Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The connection between war and networks has many varying conceptualizations, yet in each case, the many goals of using network analysis in warfare are singular in purpose: to gain advantage over one's opponent. This is as true today as it has been in the history of war, evidenced by the long past of intelligence gathering in order to best understand the idea of networks as viewed through the lens of warfare. To better understand this history, though, it is necessary to first understand three different distinctions of the concept that appear in the literature on the subject. First, war is fought through social network analysis, the online and off-line intelligence gathering of connections between people as a strategic tool; second, war is fought by means of the targeting of electronic networks, where online network structures of connectedness become the central strategy and targets of war; and third, war is also fought within networks, where the mediated lives of individuals and groups become the central locus of power, fought within virtual sites through the politics of everyday life.

Each of these three cases has one trait in common: the war of the network era is characterized not primarily by violence but instead by flows of information, people, and, ultimately, power. These are but three of the countless examples of technological conceptualization deployed in order to maintain advantage over an adversary, yet they are developments in the exercise of power that have both responded to and influenced the way in which war is understood, both within and outside academic thought.

Yet if the nature and scope of war for most of the history of the world has been one of violent conflict on the battlefield, there is presently little agreement over what, exactly, constitutes warfare. The implications of this contested definition have been at the forefront of academic dialogue on the subject. As with so many other aspects of society, the rise of the network society has destabilized the understanding of what war is, how it is conceptualized, and how it is exercised. The uses of networks in warfare have been discussed as a means and end of both the violent and nonviolent exercise of power. The exercise of power is at the center of every discussion over the issue of networks and war.

Reconceptualizing Warfare

For most of human history, war was easy to spot: whether under formal declaration or informal police action, it was obvious. Carl von Clausewitz, the canonical war writer, perhaps most famously stated in his 1832 treatise On War, “War is not merely a political act, but also a political instrument, a continuation of political relations, a carrying out of the same by other means.” Political impasses lead to violent conflicts between parties of people—tribes, organizations, parties, religious groups, and, most notably throughout the modern era, nation-states—and the conflicts were settled largely through violent means on the battlefield until the death or surrender of one movement. Historically, war was almost exclusively characterized by the spatial organization of material conflict, of peoples against other peoples.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading