Remote warfare – Buzzword or Buzzkill?

References

• Adelman, Rebecca A., and David Kieran. 2020. “Introduction: Rethinking Killing at a Distance.” In Remote Warfare: New Cultures of Violence, edited by Adelman, Rebecca A. and David Kieran, 1–28. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Almäng, Jan. 2019. “War, Vagueness and Hybrid War.” Defence Studies 19 (2): 189–204. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2019.1597631.
   Google Scholar
• Alvesson, Mats, Yiannis Gabriel, and Roland Paulsen. 2017. Return to Meaning: A Social Science with Something to Say. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bensaude Vincent, Bernadette. 2014. “The Politics of Buzzwords at the Interface of Technoscience, Market and Society: The Case of ‘Public Engagement in Science.’” Public Understanding of Science 23 (3): 238–253. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513515371.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biegon, Rubrick, and Tom F. A. Watts. 2021. “Security Cooperation as Remote Warfare: The US in the Horn of Africa.” In Remote Warfare, edited by McKay, Alasdair, Abigail Watson, and Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, 152–172. Bristol: E-IR Publishing. Interdisciplinary Perspectives.
   Google Scholar
• Biegon, Rubrick, and Tom. F. A. Watts. 2020. “Remote Warfare and the Retooling of American Primacy.” Geopolitics, Online First.
   Google Scholar
• Bjering, Jens Borrebye, and Andreas Immanuel Graae. 2020. “From Hermeneutics to Archives: Parasites and Predators in Homeland.” In Remote Warfare: New Cultures of Violence, edited by Adelman, Rebecca A. and David Kieran, 79–102. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bode, Ingvild, and Hendrik Huelss. 2021. “The Future of Remote Warfare? Artificial Intelligence, Weapons Systems and Human Control.” In Remote Warfare Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by McKay, Alasdair, Abigail Watson, and Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, 218–232. Bristol: E-IR Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks, Rosa. 2017. How Everything Became War and the Military Became Everything. New York: Simon & Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Brunck, Annika. 2020. “‘Wanted Dead or Alive’: The Hunt for Osama Bin Laden.” In Remote Warfare: New Cultures of Violence, edited by Adelman, Rebecca A. and David Kieran, 177–200. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan, David. 2020. “Warrior Woundings, Warrior Culture: An Ethos for Post-9/11 American War Culture.” In Remote Warfare: New Cultures of Violence, edited by Adelman, Rebecca A. and David Kieran, 53–77. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chapa, Joseph. 2021. “Human Judgement in Remote Warfare.” In Remote Warfare Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by McKay, Alasdair, Abigail Watson, and Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, 199–217. Bristol: E-International Relations.
   Google Scholar
• Congressional Record House. 1968. “House of Representatives- Tuesday.” Accessed June 11, 1968. https://www.congress.gov/90/crecb/1968/06/11/GPO-CRECB-1968-pt13-2-2.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Cornwall, Andrea. 2007. “Buzzwords and Fuzzwords: Deconstructing Development Discourse.” Development in Practice 17 (4–5): 471–484. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09614520701469302.
   Google Scholar
• Cornwall, Andrea, and Karen Brock. 2005. Beyond Buzzwords: “Poverty Reduction,” “Participation” and “Empowerment” in Development Policy. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, Overarching Concerns Programme Paper Number 10, November.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, Emily. 2017. “The Principle of Distinction and Remote Warfare.” In Research Handbook on Remote Warfare, edited by Ohlin, Jens David, 50–78. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Cullen, Anthony. 2017. “The Characterization of Remote Warfare under International Humanitarian Law.” In Research Handbook on Remote Warfare, edited by Ohlin, Jens David, 110–132. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Demmers, Jolle, and Lauren Gould. 2018. “An Assemblage Approach to Liquid Warfare: AFRICOM and the ‘Hunt’ for Joseph Kony.” Security Dialogue 49 (5): 364–381. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0967010618777890.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demmers, Jolle, and Lauren Gould. 2021. “The Remote Warfare Paradox: Democracies, Risk Aversion and Military Engagement.” In Remote Warfare Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by McKay, Alasdair, Abigail Watson, and Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, 34–47. Bristol: E-International Relations.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Defense. 2012. Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership. Priorities for 21st Century Defense. Washington D.C.: Department of Defense.
