Wartime in the 21st century

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Relations Pub Date : 2022-10-25 DOI:10.1177/00471178221134341
Andrew R. Hom, Luke B. Campbell
{"title":"Wartime in the 21st century","authors":"Andrew R. Hom, Luke B. Campbell","doi":"10.1177/00471178221134341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Wartime dominates the 21st century. The term is ubiquitous in contemporary politics, providing an intuitive trope for narrating foreign relations, grappling with intractable policy problems, and responding to shocking events. Such pervasion makes it easy to forget that wartime is a relatively recent political invention. It began as an instrumental and somewhat stylized concept that authorized exceptional violence by promising to contain it within strict temporal boundaries. Yet in the same era that wartime achieved international prominence, war itself became an increasingly ordinary and extended dimension of politics. Today, ‘wartime’ refers to a number of unconstrained and often self-perpetuating violent practices that have changed global politics and national security policies in deep and enduring ways – nowhere more so than in the United States. To introduce the special issue, this article presents wartime as a neglected and paradoxical topic at the heart of International Relations. It sketches the concept’s historical emergence, from innovative Presidential discourse through expansion in World War II and the Cold War, to 21st century entrenchment in daily life and habits of foreign relations. We also make the case for why US wartime marks an especially apt example of a global phenomenon, and one worthy of increased scrutiny within International Relations (IR). Finally, we provide synoptic summaries of the articles that comprise the special issue, showing how they work together to interrogate key aspects of 21st century wartime. We conclude with reflections on how the study of wartime may be extended to better understand its impact on historical and contemporary global politics.","PeriodicalId":47031,"journal":{"name":"International Relations","volume":"25 1","pages":"525 - 546"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00471178221134341","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Wartime dominates the 21st century. The term is ubiquitous in contemporary politics, providing an intuitive trope for narrating foreign relations, grappling with intractable policy problems, and responding to shocking events. Such pervasion makes it easy to forget that wartime is a relatively recent political invention. It began as an instrumental and somewhat stylized concept that authorized exceptional violence by promising to contain it within strict temporal boundaries. Yet in the same era that wartime achieved international prominence, war itself became an increasingly ordinary and extended dimension of politics. Today, ‘wartime’ refers to a number of unconstrained and often self-perpetuating violent practices that have changed global politics and national security policies in deep and enduring ways – nowhere more so than in the United States. To introduce the special issue, this article presents wartime as a neglected and paradoxical topic at the heart of International Relations. It sketches the concept’s historical emergence, from innovative Presidential discourse through expansion in World War II and the Cold War, to 21st century entrenchment in daily life and habits of foreign relations. We also make the case for why US wartime marks an especially apt example of a global phenomenon, and one worthy of increased scrutiny within International Relations (IR). Finally, we provide synoptic summaries of the articles that comprise the special issue, showing how they work together to interrogate key aspects of 21st century wartime. We conclude with reflections on how the study of wartime may be extended to better understand its impact on historical and contemporary global politics.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
21世纪的战争
战争主宰着21世纪。这个词在当代政治中无处不在,为叙述外交关系、应对棘手的政策问题和应对令人震惊的事件提供了一个直观的比喻。这种渗透很容易让人忘记,战争是一个相对较新的政治发明。它最初是一个工具性的,有点程式化的概念,通过承诺将暴力控制在严格的时间界限内,从而授权了特殊的暴力。然而,在战争取得国际地位的同一时代,战争本身也日益成为一种普通和延伸的政治维度。今天,“战时”指的是一系列不受约束的、往往是自我延续的暴力行为,这些行为已经以深刻而持久的方式改变了全球政治和国家安全政策——在美国尤其如此。为了介绍这期特刊,本文将战时作为国际关系中一个被忽视和矛盾的核心话题。它概述了这一概念的历史出现,从创新的总统话语到第二次世界大战和冷战的扩张,再到21世纪在日常生活和外交关系习惯中的根深蒂固。我们还提出了为什么美国战争是全球现象的一个特别恰当的例子,值得在国际关系(IR)中加强审查。最后,我们提供了组成特刊的文章的概要摘要,展示了它们如何共同探讨21世纪战争的关键方面。最后,我们反思了如何将战时研究扩展到更好地理解其对历史和当代全球政治的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Relations
International Relations INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: International Relations is explicitly pluralist in outlook. Editorial policy favours variety in both subject-matter and method, at a time when so many academic journals are increasingly specialised in scope, and sectarian in approach. We welcome articles or proposals from all perspectives and on all subjects pertaining to international relations: law, economics, ethics, strategy, philosophy, culture, environment, and so on, in addition to more mainstream conceptual work and policy analysis. We believe that such pluralism is in great demand by the academic and policy communities and the interested public.
期刊最新文献
A neoclassical realist model of overconfidence and the Japan–Soviet Neutrality Pact in 1941 Brazil’s pragmatic equidistance: hedging and the Second World War Mediated public diplomacy and securitisation theory: the US campaign against Chinese 5G in Brazil and Chile Domestic terrorism, incumbency, and legislative vote shares The customer is always right? Flags of convenience and the assembling of maritime affairs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1