 'Proxy War' Really That Poor a Concept?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…56 'Surrogate Warfare', according to Krieg and Rickli: the West tries to exert influence with high technology and minimal physical presence and therefore political risk in conflict areas. 57 War as risk management indeed, and certainly immaculate.…”
Section: The Shadow Of the Pastmentioning
confidence: 99%