A few comments on the «novelty» of the «new war» discourse: «innovation» and tradition

Abstract

The «transformation of war» and the related need to conceptually «fix» the transition from the concept of «old war» in the concept of «new war» determines the relevance of discussing the methodological issues arising from this transition, related to the rules of constructing a new concept, that is, philosophical analysis. The purpose of the research is to identify the necessary differences between the classical concept of war (K. Clausewitz) and the discourse of the «new war». The research methodology is defined in the horizon of the «concept of the political» (as an irreducible decision of the sovereign regarding the existential opposition «friend-enemy») and the idea of the sovereign (K. Schmitt) as «making a decision on a state of emergency», constitutive for the essential understanding of war as a «political phenomenon». Based on a consistent distinction between «concept» and «discourse», the article considers the main modern ways of reasoning about the «novelty» of «new wars» («new war» by M. Kaldor, «hybrid war» by F. Hoffman, «degenerate war» by M. Shaw, «transformation of war» by M. Kaldor). Creveld), reveals the essential conceptual framework for the construction of the concept of «new war». For the first time, it is concluded that the crisis of sovereignty of the new European States-Nations involves the search for a new «constitutive» for the concept of «new war»; Imperial sovereignty and Imperial legitimacy, theoretically the only ones able to perform this function, due to the reasons discussed in the article, are actually unable to «remove» the «problem» of the sovereignty of Nations-States. The article considers the main approaches to determining the ways of forming the «Imperial political space»; determined that globalization implies a «singularity» and «universality» Imperial order (G. Moncler), identifies the causes of his «non-reality»; the theory of «greater political space empires», preserving the «sovereignty» suitable for use in theoretical design the changing «world political order». The practical significance of the conclusion about the necessity of consistent distinction and hold the distinction of the concept of «old wars» and «private discourse» of the «new war» first and foremost is the need to preserve the «political concept» arbitrary «reductions» done in the discourses of the «new war» justifying application of the «global players» forces to their advantage.

Keywords

• war
• «new war»
• sovereign
• empire
• «political space»
• «radical conceptuality»
• «concept of the political»
• discourse