Changing Character of War

Michael von der Schulenburg will discuss the shortcomings of the UN Charter to regulate foreign military interventions and paradoxes in UN peacekeeping The character of wars is changing. Today, wars between nation-states have largely disappeared and armed conflicts between states and belligerent non-state actors have become predominant. But has the international community found the right answers to deal with such intrastate armed conflicts? Schulenburg will argue, no. In a future world of 11 billion people, intra-state conflicts are likely to increase. Finding better answers to address this is becoming, and will continue to be, ever more pressing. But would this be possible in a world of increasing great-power rivalries?

Mr Schulenburg will discuss the shortcomings of the UN Charter to regulate foreign military interventions and paradoxes in UN peacekeeping as well as ambiguities in determining the legitimacy of embattled governments and in responding to armed non-state actors. He will review problems of interpreting self-determination and identifying national identities and describe resulting difficulties in implementing ceasefire and peace agreements or in writing national constitutions and holding elections.

Michael von der Schulenburg, former UN Assistant Secretary General with political affairs with 34 experience working for the UN and the OSCE in many of the world’s trouble spots such as in Haiti, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and Sierra Leone with shorter assignments in Syria, Somalia, the Balkan and the Sahel. His experience involved the whole range of UN activities from development and humanitarian assistance to management, political affairs and peacekeeping.

Dapo Akande and Emanuela-Chiara Gilliard from ELAC (Oxford) discuss humanitarian relief in Syria The extremely severe restrictions on humanitarian operations have been one of the defining features of the Syrian conflict. Humanitarian operations have been severely impeded by a range of constraints, including active hostilities, repeated attacks against those providing humanitarian and, in particular, medical assistance, shifting front lines, proliferation of parties to the conflict, and the instrumentalisation of assistance by all belligerents. It is unquestionable though that a principal impediment have been the constraints imposed by the Government of Syria, particularly, but not exclusively, on relief operations for people in opposition-held areas. These were so severe that, following repeated requests to allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded access, that went unheeded, the Security Council took the unprecedented step of authorising cross-border and cross-line operations without the need for the consent of the Government of Syria, in Resolution 2165 (2014).

Prof Dapo Akande and Emanuela Gillard will discuss the legal framework regulating cross-border relief operations and how it has been modified by the Security Council in the Syria crisis. They will offer some reflections on what this had meant operationally in Syria and beyond.

Dapo Akande is a Fellow of Exeter College and Co-Director of the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict (ELAC).

Emanuela-Chiara Gilliard is a Senior Research Fellow at ELAC, a Research Fellow in the Individualisation of War Project at the European University Institute in Fiesole and an Associate Fellow in Chatham House’s International Law Programme.

Gender, State-collapse, Conflict and State-building: Recent Research from the Somali Context Prescribing and policing gender norms and relations, in other words controlling society’s experiences of femininity and masculinity, along with social exclusion practices, is arguably at the very heart of the protracted and violent struggle for political and ideological power in today’s Somalia. The research material that my session will be drawing on comes from two recent qualitative studies: the Impact of War on Somali Men (Rift Valley Institute) and Learning from Kismayo: a study of women’s roles and responsibilities in clan-related armed violence in the Somali conflict (Life & Peace with Peace Direct). The second study was prompted by the widespread exclusion of Somali women from peace processes and political settlements. Together, the studies’ findings provide a detailed picture of the gendered dynamics and impacts of Somalia's post-1991 violence. They deepen understanding of the complex power and gender relations at play in a context of an absent, weak or fragile state. At the same time, they give rise to many new questions, some of which we can perhaps discuss during the session.

Judith has worked in development and peacebuilding for 30 years, as a practitioner and researcher, developing a particular focus on gender and conflict. As a researcher, uses she participatory approach and qualitative methods. Among many others, she authored a ground-breaking conception study with the Rift Valley Institute on war’s impact on Somali men.

Within the context of modernity and globalisation, this research project investigates the processes by which governance arises in territories subjected to illicit forms of social order that contest state sovereignty and authority. Within the context of modernity and globalisation, this research project investigates the processes by which governance arises in territories subjected to illicit forms of social order that contest state sovereignty and authority. Drawing from recursive theoretical and empirical research rooted in the ‘abductive’ method of Pragmatism, the analysis has three principal objectives: First, it offers a different conceptual approach by moving away from negative categorisation of the phenomena, e.g. failed states, ungoverned spaces, limited statehood etc., towards a positive conceptualisation, i.e. illicit orders. By casting off the legal-rational, sovereign-territorial lens, the pursuant conceptual reconfiguration of territory, authority, and institutions recognises and more directly conveys the existence of local social organisation apart from the modern state via the agency of social groups acting in violation of domestic and/or international legal norms, rules, and institutions. Second, it seeks to explain the constitution of ‘illicit orders’ by offering a sociologically-cognisant analytical framework capable of elucidating the ‘micro’ processes inherent to governance in territories where state institutions remain nominal and ineffective. Based on insights from theoretically-informed empirical fieldwork in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, I maintain that inter-subjective relations of authority can be produced when a given actor asserts predominance in three co-constitutive domains; namely, organised violence, socioeconomic security, and social legitimacy. Resultant authority then gives rise to the ‘structuration’ of norms, rules, and institutions, which also recursively reinforces the institutionalisation of authority – a process inherent to the constitution of social order in these circumscribed territories. Third, it provides an understanding of how inherently local ‘illicit orders’ at once form part of a diffuse mosaic of social, political, and economic structures that collectively constitute ‘global society’, while simultaneously existing in dramatic juxtaposition to the ‘international order’ of states within it.

Dr Christopher Lilyblad is currently a Visiting Research Fellow at the Changing Character of War Centre. He returns to academic life after spending working at European Union Delegation in Cape Verde (2014-16), the Luxembourg Development Cooperation Agency – LuxDev (2016-2017), and Luxembourg’s national NGO platform, the Cercle de Coopération (2017-2018). In October 2017, Dr Lilyblad was elected as Councillor in his native municipality of Betzdorf, Luxembourg.

Focusing on the 'male perpetrator,' this paper first examines how, why, and with what effect gendered and raced imaginaries became encoded in international peace and security policy. Sexual violence in conflict once again captured the international spotlight earlier this month when gynaecologist, Dr Denis Mukwege, and human rights activist, Nadia Murad, were jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Responding to sexual violence grew exponentially in importance on international policy agendas over the past decade, with clear implications for operational and programmatic practice across conflict-affected contexts. The adoption of UN Security Council resolution 1820 (2008) – establishing sexual violence as a threat to international peace and security – marked a clear turning point in this regard. While pervasive across many armed conflicts, testimonies of sexual violence documented in eastern DRC were an important focus of such institutional developments. In effect, these experiences became somewhat defining of the nature of the harm, its victims and its perpetrators. Focusing on the ‘male perpetrator,’ this paper first examines how, why, and with what effect gendered and raced imaginaries became encoded in international peace and security policy. Doing so, it emphasises the role of institutional imperatives and political dynamics in shaping international policy definitions of sexual violence in the Council. Subsequently, exploring efforts to fight impunity for sexual violence in DRC, presentation foregrounds how, and with what effect, this clearly delineated policy definition obscures more complex realities in DRC.

Chloé is completing her PhD in International Development at the University of Oxford where she is researching responses to sexual and gender-based violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Drawing on extensive research conducted at the United Headquarters in New York and in DRC between 2013-2017, her dissertation examines the development of internationally-driven responses to sexual violence, including at the level of the UN Security Council, and their operationalisation in DRC. In particular, Chloé critically explores how different facets of the response architecture 'see' and 'engage' with conflict-affected women and men, why, and to what effect. Committed to working across scholarship, policy, and practice, she particularly enjoys collaborating with policy- and operationally-orientated entities, including the NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security, the World Bank Gender Innovation Lab, Search for Common Ground, and the UN Peacekeeping and Stabilization Mission in DRC (MONUSCO). Most of all, Chloé is looking forward to life after the PhD.

Dr Katerina Tkacova, member of CCW, introduces the seminar series based on the CCW research project - Changing Character of Conflict Platform project: New approach to quantitative analysis of protracted conflicts. The interdisciplinary project aims to create a knowledge-based platform for academics, practitioners, policy-makers and the wider public to understand the changing character of conflicts across different epistemologies and methodologies. While we might not be able to stop some conflicts, we may well be able to prevent a drastic increase in casualties or erosion of social fabric if we understand the main patterns of organized violence. In our work, we focus on the following dimensions of conflict and the changes within them: actors involved in conflicts, methods used in conflicts, resources that drive conflicts, environments in which conflict takes place, the impact of conflict on individuals and societies.

In the presentation, we introduce a new approach to quantitative analysis of protracted conflicts, which is one of the components of the project. Those conflicts often change their location, spread across borders and create new spin-off conflicts or escalate the old ones. To capture the dynamic and complexity of protracted conflicts, we draw new geographical units based on the activity of carefully identified relevant conflict actors. Using data from various sources including the Georeferenced Events Dataset (UCDP) and the PRIO-GRID (PRIO), we select important indicators to convene a comprehensive yet concise analysis which is designed to inform policy-makers involved in violence reduction and conflict reconciliation. The new approach to quantitative conflict analysis allows us to identify patterns of changes in time and space in the five dimensions of conflicts – actors, methods, resources, environments and impact.