   Google Scholar
• Der Derian, James. 2001. Virtuous War: Mapping the Military-Industrial-Media-Entertainment-Network. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• DeShaw Rae, James. 2014. Analyzing the Drone Debates: Targeted Killing, Remote Warfare, and Military Technology. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Enemark, Christian. 2013. Armed Drones and the Ethics of War: Military Virtue in a Post-heroic Age. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Foulds, Kim. 2014. “Buzzwords at Play: Gender, Education, and Political Participation in Kenya.” Gender and Education 26 (6): 653–671. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2014.933190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, Amos C. 2021. “Strategic Relationships, Risk, and Proxy War.” Journal of Strategic Security 14 (2): 1–24. doi:https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.14.2.1879.
   Google Scholar
• Gallie, W. B. 1955. “Essentially Contested Concepts.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56: 167–198.
   Google Scholar
• Goxho, Delina. 2021. “Remote Warfare in the Sahel and a Role for the EU.” In Remote Warfare Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by McKay, Alasdair, Abigail Watson, and Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, 96–109. Bristol: E-International Relations.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, Colin S. 2007. “Irregular Warfare: One Nature, Many Characters.” Strategic Studies Quarterly 1 (2): 35–57.
   Google Scholar
• Groh, Tyrone. 2019. Proxy War: The Least Bad Option. Redwood City: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gusterson, Hugh. 2016. Drone: Remote Control Warfare. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• HC Deb. 2020. vol 686, col 307. Accessed December 16 https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2020-12-16/debates/531F815F-67EA-4594-A01D-D5CB73D938BF/Arms(ExportsAndRemoteWarfare)
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, Frank G. 2009. “Hybrid Warfare and Challenges.” JFQ 52 (1): 34–39.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, Frank G. 2016. “The Contemporary Spectrum of Conflict: Protracted, Gray Zone, Ambiguous, and Hybrid Modes of War.” The Heritage Foundation 25–36.
   Google Scholar
• Huelss, Hendrik. 2019. “Deciding on Appropriate Use of Force: Human‐Machine Interaction in Weapons Systems and Emerging Norms.” Global Policy 10 (3): 354–358.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ignatieff, Michael. 2001. Virtual War: Kosovo and Beyond. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Jelfs, Timothy. 2020. “Over There? War Writing, Lethal Technology, and Democracy in America.” In Remote Warfare: New Cultures of Violence, edited by Adelman, Rebecca A. and David Kieran, 153–175. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Karagiannis, Emmanuel. 2021. “Russian Surrogate Warfare in Ukraine and Syria: Understanding the Utility of Militias and Private Military Companies.” Journal of Balkan and near Eastern Studies 23 (4): 549–565. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2021.1888603.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinsey, Christopher, and Helene Olsen. 2021. “Remote Warfare and the Utility of Military and Security Contractors.” In Remote Warfare Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by McKay, Alasdair, Abigail Watson, and Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, 64–78. Bristol: E-IR Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Knight, Michael. 1972. “Rep. William Ryan, West Side Liberal, Is Dead of Cancer.” The New York Times, September 18. https://www.nytimes.com/1972/09/18/archives/rep-william-ryan-west-side-liberal-is-dead-of-cancer-rep-william-f.html
   Google Scholar
• Knowles, Emily, and Abigail Watson. 2018. Remote Warfare: Lessons Learned from Contemporary Theatres. London: Oxford Research Group.
   Google Scholar
• Krieg, Andreas. 2018. Defining Remote Warfare: The Rise of the Private Military and Security Industry. London: Oxford Research Group.
   Google Scholar
• Krieg, Andreas, and Jean-Mark Rickli. 2018. “Surrogate Warfare: The Art of War in the 21st Century?” Defence Studies 18 (2): 113–130. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2018.1429218.
   Google Scholar
• Lanoszka, Alexander. 2016. “Russian Hybrid Warfare and Extended Deterrence in Eastern Europe.” International Affairs 92 (1): 175–195. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12509.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, Peter. 2018. “The Distance Paradox: Reaper, the Human Dimension of Remote Warfare, and Future Challenges for the RAF.” Air and Space Power Review 21 (3): 106–130.
