OASIS ISSN: 1657-7558 [email protected] Universidad Externado de Colombia Colombia Lele, Ajey Asymmetric Warfare: A State vs Non-State Conflict OASIS, núm. 20, julio-diciembre, 2014, pp. 97-111 Universidad Externado de Colombia Bogotá, Colombia Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=53163822007 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Asymmetric Warfare: A State vs Non-State Conflict* Ajey Lele, Ph.D.1 Research Fellow at Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), India [email protected] ABSTRACT Key words: Asymmetric, warfare, strate- gy, non-state actor, terrorism. Asymmetry in warfare is not a new phenome- non. Historically, it has been observed that on various occasions there has been a marked Guerras asimétricas: difference in the relative military power and un conflicto entre Estado strategy of the warring states. However, in the post 9/11 era, it has been observed that the versus actores no estatales character and nature of war itself is changing particularly amid the wars between state and RESUMEN non-state actors. The usage of unconventio- nal tools and tactics, be it guerrilla warfare La asimetría en la guerra no es un fenómeno or terrorism or irregular warfare or any other nuevo. Históricamente, se ha observado que forms are becoming more synonymous with en varias ocasiones ha existido una marcada non-state entities. All this is leading to a com- diferencia en el relativo poder militar y estra- position of warfare in which a non-state actor tégico de Estados en guerra. Sin embargo, en is using asymmetric methods to target the la era pos 9/11, se ha observado que el carácter state’s vulnerabilities to achieve disproportio- y la naturaleza de la guerra está cambiando, nate effect. This paper debates the notion of particularmente en las guerras entre actores Asymmetric Warfare, the characters of actors estatales y no estatales. El uso de herramientas involved and the nature of the state’s response y tácticas no convencionales, ya sea guerra de in the 21st century. guerrillas, terrorismo, guerra irregular, o cual- * Recibido: 30 de julio de 2014 / Modificado: 1 de noviembre de 2014 / Aceptado: 1 de noviembre de 2014 Para citar este artículo Lele, A. (2014). Asymmetric Warfare: A State vs Non-State Conflict. OASIS, 20, 97-111. 1 This article is an modified version of a portion of author’s earlier work and please refer http://oatd.org/ oatd/record?record=oai%5C:shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in%5C:10603%5C%2F18906 pi Rev Oasis 20_final.indb 97 2/17/15 3:55 PM Ajey Lele 98 quier otra forma, está siendo más similar con perceived as unconventional or non-traditional entidades no estatales. Todo esto está llevando methodologies (Hughes, 1998). a una composición de guerra en la cual un actor In the post 9/11 era there is a need to no estatal usa métodos asimétricos dirigidos a undertake detailed study analysing the asym- las vulnerabilidades del Estado para lograr un metry between the state and non-state actor, as efecto desproporcional. Este ensayo debate la well as the state’s reaction to such asymmetric noción de “guerra asimétrica”, el carácter de threats. However, before that, it is essential to los actores involucrados y la naturaleza de la put this notion of asymmetry in the context respuesta del Estado en el siglo xxi. of present day and emerging threats. This pa- Palabras clave: asimetría, guerra, estrate- per attempts to look at the past and present gia, actor no estatal, terrorismo. debate on this issue with a view that this un- derstanding may help to define asymmetry in present day context. The paper also attempts The history of strategic ideas and the classical to project some of the concerns of the modern understanding of warfare since World War I world about asymmetric warfare and may help were largely built on the assumption that wars to provide insights for the broader formulation would take place among state actors. A new en- of the doctrines for state responses. tity, the non-state actor, brought to the centre- stage by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, has challenged the state’s authority and IDEA OF ASYMMETRIC WaRfaRE sovereignty much more seriously than ever before. This unexpected terrorist assault on War can be said to be as old as human society the United States can be considered to be the and it certainly features prominently in the beginning of the end of Clausewitz’s theory recorded histories of state-cultures. But it is a of wars between the states and the concept of complex issue and war seems to be changing the conventional adversary’s “centre of gravi- more quickly than ever before (Gray, 1997). ty” (Clausewitz, 1984). This incident can