A social theory of war: Clausewitz and war reconsidered

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

A social theory of war: Clausewitz and war reconsidered. / Sharma, Vivek; Kjellund, Jon (Editor).

In: Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol. 28, No. 3, 19.08.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Sharma, V & Kjellund, J (ed.) 2014, 'A social theory of war: Clausewitz and war reconsidered', Cambridge Review of International Affairs, vol. 28, no. 3.

APA

Sharma, V., & Kjellund, J. (Ed.) (2014). A social theory of war: Clausewitz and war reconsidered. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 28(3).

Vancouver

Sharma V, Kjellund J, (ed.). A social theory of war: Clausewitz and war reconsidered. Cambridge Review of International Affairs. 2014 Aug 19;28(3).

Author

Sharma, Vivek ; Kjellund, Jon (Editor). / A social theory of war: Clausewitz and war reconsidered. In: Cambridge Review of International Affairs. 2014 ; Vol. 28, No. 3.

Bibtex

@article{2771f30f88fa42ed99dc3b1a6d63dd46,
title = "A social theory of war: Clausewitz and war reconsidered",
abstract = "This article presents a new theory of war that is grounded in the insights of Clausewitz on the social nature of conflict. Clausewitz had argued that war is a political process; he therefore distinguished between {\textquoteleft}war{\textquoteright}—understood in political terms—and warfare—understood as fighting. He then created a typology covering a spectrum of war ranging from total to limited, the political stakes of a conflict determining where it would fall on the spectrum. I develop and modify this basic framework by arguing that the social organization of the actors has a determining role in predicting the stakes of war. I then show how this framework helps us understand some key problems in the political science literature on war and conflict. I attempt to show two main things: (1) that there are different types of wars (and that these differences are not necessarily related to the standing of the actors, i.e. the presence or absence of sovereignty); and (2) that how war and warfare are related is more complicated than previously understood and that this has implications for the political science literature on order, conflict and violence.",
keywords = "Faculty of Social Sciences, War, Security Concepts, security and defence, Sociology, conflict research, Conflict",
author = "Vivek Sharma and Jon Kjellund",
year = "2014",
month = aug,
day = "19",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
journal = "Cambridge Review of International Affairs",
issn = "0955-7571",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - A social theory of war: Clausewitz and war reconsidered

AU - Sharma, Vivek

A2 - Kjellund, Jon

PY - 2014/8/19

Y1 - 2014/8/19

N2 - This article presents a new theory of war that is grounded in the insights of Clausewitz on the social nature of conflict. Clausewitz had argued that war is a political process; he therefore distinguished between ‘war’—understood in political terms—and warfare—understood as fighting. He then created a typology covering a spectrum of war ranging from total to limited, the political stakes of a conflict determining where it would fall on the spectrum. I develop and modify this basic framework by arguing that the social organization of the actors has a determining role in predicting the stakes of war. I then show how this framework helps us understand some key problems in the political science literature on war and conflict. I attempt to show two main things: (1) that there are different types of wars (and that these differences are not necessarily related to the standing of the actors, i.e. the presence or absence of sovereignty); and (2) that how war and warfare are related is more complicated than previously understood and that this has implications for the political science literature on order, conflict and violence.

AB - This article presents a new theory of war that is grounded in the insights of Clausewitz on the social nature of conflict. Clausewitz had argued that war is a political process; he therefore distinguished between ‘war’—understood in political terms—and warfare—understood as fighting. He then created a typology covering a spectrum of war ranging from total to limited, the political stakes of a conflict determining where it would fall on the spectrum. I develop and modify this basic framework by arguing that the social organization of the actors has a determining role in predicting the stakes of war. I then show how this framework helps us understand some key problems in the political science literature on war and conflict. I attempt to show two main things: (1) that there are different types of wars (and that these differences are not necessarily related to the standing of the actors, i.e. the presence or absence of sovereignty); and (2) that how war and warfare are related is more complicated than previously understood and that this has implications for the political science literature on order, conflict and violence.

KW - Faculty of Social Sciences

KW - War

KW - Security Concepts

KW - security and defence

KW - Sociology

KW - conflict research

KW - Conflict

UR - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09557571.2013.872600

M3 - Journal article

VL - 28

JO - Cambridge Review of International Affairs

JF - Cambridge Review of International Affairs

SN - 0955-7571

IS - 3

ER -

ID: 194043513