   Google Scholar
• Luttwak, Edward N. 1995. “Toward Post-Heroic Warfare.” Foreign Affairs 74 (3): 109–122. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/20047127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mälksoo, Maria. 2018. “Countering Hybrid Warfare as Ontological Security Management: The Emerging Practices of the EU and NATO.” European Security 27 (3): 374–392. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2018.1497984.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, Corinne L. 2019. “Buzzwords and Fuzzwords: Flattening Intersectionality in Canadian Aid.” Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 25 (2): 203–219. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/11926422.2019.1592002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, Jack. 2021. “Remote Warfare and the Legitimacy of Military Capabilities.” Defence Studies Online First.
   Google Scholar
• Moghadam, Assaf, and Michel Wyss. 2020. “The Political Power of Proxies: Why Nonstate Actors Use Local Surrogates.” International Security 44 (4): 119–157. doi:https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moran, Jon. 2015. Remote Warfare (RW): Developing a Framework for Evaluating Its Use. London: Remote Control Project.
   Google Scholar
• New England Action Research. 1973. “Toys against the People (Or Remote Warfare).” Science for the People, January 1. https://archive.scienceforthepeople.org/vol-5/v5n1/remote-warfare/
   Google Scholar
• Ohlin, Jens David. 2017a. “Introduction.” In Research Handbook on Remote Warfare, edited by Ohlin, Jens David, 1–11. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Ohlin, Jens David. 2017b. “Remoteness and Reciprocal Risk.” In Research Handbook on Remote Warfare, edited by Ohlin, Jens David, 15–49. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Rauta, Vladimir. 2016. “Proxy Agents, Auxiliary Forces and Sovereign Defection: Assessing the Outcomes of Using Non-State Actors in Civil Conflicts.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 16 (1): 91–111. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2016.1148416.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauta, Vladimir. 2018. “A Structural-Relational Analysis of Party Dynamics in Proxy Wars.” International Relations 32 (4): 449–467. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117818802436.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauta, Vladimir. 2020a. “Proxy Warfare and the Future of Conflict: Take Two.” The RUSI Journal 165 (2): 1–10. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/03071847.2020.1736437.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauta, Vladimir. 2020b. “Towards a Typology of Non-State Actors in ‘Hybrid Warfare’: Proxy, Auxiliary, Surrogate and Affiliated Forces.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 33 (6): 868–887. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2019.1656600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauta, Vladimir. 2021a. “‘Proxy War’ - A Reconceptualisation.” Civil Wars 23 (1): 1–24. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13698249.2021.1860578.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauta, Vladimir. 2021b. “Framers, Founders, and Reformers: Three Generations of Proxy War Research.” Contemporary Security Policy 42 (1): 113–134. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2020.1800240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauta, Vladimir. 2021c. “A Conceptual Critique of Remote Warfare.” Defence Studies Online First.
   Google Scholar
• Rauta, Vladimir, Matthew Ayton, Alexandra Chinchilla, Andreas Krieg, Christopher Rickard, and Jean-Marc Rickli. 2019. “A Symposium – Debating ‘Surrogate Warfare’ and the Transformation of War.” Defence Studies 19 (4): 410–430. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2019.1680290.
   Google Scholar
• Rauta, Vladimir, and Sean Monaghan. 2021. “Global Britain in the Grey Zone: Between Statecraft and Stagecraft“ Contemporary Security Policy doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2021.1980984, Online First.
   Google Scholar
• Ravitch, Diane. 2007. EdSpeak: A Glossary of Education Terms, Phrases, Buzzwords, and Jargon. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
   Google Scholar
• Renz, Bettina. 2016. “Russia and ‘Hybrid Warfare.’” Contemporary Politics 22 (3): 283–300. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2016.1201316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richards, Julian. 2021. “Intelligence Sharing in Remote Warfare.” In Remote Warfare Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by McKay, Alasdair, Abigail Watson, and Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, 48–63. Bristol: E-IR Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, Michael. 2020. “Of Games and Drones. Mediating Traumatic Affect in the Age of Remote Warfare.” In Remote Warfare: New Cultures of Violence, edited by Adelman, Rebecca A. and David Kieran, 127–152. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Riemann, Malte, and Norma Rossi. 2021b. “Remote Warfare as ‘Security of Being’: Reading Security Force Assistance as an Ontological Security Routine.” Defence Studies Online First.