be There is great debate over the definition of war; viewed as an example of a non-state actor’s the types of warfare; and why wars happen, ‘victory’ over a superpower. even when most people do not want them to. Historically, weak powers have sought Representatives of many different academic to avoid an opponent’s strengths and instead disciplines have separately attempted to answer attempted to exploit the latter’s weaknesses. these questions. But the application of hitherto unexplored and War is defined as an armed conflict bet- innovative means for attacking an adversary’s ween two or more governments or states. weaknesses is termed as “asymmetric warfare”. Clausewitz (1984) defined war as “an act of In a way, seeking asymmetries is fundamental violence intended to compel our opponent to to all wars. But in the modern context, asym- fulfil our will” (p. 75). Michael Walzer (2000), metric warfare emphasises what is popularly the author of the book, Just and Unjust Wars, oasis, No 20 • Julio-Diciembre 2014 • pp. 97-111 pi Rev Oasis 20_final.indb 98 2/17/15 3:55 PM Asymmetric Warfare: A State vs Non-State Conflict 99 defines war as a “legal condition, which equa- strategic asymmetry, tactical asymmetry and lly permits two or more groups to carry on a war by proxy (Khan, 2005). conflict by armed forces” (p. 41). When such In the case of ‘strategic asymmetric war- conflicts assume global proportions, they are fare’, belligerents begin by deploying forces known as world wars. War between different of a similar type, with the outcome being parts or factions within the same nation is ca- determined by the quality and quantity of lled civil war. Conflicts or wars in which major the opposing forces. Often when belligerents powers purposely refrain from employing all deploy forces of a similar type, the outcome their armed strength are often known as limi- of a battle and/or campaign is determined by ted wars (Singh, 1995). Inter-state wars are the numerical advantage enjoyed or better generally terminated by treaty and civil wars command and control exercised by one side. by a peace proclamation. In ‘tactical asymmetric warfare’, one si- The methods and practice of war, or de enjoys a technological advantage that can warfare, can be broadly divided into various outweigh even the numerical advantage of the types based on periods of time (like prehisto- enemy. Training and tactics as well as techno- ric warfare, ancient warfare, modern warfare); logy can prove decisive and allow a smaller by theatre, meaning where it is being fought force to overcome much larger forces. If the (land warfare, naval warfare, air warfare); by inferior power is in a position of self-defence; type of weapons used (submarine warfare, che- i.e., under attack or occupation, it may be mical warfare, nuclear warfare); by the peoples possible to use unconventional tactics, such involved (Roman warfare, Chinese warfare, as hit-and-run and selective battles to exploit Arab warfare) or by tactics used (like guerrilla the weaknesses of the superior power, as an warfare, siege warfare, asymmetric warfare) effective means of harassment without viola- (Asprey, 1975; History of Warfare). ting the laws of war. Lastly, in case of ‘war by Despite these various manifestations of proxy’, asymmetric warfare is carried out (ge- warfare, the early years of the 21st century seem nerally covertly) by non-governmental actors to have become dominated by asymmetric who are connected to or are sympathetic to a warfare. Asymmetry means the absence of a particular nation’s (the state actor’s) interest. common basis of comparison in respect to a That is, a non-state actor serves as a proxy of quality, or in operational terms, a capability. the state actor. All conflicts are asymmetric to some extent In his typology of asymmetry, Kenneth and the clever combatant has always exploited McKenzie (2000) has identified six main ty- this quality. The nature of asymmetric warfare pes of potential asymmetric threats: nuclear, being dynamic, asymmetry can be categorised chemical, biological, information operations, differently under different situations. operational concepts and terrorism. From the In broad terms, asymmetric warfare can us point of view, types of asymmetric threats be said to comprise three main types, namely have been identified to include attacks by oasis, No 20 • Julio-Diciembre 2014 • pp. 97-111 Otros temas pi Rev Oasis 20_final.indb 99 2/17/15 3:55 PM Ajey Lele 100 wmd, regional military threats and asymmetric However, asymmetric warfare is not a new threats in which state and non-state adversaries concept; it dates back to the Roman occupa- avoid direct engagement but devise strategies, tion of Spain.