Katerina Tkacova is a post-doctoral research fellow at the Changing Character of Conflict Platform at the University of Oxford since May 2018. Before joining the University of Oxford, Katerina taught at the University College London, King’s College and the University of Essex. Her teaching experience ranges from Quantitative Methods, Comparative Politics and Conflict Analysis. Katerina's research interests include political violence, ethnic groups and quantitative research methods.

The Strategic Cyber Security model illustrates how offensive cyber capability has been operationalised as a critical component in the delivery of the UK's cyber security strategy The 2013 public announcement by the then Secretary of State for Defence, Phillip Hammond stating that the United Kingdom was creating an offensive cyber capability as part of its national cyber security strategy moved the debate on the use of offensive cyber into the public policy sphere. While this debate has continued, little detail has emerged as to how offensive cyber will be integrated as a tool into the United Kingdom's cyber security strategy and more broadly its national security structure. The Strategic Cyber Security (SCS) model seeks to answer these questions by illustrating how offensive cyber capability has been operationalised as a critical component in the delivery of the United Kingdom's cyber security strategy. Drawing upon elements of ecological theory the model demonstrates how different cyber security effects are generated to deliver an holistic response to achieving security in the increasingly competitive environment of cyberspace. Development of the model is based upon a series of elite interviews with senior military and civilian policy makers and key stakeholders within the United Kingdom’s cyber security and national security communities.

Graham Fairclough is a former soldier now attempting to become an academic in the field of cybersecurity. His research is focused on the operationalisation of national cyber security strategy, in particular the integration of offensive cyber capability and how cyber security incidents are understood by decision makers with limited cyber security knowledge. He advises NATO and the UK's MOD on operational cyber security matters.

Brandon Valeriano examines cyber strategies in their varying forms through quantitative analysis and questions their level of impact This project examines the changing character of cyber strategies in the digital domain. We develop a theory that cyber operations are a form of covert coercion typically seeking to send ambiguous signals or demonstrate resolve. Cyber Coercion from this perspective is neither as revolutionary nor as novel as it seems when evaluated with evidence. We examine cyber strategies in their varying forms through quantitative analysis, finding that cyber disruptions, short-term and long-term espionage, and degradation operations all usually fail to produce political concessions. When states do compel a rival, which is measured as a change in behaviour in the target that is strategically advantageous to the initiator, the cyber operation tends to occur alongside more traditional coercive instruments such as diplomatic pressure, economic sanctions, and military threats and displays. Our findings suggest that before we develop recommendations for sound foreign policy responses to state-backed cyber intrusions or craft international frameworks that constrain the proliferation of politically-motivated malware, we should theoretically and empirically investigate cyber strategies and their efficacy.

Brandon Valeriano is the Donald Bren Chair of Armed Conflict at the Marine Corps University. He has published five books and dozens of articles. His two most recent books are Cyber War versus Cyber Reality (2015) and Cyber Strategy (2018), both with Oxford University Press. Ongoing research explores cyber coercion, biological examinations of cyber threat, repression in cyberspace, and the influence of video games on foreign policy outlooks.

Al Brown discusses new technologies, robotics and artificial intelligence entering armed conflict Secretary of Defence James Mattis recently said of artificial intelligence: "I'm certainly questioning my original premise that the fundamental nature of war will not change. You've got to question that now. I just don’t have the answers yet." Vladimir Putin stated: "Artificial intelligence is the future, not only for Russia, but for all humankind." "Whoever becomes the leader in this sphere will become the ruler of the world."

Robotics and artificial intelligence are already being employed in conflict. However, artificial intelligence manages to sit at the peak of 'inflated expectations' on Gartner's technology hype curve whilst simultaneously being underestimated in other assessments. So what are the likely effects on conflict of the trends in artificial intelligence, robotics, economics, data and society? And what do people commonly get wrong -- often with total certainty?

Al Brown works at the Ministry of Defence's independent think tank where he leads on examining trends in robotics and artificial intelligence, and the potential impacts that follow for the future of conflict. He has provided testimony on technology trends, including AI and robotics, and their defence and security implications to a number of organisations, including the United Nations. His military career has included multiple operational tours of Afghanistan and Kosovo. He is by military trade an explosive ordinance disposal officer, a field where robotics, data and algorithms have already been saving lives in conflict for a number of years.

Dr Matlary discusses the driving forces behind defence cooperation, the key players and cooperatives within Europe, as well as Russia’s effect on defence policy.