Skip to main content

New Developments

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Why Paramilitary Operations Fail
  • 273 Accesses

Abstract

The final chapter looks at some new developments that could potentially transform PMOs in the future, namely the rise of warlord enterprises, the growing importance of cyber warfare as a form of proxy warfare, and the new technology of ‘smart weapons.’ It is argued that the U.S. government has inadvertently contributed to a ‘durable disorder’ in many parts of the world, which makes proxy warfare both more viable as well as less consequential. Cyber warfare is becoming a form of proxy warfare since autonomous hacker groups and activists are needed for deniability and for getting access to a target society in an increasingly balkanized Internet. Smart weapons can change the dynamics of proxy wars and mitigate their consequences by enabling sponsors to exercise greater control over proxies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The only notable exception might be the French support to the American revolutionaries in the War of Independence. However, since France was an absolutist monarchy motivated merely by the idea of harming its geostrategic rival Britain, the outcome of the creation of an American Republic was more of an unintended consequence. The American Revolution likely inspired the French Revolution, which ended the very government that had supported the Continental Army.

  2. 2.

    ‘Ungoverned spaces’ are not really ungoverned since they tend to be controlled by nonstate actors, who can impose their rules on respective populations. These are merely territories beyond the effective control of a government. The CIA had identified over 50 ungoverned spaces in the early 2000s and had warned that they provide safe havens to terrorist groups.

  3. 3.

    Since the 1990s the Russian mafia has operated in the guise of private security companies. Warlords are now offering security services in conflict zones to governments, NGOs, and companies. McFate argued: ‘The US outsourcing of security has normalized the market for force, inspiring warlords and other conflict entrepreneurs to start their own PMCs.’ See McFate 2014, 156.

  4. 4.

    Sean McFate pointed out, ‘[i]n Afghanistan , 18,867 individuals worked for PMCs, of these, only 197 were US citizens. Similarly, in Iraq , only 1,017 of the 11,628 contractors were Americans.’ See McFate 2014, 150–151. McFate argues that the employment of foreign and indigenous fighters is mostly motivated by achieving cost savings for the PMCs as salaries are the main overhead for these companies. Foreign and indigenous personnel is cheaper and enables a PMC to have a higher profit margin and to make more competitive bids for contracts.

  5. 5.

    The US has systematically collected biometrics in Iraq and Afghanistan to identify insurgents. Unfortunately, there is little information as to how successful this single measure was in terms of reducing violence.

  6. 6.

    Thomas Rid has suggested that ‘cyberwar will not take place’ in the sense of cyber warfare being used as the sole mode of attack. Instead, Rid considers that activities usually associated with cyber warfare , namely cyber espionage, cyber sabotage, and cyber subversion, should not be considered war or warfare. See Rid 2011.

  7. 7.

    A former leader of Nashi later confirmed that the group was responsible for the cyber attack and did so on behalf of the Russian government. See Shachtman 2009.

  8. 8.

    Several governments have created ‘troll armies’ to engage the enemy in the field of social media and thereby shape perceptions of a conflict in a deniable way that is also more credible with foreign audiences since trolls only seem to represent the ‘average joe.’

  9. 9.

    An article in the New York Times by Mark Landler made the case that the Obama administration was actively seeking political change in the Middle East prior the Arab Spring . President Obama ordered the production of classified report on the future of the region. The report, known as Presidential Study Directive, ‘identified likely flashpoints, most notably Egypt, and solicited proposals for how the administration could push for political change in countries with autocratic rulers who are also valuable allies of the United States, these officials said…Leon E. Panetta , acknowledged in testimony before Congress, needed to better identify “triggers” for uprisings in countries like Egypt.’ See Landler 2011.

  10. 10.

    It is an interesting phenomenon that social media content is now used by the mainstream media as ‘authentic’ or fact with little effort made to test or determine their authenticity. There are many examples that are relevant here such as the reporting on Syria, ISIS, or the conflict in Ukraine .

  11. 11.

    The US has primarily used drones against nonstate actors with no or little air defense capability in places like Afghanistan , Iraq , Somalia , Yemen , and the tribal regions of Pakistan .

  12. 12.

    The Libyan rebels acquired an Aeryon Scout drone from a Canadian company for $100,000, which was used for reconnaissance missions. Similarly, Iran transferred reconnaissance drones to Hezbollah, which were used over Israel and in Syria .

References

  • Ackerman, Spencer. 2011. “Libya: The Real U.S. Drone War.” Wired Magazine, 20 October.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benedictus, Leo. 2016. “Invasion of the Troll Armies: From Russian Trump Supporters to Turkish Stooges.” The Guardian, 6 November.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biró, Daniel. 2015. “Warlord Governance.” In Warlords, Inc.: Black Markets, Broken States, and the Rise of the Warlord Entrepreneur, edited by Noah Radford and Andrew Trabulsi, pp. 51–65. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerny, Philip. 1998. “Neomedievalism, Civil War and the New Security Dilemma: Globalisation as Durable Disorder.” Civil Wars 1 (1): 36–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, J. Ransom. 2015. American Covert Operations: A Guide to the Issues. Santa Barbara: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cottrill, Ken. 1998. “A Less Lethal Weapon: Smart Guns Could Control the Trigger Happy.” The Guardian, 30 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crumpton, Henry. 2012. The Art of Intelligence: Lessons from a Life in the CIA’s Clandestine Service. New York: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deibert, Ronald J. 2013. Black Code: Surveillance, Privacy, and the Dark Side of the Internet. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Economist. 2013. “Smart Weapons: Kill Switches and Safety Catches.” The Economist, 30 November. https://www.economist.com/news/technology-quarterly/21590764-arms-control-new-technologies-make-it-easier-track-small-arms-and-stop-them.

  • Hancock, Larry, and Wexler, Stuart. 2014. Shadow Warfare: The History of America’s Undeclared Wars. Berkeley: Counterpoint Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healey, Jason. 2011. “The Five Futures of Cyber Conflict and Cooperation.” Georgetown Journal of International Affairs (01/2011): 110–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, Jeff. 2011. “Revealed: US Spy Operation That Manipulates Social Media.” Guardian, 17 March. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks.

  • Kilcullen, David. 2013. Out of the Mountains: The Coming Age of the Urban Guerrilla. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lake, Eli. 2013. “In Benghazi, CIA-Trusted Local Militia That Melted Away.” The Daily Beast, 10 May. http://www.thedailybeast.com/in-benghazi-cia-trusted-local-militia-that-melted-away.

  • Landler, Mark. 2011. “Secret Report Ordered by Obama Identified Potential Uprisings.” New York Times, 16 February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallett, Michael. 2009. Mercenaries and Their Masters. Totowa: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • McFate, Sean. 2014. The Modern Mercenary: Private Armies and What They Mean for World Order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, Andrew. 2013. Proxy Warfare. London: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton-Small, Jay. 2012. “Hillary’s Little Startup: How the U.S. Is Using Technology to Aid Syria’s Rebels.” Time 179 (25): 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nixon, Ron. 2011. “U.S. Groups Quietly Nurtured Arab Uprisings.” New York Times, 14 April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petit, Brian. 2012. “Social Media and UW.” Special Warfare 25 (2): 20–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radford, Noah, and Trabulsi, Andrew. 2015. Warlords Inc.: Black Markets, Broken States, and the Rise of the Warlord Entrepreneur. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rid, Thomas. 2011. “Cyber War Will Not Take Place.” Journal of Strategic Studies 35 (1): 5–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rid, Thomas. 2013. Cyber Warfare Will Not Take Place. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shachtman, Noah. 2009. “Kremlin Kids: We Launched the Estonian Cyber War.” Wired, 11 March. https://www.wired.com/2009/03/pro-kremlin-gro/.

  • Singer, Peter W. 2003. Corporate Warriors: The Rise of the Privatized Military Industry. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, Peter W., and Friedman, Allan. 2014. Cybersecurity and Cyberwar: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • UK MoD. 2010. “Securing Britain in an Age of Uncertainty: Strategic Defence and Security Review.” London (October). https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/62482/strategic-defence-security-review.pdf.

  • US Army. 2010. “Hybrid Threat: TC 7-100.” Department of the Army (November).

    Google Scholar 

  • US Congress. 2010. “Warlord, Inc.: Extortion and Corruption Along the U.S. Supply Chain in Afghanistan.” House of Representatives Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs (June).

    Google Scholar 

  • WikiLeaks. 2017. “Vault 7: Project Protego.” Wikileaks.org, 7 September. https://wikileaks.org/vault7/#Protego.

  • Zenko, Micah. 2010. Between Threats and War: U.S. Discrete Military Operations in the Post-Cold War World. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Krishnan, A. (2018). New Developments. In: Why Paramilitary Operations Fail. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71631-2_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics