Transformation of armed violence: specific features and trends
AbstractSocial transformations occurring in the world today became a result of globalization, information, changes in the international balance of power, and are reflected in all aspects of political development. One of the most pressing challenges of our time, a consequence of these processes, is the evolution of forms and methods of armed violence. This publication is devoted to determining the specific and major trends transforming the forms and methods of armed violence. Instead of the traditional military conflicts, new forms and means of armed confrontation emerge. Asymmetrical conflicts taking place with the participation of non-state parties and irregular armed groups, are quite common at the moment. «Hard power» methods associated with the use of direct violence are supplemented by means of «soft power». Violent but non-traditional (non-military) means of confrontation widen, with informational and psychological influence becoming particularly prominent. Infotechnological and infopsychological methods of intervention have become an integral part of modern military-political confrontation, taking form of hybrid, network and network-centric warfare. The hybrid military conflicts are typically distinguished by asymmetry, latency, priority of small-scale combat actions and dynamic use of indirect violence. Network-centric warfare focused on achieving information superiority over the enemy, complex effects on the enemy’s physical, informational and cognitive domains, strategic flexibility and adaptability, priority of horizontal ties over traditional vertical hierarchy. Horizontal network infrastructure, consisting of multiple independent, highly specialized and geographically dispersed units, determines the effectiveness of network war strategy today. Apart from qualitative changes associated with emergence and proliferation of new forms of armed violence on a global scale, there is a definite global increase in its quantitative characteristics. In particular, this is reflected in intensification and incremental growth of the number and duration of military and political conflicts. These trends, which are a reflection of global transformation processes the modern world is going through, constitute the new challenges and threats to national and international security.
Antonina Kolodij: Vijna na urazhennya svidomosti prodovzhuyet`sya. Zvidsy vytivky «Intera» [Antonina Kolodij: War in the destruction of consciousness continues. It tricks «Inter»]. Informacijnyj portal «Zaxidna informacijna korporaciya».
Asimmetrija v vooruzhennom protivoborstve (chast’ 1) [Asymmetry in the armed confrontation. Part 1]. Voenno-politicheskoe obozrenie: [sait].
V chem unikal’nost’ 240-dnevnoj Livijskoj vojny [What is unique about the 240-day Libyan War]. Informacionnoe agentstvo «Oruzhie Rossii».
Voennaja doktrina Rossijskoj Federacii (ot 25 dekabrja 2014) [Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation (December 25, 2016)].
Gol’ev, A. V., 2013. Vojna kak faktor sovremennogo politicheskogo processa [War as a factor in modern political process]. Vestnik MGLU 24 (684), 113 – 123 (in Russian).
Gorbatenko, V., 2014. «Myaka syla» yak osnova suchasnoyi geopolitychnoyi strategiyi [«Soft power» as the foundation of modern geopolitical strategy]. Studia politologica Ucraino-Polona 4, 27 – 31 (in Ukrainian).
Deriglazova, L. V., 2009. Asimmetrichnye konflikty: uravnenie so mnogimi neizvestnymi [Asymmetric conflicts: the equation with many unknowns]. Izd-vo Tom. un-ta, Tomsk (in Russian).
Ezhegodnik SIPRI 2014: vooruzhenija, razoruzhenie i mezhdunarodnaja bezopasnost’, 2015 [SIPRI Yearbook 2014]. Moscow.
Zharkov, Ya. M., Kompanceva, L. F., Ostrouxov, V. V., Petryk, V. M., Prysyazhnyuk, M. M., Skulysh, Ye. D., 2012. Istoriya informacijno-psyxologichnogo protyborstva [History of information-psychological confrontation]. Nauk.-vyd. viddil NA SB Ukrayiny, Kyiv (in Ukrainian).
Pauljus, A., Vashakmadze, M., 2009. Asimmetrichnaja vojna i ponjatie vooruzhennogo konflikta – popytka razrabotat’ konceptual’nuju model’ [Asymmetrical war and the notion of armed conflict – an attempt to develop a conceptual model]. International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 91, No. 873, 127 – 170 (in Russian).
Podschitano maksimal’no tochnoe kolichestvo pogibshih v Sirii [The maximally exact amount of lost in Syria is calculated]. MIGnews.com. Regime to access: http://mignews.com/news/lifestyle/190514_171053_43694.html (01.10.2016) (in Russian).
Pochepczov, G., 2015. Suchasni informacijni vijny [Modern information war]. Vyd. dim «Kyyevo-Mogylyanska akademiya», Kyiv (in Ukrainian).
Savin, L. V., 2011. Setecentrichnaja i setevaja vojna. Vvedenie v koncepciju [Network-centric and network war. Introduction to conception]. Evrazijskoe dvizhenie, Moscow (in Russian).
Siryj, S., 2007. Osoblyvosti lokalnyx vijn i voyennyx konfliktiv v umovax globalizaciyi [Features local wars and military conflicts in globalization]. Political Management 2, 144 – 154 (in Ukrainian).
Hoffman, F. G., 2013. Gibridnye ugrozy: pereosmyslenie izmenjajushhegosja haraktera sovremennyh konfliktov [Hybrid threats: rethinking the changing nature of today’s conflicts]. Geopolitics 21, 45 – 62 (in Russian).
Conflictbarometer 2005, 14 / Heidelberg Institute for International Conflict Research at the Department of Political Science, University of Heidelberg. Regime to access: http://www.hiik.de/en/konfliktbarometer/pdf/ConflictBarometer_2005.pdf (01.10.2016).
Conflict Barometer 2010, 19 / Heidelberg Institute for International Conflict Research at the Department of Political Science, University of Heidelberg.
Conflict Barometer, 2015, 24 / Heidelberg Institute for International Conflict Research at the Department of Political Science, University of Heidelberg. Regime to access: http://www.hiik.de/en/konfliktbarometer/pdf/ConflictBarometer_2015.pdf (01.10.2016).
Global responsibility-sharing through pathways for admission of Syrian refugees, 2016 / UNHCR – The UN Refugee Agency.
McCuen, J. J., 2008. Hybrid war. Military Review, Vol. 88, No. 2, 107 – 113.