   Google Scholar
• Riemann, Malte, and Normal Rossi. 2021a. “Outsourcing Death, Sacrifice and Remembrance: The Socio-Political Effects of Remote Warfare.” In Remote Warfare Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Mckay, Alasdair, Abigail Watson, and Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, 79–95. Bristol: E-International Relations Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Robertson, Nic 2009. “Remote Warfare Ushers New Kind of Stress.” CNN, July 23. http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/07/23/wus.warfare.pilots.uav/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, Paul. 2013. “Security by ‘Remote Control’ Can It Work?” The RUSI Journal 158 (3): 14–20. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/03071847.2013.807581.
   Google Scholar
• Routley, Laura. 2014. “Developmental States in Africa? A Review of Ongoing Debates and Buzzwords.” Development Policy Review 32 (2): 159–177. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12049.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schnable, Allison, Anthony DeMattee, Rachel Sullivan Robinson, and Jennifer N. Brass. 2021. “International Development Buzzwords: Understanding Their Use among Donors, NGOs, and Academics.” The Journal of Development Studies 57 (1): 26–44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2020.1790532.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulzke, Markus. 2016. “The Morality of Remote Warfare: Against the Asymmetry Objection to Remote Weaponry.” Political Studies 64 (1): 90–105. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9248.12155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiban, Baraa, and Camilla Molyneux. 2021. “The Human Cost of Remote Warfare in Yemen.” In Remote Warfare Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Mckay, Alasdair, Abigail Watson, and Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, 110–131. Bristol: E-International Relations.
   Google Scholar
• Sjoberg, Laura. 2015. “Intimacy, Warfare, and Gender Hierarchy.” Political Geography 44 (1): 74–76. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2014.09.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoddard, Edward, and Sorina Toltica. 2021. “Practising Remote Warfare: Analysing the Remote Character of the Saudi/UAE Intervention in Yemen.” Defence Studies Online First.
   Google Scholar
• The Labour Party. 2019. “Manifesto: A New Internationalism.” https://labour.org.uk/manifesto-2019/a-new-internationalism/
   Google Scholar
• Trenta, Luca. 2021. “Remote Killing? Remoteness, Covertness, and the US Government’s Involvement in Assassination.” Defence Studies Online First.
   Google Scholar
• Ucko, David H., and Thomas. A. Marks. 2018. “Violence in Context: Mapping the Strategies and Operational Art of Irregular Warfare.” Contemporary Security Policy 39 (2): 206–233. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2018.1432922.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldman, Thomas. 2021. Vicarious Warfare: American Strategy and the Illusion of War on the Cheap. Bristol: Bristol University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, David M. 2018. “American Military Culture and the Strategic Seduction of Remote Warfare.” Journal of War & Culture Studies 11 (1): 5–21. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/17526272.2017.1416763.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, Abigail, and Karlshøj-Pedersen Megan. 2019. Fusion Doctrine in Five Steps: Lessons Learned from Remote Warfare in Africa. London: Oxford Research Group.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, Abigail, and McKay Alasdair. 2021. “Remote Warfare: A Critical Introduction.” In Remote Warfare Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Mckay, Alasdair, Abigail Watson, and Megan Karlshøj-Pedersen, 7–33. Bristol: E-International Relations.
   Google Scholar
• Watts, Thomas F. A., and Rubrick Biegon. 2017. Defining Remote Warfare: Security Cooperation. London: Oxford Research Group.
   Google Scholar
• Watts, Thomas F. A., and Rubrick Biegon. 2019. “Conceptualising Remote Warfare: The Past, Present, and Future.” Oxford Research Group. https://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/conceptualising-remote-warfare-the-pastpresent-and-future
   Google Scholar
• Watts, Thomas F. A., and Rubrick Biegon. 2021Revisiting the Remoteness of Remote Warfare: US Military Intervention in Libya during Obama's Presidency Defence Studies Online First.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, John. 2015. “Distant Intimacy: Space, Drones, and Just War.” Ethics and International Affairs 29 (1): 93–110. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679414000793.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeitlin, Michael. 2020. “An Entirely New Method of Conducting War at A Distance’: The First World War and the Air War and the Air War of the Future.” In Remote Warfare: New Cultures of Violence, edited by Adelman, Rebecca A. and David Kieran, 31–52. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar