Search results

Considers the relations between warfare, gender and marketing, and asks “Are we witnessing the feminization of marketing?” Draws on Deleuze and Guattari’s (1988) conception of warfare to illustrate contemporary patriarchal organization of society, war and marketing. Some might argue that a shifting balance of power in society and in marketing is reflected in developments such as relationship marketing and postmodern marketing which signal a shift away from “male” values, and that we are currently witnessing the resurgence of more “feminine” values. Concludes that despite these grand claims, prevailing “patriarchal” relations of power are still intact.One could argue that such developments are further acts of appropriation of the “female” space. That said, this space can never be totally appropriated. To locate the “female” principle, one must look beyond the regulating structures of society and the academy to the fringe, for this is the domain of the war machine, a territory which cannot be fully occupied by the forces of the social.

This chapter presents reflections and considerations regarding artificial intelligence (AI) and contemporary and future warfare. As “an evolving collection of computational techniques for solving problems,” AI holds great potential for national defense endeavors (Rubin, Stafford, Mertoguno, & Lukos, 2018). Though decades old, AI is becoming an integral instrument of war for contemporary warfighters. But there are also challenges and uncertainties. Johannsen, Solka, and Rigsby (2018), scientists who work with AI and national defense, ask, “are we moving too quickly with a technology we still don't fully understand?” Their concern is not if AI should be used, but, if research and development of it and pursuit of its usage are following a course that will reap the rewards desired. Although they have long-term optimism, they ask: “Until theory can catch up with practice, is a system whose outputs we can neither predict nor explain really all that desirable?” ¹ Time (speed of development) is a factor, but so too are research and development priorities, guidelines, and strong accountability mechanisms. ²

This section deals with asymmetric warfare and its nature as well as the issues that it creates. The reason for devoting such a large part of the Seoul conference and of these proceedings to this type of warfare derives from the fact that it has changed many rules of the game of conflict.

This change has imposed a profound transformation on the military, not only tactical but also structural, preparatory and mental.

The commitment to adaptation, to change, to the broadening of mentalities and horizons that asymmetric warfare requires of the military today thus motivates the plurality – and also the heterogeneity – of the studies presented in the chapters of this section.

The U.S. military is designed to take on a similarly constructed foreign military located across some line of demarcation. The goal of such conventional warfare is to incapacitate or annihilate the enemy military, whereupon victory is achieved – a task for which the U.S. military has no peer on the current world scene or the foreseeable future. However, the U.S.'s adversaries since the end of the Cold War have not been conventional forces, as evidenced most recently in Iraq and Afghanistan. Consequently, the U.S. Army and Marine Corps recently have become volcanoes of change in order to adapt their operational styles to this reality. In the past, departures from the conventional mode in similar circumstances have been temporary. Currently, there is considerable discussion in the U.S. defense establishment about how persistent these types of nonconventional threats are likely to be in the future and whether it is necessary to change the configuration of the U.S. military accordingly. A centerpiece of this discussion is a new Counterinsurgency (COIN) Field Manual 3-24 addressing issues related to the postures the military and support establishments may take. This paper discusses some events prior to the writing of the new COIN Manual, comments on issues raised by the Manual and its doctrine, and offers some social science implications for thinking about and implementing the doctrine.

Purpose – An analysis of the security implications of asymmetric warfare and counterinsurgency.

Methodology/approach – This chapter provides a review of the relevant literature based on historical, defense-strategic and also a wider security-political qualitative approach.

Findings – The results show that the military is not always the best and the only instrument to counter asymmetric war. Intelligence and covert action play a certain role, but cause additional problems, also with regard to international law.

Research limitations/implications – Further research should be done with regard to a coordination and cooperation of the various actors and bodies engaged in countering insurgency and asymmetric warfare.

Originality/value of paper – This is a research paper with practical implications.

The rates of direct paternal care vary greatly across human cultures and primate species. Prior research reveals important hormonal differences between average fathers and non‐fathers in the same population, such as higher levels of prolactin and oxytocin and lower levels of testosterone. This evidence raises the question of whether rates of aggression would be lower in populations with higher paternal care. This study aims to test this hypothesis.

Analyses of correlation and χ²‐tests were applied to data from the Standard Cross‐Cultural Sample, a database of 186 pre‐industrial societies chosen for their independence for cross‐cultural research, to test the hypothesized relationship between paternal care and societal aggression.

High infant‐father closeness was found to be significantly associated with low levels of aggression towards other societies (external war), as predicted. There was not a statistically significant finding between infant‐father closeness and aggression inside a given society.

This study only reports a correlational effect owing to the nature of the data. More research is needed to determine causality and to better understand the mechanisms underlying the found association. One future direction of research is to examine a similar question across difference nonhuman primate species.

This paper reports a previously unknown association between father closeness and low external warfare. It might inspire future research that could lead to interventions intended to reduce aggression.

Information and communication in times of war is an area that has been much written about, but one which has not often been treated as a topic in its own right from an information science perspective. The national liberation struggles of the second half of the 20th century offer possibilities for the development of an information and communication model, incorporating data on a range of covert and overt information and communication activities by both sides in the conflict. The model takes account of such activities as scouting, secret communication, propaganda, misinformation campaigns, censorship, intelligence gathering and collating, and other aspects of information‐related activity. It offers a capacity to structure this knowledge, indicates gaps and concentrations in activity, and permits audit and assessment of information‐related activity in the struggle. It is intended to be capable of providing perspectives on information warfare in other contexts, although this aspect is not explored here.