Abstract
Whereas war is the continuation of politics by other means, a new space between diplomacy and open conflict is now becoming available for state and non-state actors, tempting them with the promise of achieving a strategic advantage over an opponent without risking the escalation of the conflict to the level of kinetic aggression. From that perspective, the ongoing shift of states and societies into cyberspace is becoming extremely interesting. As it blurs national borders, it offers an excellent dimension in which to exercise non-war activities, enabling reduction of kinetic aggression in the three basic dimensions of warfare (land, air, and sea) and providing new means of reaching one’s political objectives. The aim of this article is twofold. Firstly, it discusses the changing nature of borders and examines the impact of non-war doctrine on the functions played by national borders. Secondly, it analyzes how states utilize these activities to achieve political goals and gain strategic advantage over opponents, as well as to what extent they foster de-bordering.
Subject
Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science
Reference63 articles.
1. Agnew, J. (1994). The territorial trap: The geographical assumptions of international relations theory. Review of International Political Economy, 1(1), 53–80.
2. Andreas, P. (2002). The re-bordering of America after 11 September. The Brown Journal of World Affairs, 8(2), 195–202.
3. Andreas, P. (2003). Redrawing the line: Borders and security in the twenty-first century. International Security, 28(20), 78–111.
4. Ashraf, C. H. (2015). The spatiality of power in internet control and cyberwar [Doctoral thesis, University of California]. UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations, https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0w99g31p
5. Belo, D., & Carment, D. (2019). Grey-zone conflict: Implications for conflict management. Canadian Global Affairs Institute.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献