Becoming War: Steps to an Ecology of Global Security

This is the video abstract of my dissertation. While the paper version of my dissertation does not yet support video. I will be posting chapters here that will embed the video footage that has been collected as part of the dissertation research. This is a montage of some of that footage.

Jairus Grove's Prospectus

How War Exceeds the State: Insurgencies, Cities, and the Materiality of Violence

Introduction:
What follows is a description of the centrality of warfare’s place in global security. It is not the case that I think that is inevitably the case or has always been the case but that war is a persistent and serious challenge to global order. This is a relatively undisputed fact amongst those often described as Realists and and yet is dismissed as fatalistic and outmoded by those of the Liberal IR persuasion and the growing class of of Kantian inspired international legal activists.  I think that each of these divergent approaches for predicting the future of warfare is greatly hindered by tendencies of state or institutional centrism, overly simplistic historicisms, and an unhelpful anthropocentrism in defining what is considered war and who or what causes or starts wars.
However this is not a dissertation about the causes of war, the why of war as it were. It is rather an attempt to look somewhere between the how and the what of warfare, particularly modern warfare. The central concern being how combat is mobilized and who or what can mobilize it. This of course raises the question of what combat is and what exactly ought to count as mobilization. It is the latter point that will likely be the more controversial of the claims. Mobilization would seem to suggest a mobilizer, or an agent of mobilization. However it is the contention of this dissertation that such an agent is often lacking or insufficient to explain combat, as in the case of non-state organizations such as al-Qaeda where the leadership is pluralized and therefore proceeds by agents. Diverging from the debate over agent or agents, mobilization may be even more dispersed to the point of no longer being usefully described as either agent or agents.
I argue that the mobilization of combat--warfare—can at times be so dispersed as to demonstrate that agents are better described as material contexts or assemblages of material contexts and a myriad of differing agents at varying levels of efficacy such as in the case of urban ghettos and other complex assemblages such as crowds that are not reducible to the mere addition of their parts much less the sum of the rational individual decisions of each crowd member.
I am not attempting to jettison earlier explanations that rely on the state or defined interest groups for explaining the emergence of combat. The value of this dissertation’s approach is not to discount or dismiss the state as outmoded or as a mythical construct as earlier transnational and postmodern approaches have often done. Quite the contrary, the goal is to show that the state, and I think from its beginnings, has been in a competitive struggle with other forms of organization and self-organization.
For the purposes of this study the focus is on the particular competition over the organization and monopoly of force or violence. To put this another way, if the mobilization of warfare is seen as a collective action problem this dissertation demonstrates that the state while having great success in overcoming collective action barriers has never had a monopoly on warfare, and is increasingly losing its comparative advantage over other less centralized or less institutionalized forms. Therefore theorist of international relations, and security studies more broadly, that proceed on the belief that international politics can be analyzed as an anarchy of units defined as political entities with a territorial monopoly over legitimate force—the standard Weberian definition—are leaving out the myriad of forces that complicate and at times even drive global conflict.
To add depth and dimension to these complexities requires the investigation of how warfare exceeds state control and also how else and from where else warfare can emerge. In this picture of global politics the state is not left behind as outmoded or anachronistic as many globalization theorist declared it in the wake of the Cold War. The state has to be brought back in but back in context. If International Relations theory once thought of the globe as a kind desert landscape populated by a single homogenous species of war wielding states competing for advantage, balance or sometimes cooperation (depending on your theoretical leanings), the picture developed here is a richer ecosystem. States are thrown into a veritable rainforest of other species.  Some relatively similar to states such as terrorist organizations with institutionalized goals and human leadership. Others have more alien and less analogous features such as mobs, uprisings, and insurgent assemblages whose organization or control is less directed or thought out but yet sustainable and sometimes more destructive and competitively superior to the state form.
The mystery or puzzle is what holds these collectivities together. Like a colony of bacteria in the human gut or the complex dynamics of urban life that can only be understood in their emergent whole rather than their constituent parts, the collectivities analyzed in this dissertation require theorizing and conceptualizing action that is constituent but leaderless, goal oriented but not conscious, collective but not regimented. Previous theories of institutions such as states, firms, international organization, or social movements provide tools but are insufficient to describe what holds these collectivities together much less adequately describe their behavior or impact on global security. To begin this task we have to dive back into the material context or primordial goo from which states emerged and look at the other, often incipient, mobilizing forces of combat. In so doing providing more tools for understanding why parsimonious theories of state to state behavior describe so little of contemporary global conflict.


 Section 1: Traditions of Materialism in International Relations

Chapter 1: Real Materialism
Analyzing the micropolitical or sub-state and supra-state or global context of conflict is not new. A strand of this kind of materialist thinking runs from Thucydides to Hans Morgenthau and beyond. However it has been at best an undercurrent of International Relations thinking and with the behavioral revolution’s drive to structural reductionism has been, in the second half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century, reduced to almost a trickle. This first chapter focuses on Hans Morgenthau and E.H. Carr materialist explanations of the recurrence of war and national competition while flushing out a deep ambivalence in both scholars for the increasingly formative role of technological and material change; a nascent theory of complexity. In both thinkers is a rich theory of the empirical world driving change and behavior but a lingering commitment to ahistorical or cyclical view of human nature even as they were writing about dramatic, system altering changes, such as airpower and nuclear weapons. Ultimately, Morgenthau and Carr have useful critiques of earlier forms of idealism and understands the role of technology and natural material conditions play in altering the constraints or possibilities of politics but are both trapped in an unhelpful paradox where they assert that war and national interest do not change and asserts that human nature, the origin of national interest and war, is a result of a changing technological and natural context. However what is useful and lost in later theories of neorealism is Morgenthau and Carr’s insistence that the empirical ought to drive thought rather than the expectation that “reality change to fit the model.” For Morgenthau this results in a sustained engagement with Alfred North Whitehead’s critique of 19th century scientific rationality in the book Scientific Man Versus Power Politics. Carr took his cues on non-linearity and complex materialism from the writings of Henri Poincare. I read Whitehead’s concepts of reason and becoming and Poincare writings on complexity and self-organization back into the Morgenthau and Carr’s limited materialism to show how their chastened views of natural history results in the fatalism of war and hierarchy but could be opened up to include the efficacy of the world’s material becoming to make a richer mode of analysis possible.

Chapter 2: Cybermaterialism
Inspired by the groundbreaking work of Norbert Wiener and Alan Turing scholars such as Karl Deutsch and Hayward Alker began to investigate and apply the then underdeveloped and untested concepts of cybernetics to explain global change as well as propose new means for engineering global order. The central assumption of Deutsch’s book The Nerves of Government is that humans, their behavior and habits, are fundamentally plastic. There was no theory of transcendental human nature, we are our brains and our brains can change. Despite this interest in a very rich understanding of the mutability of the materiality of human beings Deutch and Alker were both relatively indifferent to the materiality of the rest of the world much less the second-order dimensions or ecological dimensions of the larger system. The emphasis was on humans in their relationship to information and the resulting behavioral modifications that could be made or as Deutsch thought had to be made to escape nuclear Armageddon. Hacking the human species and re-engineering or ‘steering’ human civilization was his way out of the security dilemma of Political Realism. However, in all of their talk of feedback loops and control mechanisms very little attention was played to the feedback of non-human factors or the material contexts those plastic humans lived in. Where as cybermaterialism’s view of history is less cyclical than early strands of real materialism—in part because assumption about the universality or stability of human nature are jettisoned—there is little attention to what factors, both material constraints and possibilities, may have produced the recurrence of violence and war. The failure of this approach left only the mathematics and quantitative measurements of cybernetics in the case of Deutsch’s pursuit of behavioralism and in the case of Alker lead to a focus entirely on language and the development and integration of postmodern discourse analysis into his theories of international change. I take from this a useful understanding of power as steering that sees the world as alterable and the concept of control that understands patterns of behavior as not being the result of individual rational decisions but of broader more dispersed logics or protocols of behavior that emerge through complex and large scale interaction. However what is still lacking is an engine for the becoming or unfolding of the world that is not reducible to human ideas. The world is left behind and the relations that change that world are left untheorized. Deutsch and Alker’s unhelpful anthropocentrism ignores many of the feedbacks involved in global politics and retains a transcendental position from which Deutsch can code and quantify politics and Alker can more interestingly, but still insufficiently, investigate discursively constituted ontologies of security and war.

Chapter 3: Ecological Materialism 
I see this strand of materialism as a synthesis of earlier description of the formative materiality of the world and the plasticity of cybermaterialism. The position is captured succinctly by philosopher and biologist William Wimsatt who provides some of the conceptual language for integrating complexity theory and materialism in this chapter:
“[We Live in] variegated ecologies of reality supporting and increasingly bent to our science and technology, but we are embodied socialized beings; evolved and developing in a world conditioned by our sociality and technology… embedded in a larger supporting complex that is both of the world and self-continuing in the world.” (Re-Engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings)
To develop this concept of embedded or what I call ecological materialism I draw on three I.R. theorists Daniel Deudney, James Rosenau, and T.F. Homer-Dixon and from theorists Manuel DeLanda , Gilles Deleuze, Alfred North Whitehead, and William Wimsatt. This section develops the main thrust of the concepts necessary for the following three chapters. Using Deudney’s security materialist account of violence interdependence and Rosenau’s application of complexity theory to global change I explain why states are increasingly unable to either guarantee security territorially or effectively compete with other combat mobilizing forces abroad. Additionally I draw on Deudney and DeLanda in particular to explain how technological and ecological changes alter the conditions of both macro and microscale violence. The philosophers are brought in to support and illustrate the position that materialism is neither deterministic nor constructed. The point is to develop a theory of becoming and complexity that accounts both for humans agency and their environment without falling prey either to the anthropocentrism and discursive focus of constructivism nor the fatalism and determinism of classical Realism.
The main problematic to be developed and explained is the difference between power as the ability to wield force and power as the ability to control outcomes or patterns. This requires explaining why control as consistency of outcome or consistency of organization does not require a controller. The slogan of theorists Alexander Galloway and Eugene Thacker “no one controls networks, but networks are controlled” raises the question of how control exists after decentralization or without hierarchy. I also unpack the terms network, assemblage, emergence, and non-linear change to explain how the violence capacity of non-state forms is mobilized and executed as well as why seemingly local incidence of combat increasingly have global effects.

Section 2: Crowds, Cities, and Assemblages.
This section applies the theoretical work of section 1 to the two concrete examples crowds and cities and then concludes with a final chapter further illustrating the conceptual usefulness of assemblages and resonance machines or agents embedded and in a co-constitutive relay with their material context rather than the simple theory of networks that attempts to just theorize the collective capacity of connected individual agents.

Chapter 1: Crowds
This chapter starts with the popular uprising in Spain against Napoleon to illustrate the power of emergent insurgencies in the context of the beginning of modern state warfare, meaning nationalist warfare. The chapter subsequently reviews the early theories of crowds including Gustave Le Bon, Sigmund Freud, and Elias Cannetti and then delves into contemporary scientific work on uprisings and riot ‘intelligence’ inspired by Deleuze and Guattarie’s concept of swarming. The ultimately goal is to conclude that seemingly disorganized groups have real effects upon the security environment and are not adequately described by either rational choice theory, collective action theory (Mancur Olson), nor contemporary theories of terrorist networks that conflate uprisings with coordinated attacks as in the case of the U.S. Counter-Insurgency Field Manual and the failed efforts of the U.S. Air Force and Army to develop ‘Effects Based Operations’ that rely on network targeting and behavioral modification through strategic bombing and other forms of often highly lethal coercion or intimidation.

Chapter 2: The City 
This chapter investigates the role spatial relations play in both undermining the state’s control as well as enabling forms such as crowds and riots that would not otherwise be possible or likely in other spatial arrangements such as agrarian or suburban life. After a brief history of the city as a form of social control or social organization I shift to a focus on the Ghetto or the super-dense urban environment. Drawing on evidence from the drug war in New York City, the drug conflict and increasingly warlike behavior of the Brazilian Favelas and Baghdad’s persistently violent enclaves such as Sadr City I argue against what I call the creator myth. This is the false presumption that the creator of a thing is the master of that thing. While cities are human built and often even state built they take on a life of their own. They may not have agency but they have efficacy, real effects that are not controlled by architects, city planners, or those that maintain the city such as the police or other state officials.
Cities change and degrade to create new ways of living or environments for conflict and they concentrate or alter human behavior or relations in ways that are beyond the intended purposes of their original design. Some ghettos emerge haphazardly as a result of marginalization as in the case of Brazil. Others are built for centralized control as in the case of the projects in the United States. Or further still result from racialization and perceptions of difference as in the case of the Shiite enclave Sadr City. Cities also intensify or amplify that perception of difference as in the case of all three. However in all cases the ‘built’ properties have effects that complicated state control and enable or even create often deadly and highly destructive mobilizations of violence. These examples further demonstrate the central thesis that materiality alters calculations of power.  Being superior at the application of force can become a liability in such an environment. Power is shown to be more obviously about control and the consistency of mobilization than about how many pounds of explosives or bullets you can deliver.

Chapter 3: From Networks to Assemblages
This chapter begins with a critique of network theory as it has been espoused by Marc Sageman and others as a quantitative means for analyzing terrorism and insurgency. What I hope to make clear is that Graph Theory, the mathematical approach to studying networks that is used to develop Sageman et all’s coding and quantitative study of terrorism, over privileges nodes or individuals in the determination of a network identity rather than taking into account qualitatively different kinds of edges or connections between nodes/individuals. The relative indifference to the edges or connection, i.e. the context or the materiality of the connection, misses the variable intensity of latent or incipient connections of, for instances, nationalism or religion that may become more pronounced as the result of a foreign invasion or collateral damage. The materiality of edges may also effect what emerges as in the case of hand held communication devices or in the case of IEDs where economic networks have resulted in the dumping of surplus goods. Seemingly harmless and outdated technologies such as old weapons and garage door openers accumulating in sufficient quantities in 3rd world countries produced a new weapon that caught the most advanced military in the world off guard. These changes in intensity or changes in context can transform or activate even create a new network (what I would call an assemblage) that may previously have only existed in its most rudimentary form. Suddenly familial connections or neighborhood affiliation can become the bonds of insurgent solidarity. A peaceful civilian can suddenly become an effective combatant as the result of rage or simply fear as a result of an unexpected armored division attempting to squeeze through a crowded alleyway. Or the attempt to dump cheap outdated munitions and the promotion of telecommunications world wide can resonate in a new way to develop a new form of warfare. Therefore it is important to understand that the connection feedback and can even alter the identity or content of the node or individual.
In this last section I draw on William Connolly concept of resonance to describe how these shifts can and do occur as well as the similar account of change described by David Kilcullen’s concept the ‘Accidental Guerilla’. The point is to show how uprisings, insurgencies, and even military defeats and technological innovations can occur as the result of unplanned, emergent collectivities, that are embedded in the world but not obviously identifiable as institutions, either state or non-state.

Jairus Victor Grove's CV

Jairus Victor Grove

2827  N. Calvert
Apt. 3

Baltimore, MD 21218

T 443 9096091

jgrove1@jhu.edu

http://contemporarycondition.blogspot.com

Education
Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University 2005 to 
Present. Double Major: International Relations; Political Theory.


Dissertation: Becoming War: Steps to An Ecology of Global Security. Defense Date, May 2011. Committee: William Connolly, Siba Grovogui, Jane Bennett, Daniel Deudney.


B.A. with University Honors, University of Texas at Austin, Bachelor of Liberal Arts from the History Honors Program, December 2000.
Senior Thesis: The Terror Network or How They Built an Enemy: A Critique of The Reagan Administration’s Policy on International Terrorism.


Summer Workshop on Teaching about Terrorism (SWOTT), University of Oklahoma, Summer 2008.


Selected Publications
“New Materialism,” in The Cambridge Dictionary of Political Thought, Cambridge University Press, forthcoming 2011.


“Xenophobia,” Encyclopedia of Political Thought, Blackwell, forthcoming 2011.


"Must We Persist to Continue? Critical Responsiveness Beyond the Limits of the Human Species," in Democracy and Pluralism, Editor Allen Finlayson, Routledge, October 2009. http://tinyurl.com/yljuz6p


“The Effects of Geoengineering on Global Order.” Co-Written with Dr. Daniel Deudney, Submitted. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1490795


“New Wars, New Warriors.” The Contemporary Condition, March 16, 2010. http://contemporarycondition.blogspot.com/search/label/Jairus%20Victor%20Grove


"Dialogue About Evolving Approaches to Debate", in Privacy Protection Policy: Nowhere to Hide? Wake Forest University Press, 2000.


“McCain’s Broken Promises” October 10, 2008, Huffington Post. http://tinyurl.com/ykrtem7


“The Wars History Left Behind,” September 5, 2004, In The Fray. http://inthefray.org/content/view/688/39


“Heroic Ethics: The Tragedy of Ralph Ellison’s America,” May 16, 2004, In The Fray. http://inthefray.org/content/view/430/37/


Teaching
Instructor, “Terrorism, Insurgency, and the Globalization of Violence” (Senior Seminar), Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University, Spring 2010.


Teaching Assistant, “Global Security Politics” (Lower Division), Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University. Led class and gave lectures periodically, discussion section, graded papers and exams, Spring 2006.


Teaching Assistant, “Norms of Force in International Law” (Lower Division), Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University. Led class and gave lectures periodically, discussion section, graded papers and exams, Fall 2005.


Co-Taught with Daniel Deudney, “Global Security Politics” (Upper Division), Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University. Led class and lectures, discussion section, graded papers and exams, Fall 2005.


Co-Taught with Daniel Deudney, “American Grand Strategy and the War on Terrorism” (Upper Division), Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University. Led class and gave lectures periodically, discussion section, graded papers and exams, Fall 2005.


Instructor, “CMS 210 Forensics Workshop” (Lower Division), Communication Studies Department. Designed curriculum and assignments as well as lecturing, teaching, and grading, Spring 2005.


Instructor, “CMS 210 Forensics Workshop” (Lower Division), Communication Studies Department. Designed curriculum and assignments as well as lecturing, teaching, and grading, Fall 2004.


Research
Research Assistant, Prof. Daniel Deudney, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University, 2005-2006, 2008-2009.


Research Assistant, Prof. Siba Grovogui, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University, 2007-2010.


Research Assistant, Prof. Lori Leonard, Department of Global Health, School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, 2007-2008.


Selected Conference Presentation and Participation
Paper, International Studies Association, Montreal, “iWar and the Terrain of Modern Combat, March 2011. 


Paper, The Political Life of Things, British Imperial War Museum, London, “Improvised Explosive Devices and the New Ecology of War,” December 2010.


Paper, International Studies Association, “From Power To Control: The Real Existence of Networks and the Need For Ambient Security,” February 2010.


Paper, American Political Science Association, "Geoengineering and World Order: Past and Future," September 2009.


Paper, Western Political Science Association, Vancouver, B.C., “The War/Politics 
Dilemma: Control Systems and the Urbanization of Warfare in Rio and Sadr City,” March 2009.


Paper, International Studies Association, New York, "Becoming War: Affective Machines and the Biopolitical Aesthetics of Mass Slaughter," February 2009.


Paper, Johns Hopkins Political Science Graduate Student Colloquium, “Becoming War,” May 2008.


Paper, International Studies Association, San Francisco, "Schmitt's Sovereign 'Exception', The American Constitution, and Presidential Nuclear Power," Spring 2008.


Paper, Becoming Plural: The Political Thought of William E. Connolly: Hosted by: The Department of Politics and International Relations, Swansea University, United Kingdom, "Must We Persist to Continue: Animals, Robots, and Freaks," May 11, 2007.


Paper, Johns Hopkins Political Science Graduate Student Colloquium, "Sovereign Hospitality: The Ghettos and Gated Communities of the Cosmopolitan Order," October 6, 2006.


Paper, Global States Conference, U.C. Irvine, “Close Only Counts in Horseshoes and Hand Grenades: Nearness and Intimacy in the Metaphysics of Cosmopolitan Thought,” May 5, 2006.


Respondent, Johns Hopkins Political Science Graduate Student Colloquium, Bhrigupati Sing, "Preliminary Work for a Future Morality: Spiritual and Political Exercises in Gandhi, Thoreau and Nietzsche," Fall 2008.


Respondent, Johns Hopkins Political Science Graduate Student Colloquium Daniel Levine "‘Shall on make a whore of our sister?’ Genesis 34 as a 'Melian' Parable for Critical IR Theory,” Spring 2008.


Respondent, Discussant, Johns Hopkins Political Science Graduate Student Colloquium Simon Glezos, “The Acceleration of Inertia: Towards a Political Economy of Speed,” Fall 2007.


Current Employment
Harvard University
Debate Coach, 2005 to present.


Johns Hopkins University
Coordinator, International Studies Program, Johns Hopkins University, 2008 to 2009.


Selected Previous Employment
University of Texas at Austin
Director of Programs, University of Texas National Summer Institute in Forensics, 2001 to 2009.


Obama For America
Field Organizer, Florida (Supervisor, Matt Devine) 2008.


Chicago Board of Education, Office Of High School Development 

Director of the Chicago Urban Debate League, 2002 to 2003. The Chicago Debate 
Project is an educational initiative that develops and supports debate teams in inner-city public high schools focusing on at risk students. Oversaw 33 high schools, 62 teachers, and approximately 500 high school students.


Midwest Center for Justice, Chicago, IL.
International Political Consultant, April 2002 to January 2003. The Midwest Center for Justice is a private firm exclusively representing death row inmates on their state post-conviction and federal habeas corpus appeals. Drafted International Petition for cases that had claims under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to increase pressure from the European Union and international human rights organizations. The work ended because the clients were removed from the Illinois death row.


Professional Service
Co-Editor, The Contemporary Condition, www.contemporarycondition.blogspot.com


Reviewer, Borderlands, 2010 to present.


Co-Organizer, “New Materialisms”, Conference, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University, April 13-14, 2010.


Reviewer, Review of International Political Economy, 2009.


Listserv Moderator, Department of Political Science, 2005 to Present.


Chair, Johns Hopkins Political Science Graduate Student Colloquium, 2007 to 2008.


Awards
Nicole Suveges Fellowship in International Relations, 2010 to 2011.


Johns Hopkins University Deans Teaching Fellowship, 2008 to 2010.


Johns Hopkins University Graduate Student Paper of the Year, 2006 to 2007.


Johns Hopkins University International Relations Fellow, Fall 2005 to Spring 2008.


Coached the 2002 and 2003 National Debate Champions. 2nd Speaker National Debate Tournament and Semi-Finalist, 2000. 2nd Speaker CEDA National Championship, 2000.


Foreign Language Skills
Spanish: Verbal, written, and reading proficiency.


German: Reading competency.


References
Jane Bennett, Chair, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University, 
Baltimore, MD, 21218, (410) 516-5230, janebennett@jhu.edu


Terrell Carver, Professor, Department of Politics, University of Bristol, 10 Priory Road,
Clifton, Bristol BS8 1TU, (0117) 928 8826, t.carver@bristol.ac.uk


William E. Connolly, Professor, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21218, (410) 516-7535, pluma@jhu.edu


Daniel Deudney, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21218, (410) 516-7538, ddeudney@jhu.edu


Siba N. Grovogui, Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21218, (410) 516-7539, sibagro@jhu.edu


Dallas Perkins, Director of Debate Harvard University, 324 Franklin ST, Cambridge, MA 02139, (617) 306-4514, dperkins@fas.harvard.edu

Speechless.

Who Fights In Afghanistan When We Leave?

I stumbled upon a little book today. It was, in fact, its shape and color that attracted me to it. I was in a used book store and it was a tiny, hardback, Everyman edition from the late 1940's, no more than half an inch thick. The title was small and faded and too hard to read against its navy blue binding so I picked it up and examined it more closely. It was Hiroshima by John Hersey. It sounded familiar. I think I may have read it as part of a class on the Cold War I took as an undergraduate but I cannot be sure. It was, if only as an object, interesting enough to buy and take home.

I had no recollection of what it was. I assumed it was an account of the first atom bomb. It was. But the first few pages were something different. The book begins with an account of the morning proceeding the bomb. I study and teach about war so I have read the papers and documents surrounding the Manhattan Project. I know the details of the blast, the kilotonage, the side bets between the scientists regarding the risk of igniting the earth's atmosphere. I didn't know that for weeks every conventional B-29 attack on Japan had flown by Hiroshima on the way to its target elsewhere. That night after night the inhabitants of Hiroshima had listened to air raid sirens wondering if the B-29 was just passing through or if this time it was their turn to be fire bombed. According to the author, the anxiety was unbearable. Hiroshima was as of yet untouched and people assumed with each siren their time must have come or worse yet that the Americans were saving something special for them.

Of course we were. The bomb was dropped, 140,000 people were killed, and the world changed forever. Although what struck me about these few introductory pages was that the dropping of the bomb was not in anyway the worst part, it was in some perverse sense a relief. As many people disagree about the reason the bomb was dropped as whether it needed to be dropped, but for the next few paragraphs that is not what concerns me. It is the interminable panic, the slow, seemingly endless terror, a sick feeling in the gut, that at any moment the sky could fall and there is nothing you, as a singular person, could do about it, that makes me sad for our world. To paraphrase Norman Mailer, nothing you do, nothing that you are will change the fact that in an instant you can be reduced to little more than a few teeth or other grizzly remain to be cataloged or counted in some post-mortem ledger.

This, of course, has nothing to do with the atom bomb per se. Airpower, cruise missiles, the "Prompt Global Strike" initiative, can all accomplish this task without a nuclear warhead. What keeps me up at night is not the magnitude of the weapons but the event without warning that strikes like a lightening bolt. More to the point it is the inequality and the regularity of the inequality with which these weapons strike such that only a few populations in the world truly live with the daily dread that they or their loved ones could be next.

I don't believe for one second that this is the tragic inevitability of war. Nor do I believe that this is just some flaw in the mortal condition. Death from above is different than someone kicking in your door or invading your city. There is no countermeasure, no response, no resistance, no possibility for combat. If the bomb arrives there is only what I imagine is a few seconds of shock, sadness and then maybe even relief that you do not have to bear another day of waiting to be visited by the bomb.

This is all a long of way of saying that, for me, the debate over continuing the war in Afghanistan elides a question much more troubling that is not even being asked on the major news networks, much less openly by the Obama administration: Will we continue to send drones to shoot 'Hellfire' missiles into villages between Afghanistan and Pakistan? Will more or less troops even have any bearing on the decision to increasingly automate the war? Is it possible that troop reductions will lead to an increasing reliance on this prosthetic means of warfare?

For all of the changes in strategy, diplomatic posture, and real commitments to a better world in both word and deed by the Obama administration, the first drone attack took place January 23rd 2009, just a few days after Obama was inaugurated. I remember because I had just returned from the Obama Campaign's Staff Party when I read the news update on my computer. Even then in the haze of one of the best nights of my life the news made me sad. So much had changed and yet this continued unabated, seemingly without pause. Since then the attacks have become more regular. In fact the administration has already authorized and ordered more Predator attacks than the Bush administration did the previous year.

I have no idea what a drone sounds like. I imagine it to be like a remote control airplane. Something high-pitched, like an airplane but shriller. What I do know is that every child in the territory of Waziristan must talk about it constantly. In an area of the world in which indoor plumbing and consistent electricity would be 'the future' the boogeyman is not a vampire or some disfigured monster as it was for me growing up in the Texas suburbs. It is a polished, faceless, white UFO armed to kill and operated by remote or automated control.

I am sure, in fact I know, that the statistical success of these weapons is unimpeachable. If the question is do they work than the answer is yes. If by work you mean they, in the words of the Revolution in Military Affairs, 'hit to kill'. I can't argue with the numbers.

However I can't help wondering what the world will be like in ten or twenty years, not just in Waziristan, but in every country we deploy these weapons, if the United States of America becomes synonymous with this faceless, bringer of death. It will not be those maimed or killed that all Americans will have to answer to but the millions that couldn't sleep, that woke up drenched in sweat, or simply wanted to die because they could not stand the waiting. What must it be like to start every day wondering if you are next. If the plane you hear in the distance, the buzz you thought you heard, the unholy dread of a sudden stillness, the oppressive weight of silence, is the arrival of precision American engineering.

War is hell. This is slow sadistic torture. Every flash in the sky, the low hum of an engine, the constant sense of unease, all of it is a waiting game that would make me wish for hell's certainty and finality. This cannot be the best we can do.

Conclusion: Becoming Otherwise than War

Bibliography
Abu-Lughod, Janet, Race, Space, and Riots: In Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Agamben, Giorgio. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998.
______, Remnants of Auschwitz, New York, Zone Books, 2002.
______, The State of Exception, Chicago: University of Chicago, 2005.
Anderson, Ben. “Becoming and being hopeful: towards a theory of affect.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, Vol. 24, 2006.
Anderson, Craig A. “Effects of Violent Movies and Trait Hostility on Hostile Feelings and Aggressive Thoughts,” Aggressive Behavior, Vol. 23, 1997.
Appadurai, Arjun. “Deep Democracy: Urban Governmentality and the Horizon of Politics,” Environment and Urbanization, Vol. 13, No. 2, 2001.
Armitage, John. “Militarized Bodies: An Introduction, Body and Society,” Vol. 9, Iss. 1, 2003.
Arquilla, John. “The end of war as we knew it? Insurgency, counterinsurgency and lessons from the forgotten history of early terror networks,” Third World Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2007.
Arquilla, John and David Ronfeldt, Networks and Netwars: The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy, RAND Corp, 2001.
________, Swarming and the Future of Conflict, RAND Corp., 2000.
Asad, Talal. On Suicide Bombing, New York: Columbia University Press, 2007.
Atlan, Henri. “Intentional Self-Organiztion. Emergence and Reduction: Towards a Physical Theory of Intentionality,” Thesis Eleven, 1998, No. 52, 1998.
Baillie, Harold. Is Human Nature Obsolete?: Genetics, Bioengineering, and the Future of the Human Condition, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004.
Bartholow, Bruce D. Interactive effect of life experience and situational cues on aggression: The weapons priming effect in hunters and nonhunters, Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 41, 2005.
Bataille, Georges. “Additional Notes on the War,” October, Vol. 36, Spring, 1986.
_______, “The Threat of War,” October. Vol. 36, 1986.
_______, “Slaughterhouse, October, Vol. 36, 1986.
_______, The Accursed Share, Vols. 2 and 3: The History of Eroticism and Sovereignty, New York: Zone Books, 1993.
Bauman, Zygmunt. City of Fears, City of Hopes, London: University of Londun Press, 2003.
Bennett, J & Connolly, W. 2002, “Contesting Nature/Culture: Creative Character of Thinking,” The Journal of Nietzsche Studies, Vol. 24, pp. 148-163.
Bennett, Jane. Edible Matter, New Left Review, May/June 2007.
_______, “The Agency of Assemblages and the North American Blackout,” Public Culture No 17, Iss. 3, 2005.
_______, “The Force of Things: Steps toward an Ecology of Matter”, Political Theory, 2004.
Bennett, Jill. Empathic Vision: Affect, Trauma, and Contemporary Art, Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 2004.
Bergson, Henri. The Meaning of the War: Life and Matter in Conflict, T. Fisher, 1915.
_______, Matter and Memory, New York: Zone Books, 1991.
_______, The Creative Mind: An Introduction to Metaphysics,
Bevans, Katherine. “Advances and Future Directions in the Study of Children’s Neurobiological Responses to Trauma and Violence Exposure,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol. 20, No. 4, April, 2005.
Biddle, Stephen. Military Power: Explaining Victory and Defeat in Modern Battle, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006.
Biehl, Joao. Vita: Life in a Zone of Social Abandonment, Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005.
Blair, Bruce G. Strategic Command and Control: Redefining the Nuclear Threat, Washington D.C.: Brookings Institute, 1985, p. 5.
Blair, Bruce, John Pike and Stephen Schwartz, “Targeting and Controlling the Bomb”, in Atomic Audit: The Cost and Consequences of U.S. Nuclear Weapons since 1940 ed. Stephen I. Schwartz, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998, 222.
Bogard, William. “The Coils of a Serpent: Haptic Space and Control Societies,” 1000 Days of Theory, 9/11/2007, www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=581.
Bogost, Ian. Unit Operations: An Approach to Videogame Criticism, Cambridge: MIT, 2006.
_______, Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2007.
Bonabeau, Eric. Swarm Intelligence From Natural to Artificial Systems, New York: Oxford University Press,1999.
Bonabeau, Eric and Guy Theraulaz, “Swarming Smarts,” Scientific American, March, 2000.
Bracken, Paul. The Command and Control of Nuclear Forces, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983.
Brown, Bill. “Thing Theory,” Critical Inquiry, Vol. 28, No. 1, 2007.
Buck-Morss, Susan. “The City as Dreamworld and Catastrophe,” October, Vol. 73, Summer, 1995.
Bunker, Robert J. Networks, Terrorism, and Global Insurgency, New York: Routledge, 2006.
Burnett, Ron. How Images Think, Cambridge: MIT, 2004.
Byrne, David. Arboretum, San Francisco: McSweeney’s, 2006.
Campbell, David. “Performing Security: The Imaginative geographies of current US strategy,” Political Geography, Iss. 26, 2007.
Cassidy, Robert M. Counterinsurgency and the Global War on Terror, Praeger Security International, 2006.
Chaloupka, William, Knowing Nukes: The Politics and Culture of the Atom, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1992.
Chow, Rey. The Age of the World Taget: Self-Referentiality in War, Theory, and Comparative Work. Durham: Duke University Press, 2006.
Clarke, Richard and Rob Knake, “Counter-Terrorism Issues for the Next President, CTC Sentinel, Vol. 1, Iss. 8, February, 2008.
Clausewitz, Carl Von. On War. eds. Michael Howard and Peter Paret, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989.
Clough, Particia. “Notes Towards a Theory of Affect-Itself,” Ephemera, softarcades.com
Coffey, Donald. “Self-Organization, complexity and The New Biology for Medicine,” Nature Medicine, Vol. 4, Number 8, August 1998.
Connolly, W.E. 1999, Why I Am Not a Secularist, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
______, 2002, Neuropolitics, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
______, 2005, Pluralism, Duke University Press, Durham.
______, 2007, Capitalism and Christianity, Duke University Press, Durham.
______, 2007, The Political Theorist and the Seer, Forthcoming
Cordesman, Anthony H., “Iraq and Conflict Termination: The Road to Guerrilla War?, Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2003, http://www.csis.org/features/iraq_instantlessons.pdf.
Creative Strategic Intelligence Analysis and Decision Making Within the Elements of National Power, Proteus Futures Workshop: 14–16 August, 2007.
Damasio, Antonio R. “Exploring the Minded Brain,” Tanner Lectures on Human Values, 1997.
Daston, Loraine. “Life, chance and life chances,” Daedalus, Winter, 2008.
Davis, Mike. City of Slums, New York: Verso, 2007.
De Landa, Manuel and John Protevi, “Deleuzian Interrogations,” www.tamarajournal.com
De Landa, Manuel. War in the Age of Intelligent Machines, New York: Zone Books, 1991.
______, “1000 Years of War,” CTheory.com.
______, “Beyond the Problematic of Legitimacy: Military Influences on Civilian Society, boundary 2, Spring 2005.
______, “Deleuze and the Open-ended Becoming of the World”
______, “Deleuze and the Use of the Genetic Algorithm in Architecture”
______, “Markets and Antimarkets in the World Economy,” 6/14/98.
______, “Meshworks, Hierarchies and Interfaces”
______, “Uniformity and Variability: An Essay in the Philosophy of Matter”
______, “Virtual Environments and the Concepty of Synergy, Leonardo, Vol. 28, No. 5, 1995.
______, A New Ontology for the Social Sciences,
______, A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity, New York: Continuum International Publishing, 2006.
______, A Thousand Years of Non-Linear History, New York: Zone Books, 2000.
______, Intensive Science & Virtual Philosophy, New York: Continuum International Publishing, 2005.
De Waal, Frans. “Morality and the Social Instincts,” Tanner Lectures on Human Values, 2003.
Deibert, Ronald J. “Circuits of Power: Security in the Internet Environment,” in Information Technologies and Global Politics: The Changing Scope of Power and Governance, eds James N. Rosenau and J.P. Singh, Albany: SUNY Press, 2002.
Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F, Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983.
______, Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1986.
______, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1987.
______, What is Philosophy?, New York: Columbia University Press, 1996.
Deleuze, Gilles. “Anti Oedipe et Mille Plateaux: The Nature of Flows,” 14/12/1971, www.webdeleuze.com
______, “Anti Oedipe et Mille Plateaux: On Music,” 03/05/1977, www.webdeleuze.com
______, “GILLES DELEUZE, LECTURE TRANSCRIPTS ON SPINOZA’S CONCEPT OF AFFECT,” http://www.webdeleuze.com/php/sommaire.html, 24/01/1978,
______, “Spinoza: Power & Classical Natural Right,” 9/12/1980, www.webdeleuze.com.
______, Logic of Sense, New York: Columbia University Press, 1990.
______, “Postscript on the Societies of Control,” October, Vol. 59, Winter, 1992.
______, Difference and Repetition, New York: Columbia University Press, 1995a,
______, Cinema 2, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. 1995b.
______, Negotiations, Columbia University Press, New York. 1995c.
______, Desert Islands and Other Texts, New York: Semiotext(e), 2004.
______, “Lecture Course on Chapter Three of Bergson’s Creative Evolution,” SubStance, #114, Vol. 36, No. 3, 2007.
______, Two Regimes of Madness, New York: Semiotext(e), 2007.
______, “Power and Classical natural Right,” Les Cours De Gilles Deleuze, www.webdeleuze.com.
______, “Theory of Multiplicities in Bergson.” http://www.webdeleuze.com.
DerDerian, James. Virtuous War: Mapping the Military-Industrial-Media Complex, West View Publishing, 2001.
Deudney, Daniel. “Geopolitics as Theory: Historical Security Materialism,” European Journal of International Relations, 6:1, 2000.
______, Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village, Princeton University Press, 2007.
Diken, Bulent and Carsten Bagge Laustsen, “The Camp,” Geografiska Annaler, Vol. 88, Iss. 4, 2006.
Diken, Bulent. “From exception to rule: from 9/11 to comedy of (t)errors,” Irish Journal of Sociology, Vol. 15, Iss. 1, 2006.
Dillon, Michael. “Network Society, Network-Centric Warfare and the State of Emergency, Theory, Culture, and Society, Vol. 19, Iss. 4, 2002.
______, “Intelligence Incarnate: Martial Corporeality in the Digital Age, Body and Society, Vol. 9, Iss. 4, 2003a.
______, “Intelligence Incarnate: Martial Corporeality in the Digital Age, Body and Society, Vol. 9, Iss. 4, 2003.
______, “Virtual Security: A Life Science of (Dis)order,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 32, No. 3, 2003b.
______, Governing through contingency: The Security of Biopolitical governance, Political Geography, 2006.
Donnelly, Thomas and Vance Serchuck. “Fighting a Global Counterinsurgency,” American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, December, 2003.
Doyle, Richard. Wetwares, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003.
Eberhart, Russell C., Swarm Intelligence, Morgan Kaufman, 2001.
Edkins, Jenny. “Through the Wire: Relations of Power and Relations of Violence,” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 34, No. 1, 2005.
Edmund Husserl, The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology. Chicago: Northwestern, 1997, pg. 241.
Elden, Stuart. “Rethinking governmentality,” Political Geography, Iss. 26, 2007.
Ernst Junger, “War and Photography,” New German Critique, No. 59, 1993.
Fanon, Frantz. A Dying Colonialism, New York: Grove Press, 1994a.
______, Black Skin, White Masks, New York: Grove Press, 1994b.
______, Toward the African Revolution, New York: Grove Press, 1994c.
______, The Wretched of The Earth, New York: Grove Press, 2005.
Finn, Bernard and Barton C. Hacker. Materializing the Military, England: Cromwell Press, 2005.
Ford, Daniel, The Button, New York: Harper Collins, 1986.
Foucault, Michel. “Of Other Spaces,” Diacritics, Vol. 16, No. 1, Spring 1986.
______, The Order of Things, Vintage Press, New York, 1994.
______, “Society Must be Defended”: Lectures at the College de France, 1975-1976. Picador, New York. 2003.
______, Abnormal: Lectures at the College de France, 1974-1975, New York: Palgrave McMillan, 2004.
______, Security, Territory, Population, Picador, New York, 2007.
______, The Birth of Biopolitics, New York: Palgrave McMillan, 2008.
Fuller, Mathew. Media Ecologies: Materialist Energies in Art and Technoculture, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2005.
Gallagher, Shaun. How the Body Shapes the Mind, New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Gallese, Vittorio. “Recognition in the premotor cortex,” Brain, vol. 119, 1996.
Galloway, Alexander and Eugene Thacker, The Exploit: A Theory of Networks, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2007
Galloway, Alexander R. Protocol: How Control Exists After Decentralization, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004.
______, Gaming: Essays On Algorithmic Culture, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2006.
Galula, David. Pacification in Algeria, 1956-1958, RAND Corporation, 2006.
Gambetta, Diego and Steffen Hertog. “Engineers of Jihad.” University of Oxford Sociology Working Papers, Paper Number 2007-2010. www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/swp.html
Gandy, Matthew. “Zones of indistinction: bio-political contestations in the urban arena,” Cultural Geographies, Iss. 13, 2006.
Georges Canguilhem, The Normal and The Pathological, Cambridge: Zone Books, 1991.
______, “The Living and Its Milieu.” Grey Room, No. 3, Spring, 2001.
Gilliam Jr., Franklin D. “Where You Live and What You Watch: The Impact of RacialProximity and Local Television on Attitudes about Race and Crime,” Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 4. December, 2002, 755-780
Gloor, Peter A. Swarm Creativity: Competitive Advantage through Collaborative Innovation Networks, New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Gombert, “Heads We Win: The Cognitive Side of Counterinsurgency,” Occasional Paper Prepared for the Department of Defense, RAND Corporation, www.rand.org, 2007.
Gondusky, Joseph LT, “Protecting Military Convoys in Iraq: An Examination of Battle Injuries Sustained by a Mechanized Battalion during Operation Iraqi Freedom II” Military Medicine, 170, 6, 2005.
Goodwin, B. 1994, How The Leopard Changed Its Spots: The Evolution of Complexity, Princeton University of Press, Princeton.
Goodwin, Brian. Nature’s Due: Healing Our Fragmented Culture, Floris Books, 2007.
Graeber, David. Possibilities: Essays on Hierarchy, Rebellion, and Desire, AK Press, 2007.
Graham, Stephen. “Global Grids of Glass: On Global Cities, Telecomunications and Planetary Urban Networks,” Urban Studies, Vol. 36, Nos. 5-6, 1999.
______, “FlowCity: Networked Mobilities and Contemporary Metropolis,” Journal of Urban Technology, Vol. 9, N. 1, 2002.
______, Bulldozers and Bombs: The Latest Palestinian-Israeli Conflict as Asymmetric Urbicide, Antipode, 2002.
______, “Postmortem City, Towards and Urban Geopolitics,” City, Vol. 8, No. 2, July 2004.
______, “Vertical Geopolitics: Baghdad and After,” Antipode, 2004.
______, “War in the ‘Weirdly Pervious World’: Infrastructure, Demodernization, and Geopolitics,” 2004.
______, “Switching Cities Off: Urban Infrastructure and US Air Power,” City, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2005.
______, Cities, War, and Terrorism: Towards and Urban Geopolitics, Malden: Blackwell, 2006.
______, “America’s Robot Army,” The New Stateman, June 2006.
______, “War and the City,” New Left Review, March 2007.
______, Wars of the City, No Date.
Graham, Stephen and David Wood. “Digitizing Surveillance: Categorization, space, inequality, Critical Social Policy,” Vol. 23, Iss, 2., 2003.
Gray, Colin S. “Nuclear Strategy: The Case for a Theory of Victory,” International Security, Vol. 4, Iss. 1, Summer 1979.
______, Another Bloody Century: Future Warfare, Phoenix Press, 2007.
Grosz, Elizabeth. Architecture from the Outside: Essays on the Virtual and Real Space, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001.
Guattari, Felix. Molecular Revolution in Brazil, New York: Semiotext(e), 2008.
Guevara, Che. Guerrilla Warfare, Bison Books, 1998.
Hacking, Ian. “Our Neo-Cartesian Bodies in Parts, Critical Inquiry, 34, Autumn, 2007.
Hamilton, Alexander and James Madison, Letters of Pacificus and Helvidius on the Proclamation of Neutrality of 1793, at 89 (James Madison) (Washington, D.C., J Gideon & G.S. Gideon, 1845).
Hansen, Mark B.N. “Affect as Medium, or the ‘Digital-Facial-Image,” Journal of Visual Culture, Vol. 2, Iss. 2, 2003.
______, “Communication as Interface or Information Exchange?: A Reply to Richard Rushton,” Journal of Visual Culture, Vol. 3, Iss. 3, 2004.
______, Bodies in Code: Interfaces with Digital Media, New York: Routledge, 2006a.
______, New Philosophy for New Media, Cambridge: MIT, 2006b.
Harrison, Neil E. Complexity in World Politics: Concept are Methods of a New Paradigm, Albany: SUNY Press, 2006.
Heidegger, Martin. “What is a Thing,” in Poetry, Language, and Thought, trans. Albert Hofstadter, New York: Harper, 1975, 165-166.
______, The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays. New York: Harper and Row, 1982.
______, The Fundamental Concepts of Metaphysics: World, Finitude, Solitude, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995.
______, Being and Time, trans. Joan Stambaugh, Albany: SUNY Press, 1996.
Hemesath, Paul A. “Who’s Got the Button? Nuclear War Powers Uncertainty in the Post-Cold Ware Era”, Georgetown Law Journal, Vol. 88, Iss. 2473, August 2000.
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: A Norton Critical Edition, New York: Norton Publishing, 1997.
Hoffert, Paul. Music for New Media: Composing for Videogames, Web Sites, Presentations, Other Interactive Media, Berklee Press, 2007.
Huesmann, Rowell. “Longitudinal Relations Between Children’s Exposure to TV Violence and Their Aggressive and Violent Behavior in Young Adulthood: 1977- 1992.” Develomental Psychology,Vol. 39, No. 2, 2003.
Huyssen, Andreas. “Air War Legacies: From Dresden to Baghdad,” New German Critique, No. 90, 2003.
Jager, Sheila Miyoshi. “On the Uses of Cultural Knowledge,” Report of the Strategic Studies Institute, http://www.StrategicStudiesInstitute.army.mil/ 2007.
Jaspers, Karl. The Future of Mankind, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968.
Jervis, Robert. The Meaning of the Nuclear Revolution: Statecraft and the Prospect of Armegeddon, Ithica: Cornell University Press, 1990.
Julian Reid, “Architecture, Al-Qaeda, and the World Trade Center: Rethinking Relations Between War, Modernity, and City Spaces After 9/11, Space and Culture, Vol. 7, No. 4, 2004.
Junger, Ernst. On Danger, New German Critique, No. 59, Spring-Summer, 1993.
Kenney, Michael. From Pablo to Osama: Trafficking and Terrorist Networks, Government Bureaucracies, and Competitive Adaptation, Pennsylvania State University Press, 2007.
Kilcullen, David. “Counter-Insurgency Redux,” Survival, Vol. 48, Iss. 4, 2006.
Koh, Harold. The National Security Constitution, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990.
Kohler, Evelyne. Giacomo Rizzolatti, “Hearing Sounds, Understaning Actions: Action Representation in Mirror Neurons.” Science, Vol. 297, 2002.
Latour, Bruno. “On Interobjectivity,” Mind, Culture, and Activity, Vol. 3, No. 4, 1996.
______, “Morality and Technology: The End of the Means,” Theory, Culture and Society, Vol. 19, Iss, 5/6, 2002.
______, “Is Re-modernization Occurring- And If So, How To Prove It? A commentary on Ulrich Beck,” Theory, Culture, and Society, 2003.
______, “When things strike back: a possible contribution of ‘science studies’ to the social sciences,” British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 51, Iss. 1, 2000.
______, Reassembling the Social, New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
______, “The Trouble with Actor-Network Theory”
______, From Realpolitik to Dingpolitik or How to Make Things Public.
Lichterman and Cabassos, “Faustian Bargain: Why ‘Stockpile Stewardship’ is Fundamentally incompatible with the process of nuclear disarmament”, Western States Legal Foundation, May 2000, http://wslfweb.org/docs/fb2000.pdf
Lefebve, Henri. The Urban Revolution, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2003
Lotringer, Sylvere. Autonomia: Post-Political Politics, New York: Semiotext(e), 2007.
Louiza Odysseos, The Subject of Coexistence: Otherness in International Relations, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2007.
Luttwak, Edward N. “A brief note on ‘fourth-generation warfare,’” Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 26, Iss. 2, 2005.
Lyon, David. Surveillance After September 11, Polity, 2003.
Lyon, David. Surveillance Studies: An Overview, Polity, 2007.
Lyon, David. Theorizing Surveillance: The Panopticon And Beyond, Willan, 2006.
Madison, James. “Letter from James Madison to James Monroe” (Nov. 16, 1827), in 3 Letters and Other Writings of James Madison 600 (Philidelphia, J.B. Lippincott and Co. 1865).
Marks, Aaron. The Complete Guide to Game Audio: For Composers, Musicians, Sound Designers, and Game Developers, CMP Books, 2001.
Massumi, Brian. “The Autonomy of Affect,” Cultural Critique, No. 31, Autumn, 1995.
______, Parables For The Virtual: Movement, Affect, Sensation. Durham: Duke University Press, 2002.
______, “Fear (Spectrum Said).” positions, Vol. 13, Iss. 1, 2005.
______, Interact or Die: There is Drama In The Networks, NAi Publisher, 2007a.
______, “Potential Politics and the Primacy of Preemption.” Theory and Event, Vol. 10, Iss. 2, 2007b.
Mbembe, Achille. On the Post-Colony, Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001.
______, “Necropolitics,” Public Culture, Vol. 15, Iss. 1, 2003.
______, “Aesthetics of Superfluity,” Public Culture, Vol. 16, Iss. 3, 2004.
Meigs, Tom. Ultimate Game Design: Building Game Worlds, McGraw-Hill, 2003.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Phenomenology of Perception. New York: Routledge, 2002.
______, “The War Has Taken Place.” in The Merleau-Ponty Reader, Chicago: Northwestern University Press, 2007.
Metz, Steven. Learning From Iraq: Counterinsurgency in American Strategy, U.S. Army War College, 2007.
Miller, Arthur S. and H. Bart Cox, “Congress, The Constitution, and First Use of Nuclear Weapons”, The Review of Politics, Vol. 48, No. 2. Spring, 1986, p. 240- 241.
Moreno, Jonathan D. Mind Wars: Brain Research And National Defense, Dana Press, 2006.
Mumford, Lewis. The Culture of Cities, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1938.
Munster, Anna. Materializing New Media: Embodiment in Information Aesthetics, Dartmouth University Press, 2006.
Nagl, John A. Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife: Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya and Vietnam, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005.
Nagl, John A., David H. Petraeus, James F. Amos, Sarah Sewel, The U.S. Army/Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007.
Neuwirth, Robert. Shadow Cities: A Billion Squatters, An Urban New World, New York: Routledge, 2006.
Nickles, Matthias. Agents and Computational Autonomy: Potential, Risks, and Solutions, Pittsburgh: Springer International, 2004
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Human, All Too Human: A Book for Free Spirits, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Noe, Alva. Action and Perception, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004.
Nolan, Janne E. An Elusive Consensus: Nuclear Weapons and American Security after the Cold War, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute Press, 1999.
Norris, Robert, Steven Kosiak, Stephen Schwartz, “Deploying the Bomb”, in Atomic Audit: The Cost and Consequences of U.S. Nuclear Weapons since 1940 ed. Stephen I. Schwartz, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998.
Novak, Jeannie. Game Development Essentials: An Introduction, CENGAGE Delmar Learning, 2007.
Panee, Cameron D. and Mary E. Ballard, “High Versus Low Aggressive Priming During Video-Game Training: Effect on Violent Action During Game Play, Hostility, Heart Rate, and Blood Pressue,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2002.
Pasquino, Pasquale. “Political Theory of War and Peace: Foucault and the History of Modern Political Theory,” Economy and Society, Vol. 22, No 1, 1993.
Patton, Paul. Deleuze and the Political, New York: Routledge, 2000.
Paul Virilio, State of Emergency in The Virilio Reader ed. James Der Derian, New York: Blackwell, 1998.
Petraeus, General David H. “Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq, September 10-11, 2007.
Poindexter, John M. “Information, Technologies, and National Security for the 21st Century, Neal Pollard Lecture, Georgetown University, November 14th, 2007.
Prigogine, Ilya. From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Science, W.H. Freeman, 1981.
______, Only and Illusion, The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, 1982.
______, Order Out of Chaos, Bantam, 1984.
______, The End of Certainty, Free Press, 1997.
______, Is Future Given, World Scientific Publishing Company, 2003.
Proceedings on Combating The Unrestricted Threat: Integrative Strategy, Analysis and Technology, Unrestricted Warfare Symposium, 2007.
Proceedings on Strategy, Analysis, and Technology. Unrestricted Warfare Symposium, 2006.
Proteus Newsletter.
Puar, Jasbir. Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times, Durham: Duke University Press, 2007.
Puar, Jasbir K. and Amit S. Rai, “Monster, Terrorist, Fag: The War on Terrorism and the Production of Docile Patriots, Social Text, Vol. 20, No. 3, Fall 2002.
Quester, George. Nuclear First Strike: Consequences of A Broken Taboo, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006.
Rabinow, Paul and Nikolas Rose, “Biopower Today,” Biosocieties, Issue. 1, 2006.
Rai, Amit. “The Future Is a Monster,” Camera Obscura, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2006.
Ranciere, Jacques. The Politics of Aesthetics, Continuum, 2006.
Rasmussen, Mikkel Vedby. The Risk Society at War: Terror, Technology and Strategy in the Twenty-First Century, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Raven-Hansen, Peter. “The United States Constitution in its Third Century: Foreign Affairs” The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 83, No. 4,. Oct., 1989,
Reiser + Umemoto, Atlas of Novel Tectonics, New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2006.
Rizzolatti, Giacomo. Vittoria Gallese, Pier Francesco Ferrari, “Mirror Neurons Responding to the observation of ingestive and communicative mouth actions in the monkey ventral premotor cortex, European Journal of Neuroscience, Vol. 17, 2003.
Robb, John. Brave New War: The Next Stage of Terrorism and the End of Globalization, Wiley, 2007.
Rochon, Thomas and David S. Meyer, Coalitions and Political Movements: The Lessons of the Nuclear Freeze, Boulder: L. Rienner Publishers 1997.
Rudalevige, Andrew. The New Imperial Presidency: Renewing Presidential Power After Watergate, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006.
Sagemen, Marc. Understand Terror Networks, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004.
Sautler, Joseph. Introduction to Video Game Design and Development, Career Education, 2006.
Schmitt, Carl. Four Articles, 1931 – 1938. Simona Draghici, trans. Plutarch Press,1999.
______, The Nomos of the Earth in the International Law of the Jus Publicum Europaeum. G.L. Ulmen, trans., New York: Telos Press, 2003.
______, The Theory of the Partisan: A Commentary/Remark on the Concept of the Political, Michigan State University Press, 2004.
______, Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty,
Chicago,: University of Chicago, 2006, p.15.
Schlesinger, Arthur Jr., The Imperial President, Boston: Mariner Books, 2004a.
______, War and The American Presidency, New York: Norton, 2004b.
Shapiro, Michael. “Warring Bodies and Bodies Politic: Tribal versus State Societies,” Vol. 1, No. 1. 2002.
______, “Perpetual War,” Bodies and Society, Vol. 9, No. 4, 2003.
Silberglitt, Richard. The Global Technology Revolution 2020, Bio/Nano/Materials/Information Trends, Drivers, Barriers, and Social Implications, Rand Report, 2006.
Simondon, Gilbert. L’individu et sa genèse physico-biologique. Trans. Taylor Adkin. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1964.
______, On the Mode of Existence of Technical Objects, University of Western Ontario Press, 1980.
Singer, Peter. Darwinian Left: Politics, Evolution, and Cooperation, Yale University Press, 2000.
Smith, Richard G. “World City Topologies,” Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 27, Iss. 5, 2003.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty, Globalcities: Terror and Its Consequences, The New Centennial Review, 2004.
Stallybrass, Peter and Allon White, “The City: The Sewer, The Gaze, and the Contaminating Touch,” in The Politics and Poetics of Transgression, (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1986), 125-148.
Stone, Jeremy. First Use of Nuclear Weapons: Under the Constitution, Who Decides?, ed. Peter Raven-Hansen, New York: Greenwood Press, 1987
Southern, Terry. Dr. Strangelove or: How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb, written by Terry Southern, Directed by Stanley Kubrick, Hawk Ltd. Films, 1964.
Stromseth, Jane E. “Understanding Constitutional War Powers Today: Why Methodology Matters, The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 106, N. 3, December, 1996
Taussig, Michael. “Maleficium: State Fetishism,” in The Nervous System, New York: Routledge, 1991.
Turco, R.P., Toon, A.B., Ackerman, T.P., Pollack, J.B., Sagan, C. (TTAPS) (1990) "Climate and Smoke: An Appraisal of Nuclear Winter", Science, volume 247, pp. 167-168, January.
The National Security Strategy of the United States of America, Winterhouse Editions: Falls Village, 2002.
Thrift, Nigel. “From born to made: technology, biology, and space,” Trans Inst Br Geogr
Tse-tung, Mao and Samuel B. Griffith. On Guerilla Warfare, New York: Dover Press, 2005.
Tushnet, Mark. The Constitution in Wartime: Beyond Alarmism and Complacency, Chapel Hill: Duke University Press, 2005.
UN-HABITAT, The Challenge of Slums, Global Report on Human Settlements, Earthscan Publications 2003.
Urbano, Fighting in the Streets: A Manual of Urban Guerilla Warfare, Barricade Books, 1992.
Vandergriff, Maj. Donald. Raising the Bar: Creating and Nurturing Adaptability to Deal with the Changing Face of War, Center for Defense Information Press, 2006.
Venkatesh, Sudhir Alladi. American Project: The Rise and Fall of a Modern Ghetto, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002.
______, Off the Books: The Underground Economy of the Urban Poor, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006.
Virilio, Paul. Speed and Politics: An Essay on Dromology, New York: Semiotexte, 1986.
Virilio, Paul and Sylvere Lotringer, “After Architecture: A Conversation,” Grey Room, Spring 2001.
Vonnegut, Kurt. Slaughterhouse-Five or The Children’s Crusade: A Duty-Dance With Death. Dial Press, 1999.
Wark, McKenzie. Gamer Theory, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007.
Weiss, Gerhard. Multiagent Systems: A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001.
Weizman, Eyal. “Strategic Points, Flexible Lines, Tense Surfaces, Political Volumes: Ariel Sharon and the Geometry of Occupation, The Philosophical Forum, Vol. XXXV, No. 2, Summer 2004.
______, “Lethal Theory”, presented at Urbicide: The Killing of Cities, Durham University, 2005.
______, “Seeing through Walls: The Split Sovereign and the One Way Mirror.” Grey Room, 24, Summer 2006.
______, Hollow Land: Israel’s Architecture of Occupation, New York: Verso Press, 2007.
Werther, Guntram. Holistic Integrative Analysis of International Change: A Commentary on Teaching Emergent Futures, Proteus Monograph Series, 2008.
Wesley, Robert. “Combating Terrorism Through a Counter-Framing Strategy,” CTC Sentinel: Objective, Relevant, Rigorous, Vol. 1, Iss. 2, January, 2008.
West, Robin “Progressive and Conservative Constitutionalism”, Michigan Law Review, Vol. 88, No. 4. Feb. 1990.
Whitehead, Alfred North. Process and Reality. New York: Free Press, 1978.
Wilson, Clay. Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) in Iraq and Afghanistan: Effects and Countermeasures. CRS Report for Congress, August 28, 2007.
Yoo, John. The Powers of War and Peace: The Constitution and Foreign Affairs After 9/11, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006.
Zacher, Mark W. and Brent A. Sutton, Governing Global Networks: International Regimes for Transportation and Communications, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Chapter 5: Taming the Unknown

The goal of 'futuring' is not to predict the future but improve it. We want to anticipate possible or likely future conditions so that we can prepare for them. We especially want to know about opportunities and risks that we should be ready for.
-Edward Cornish from the Proteus Mission Statement

This chapter focuses primarily on two bodies of source material. The first is the 2006 Counter-Insurgency Field Manual and the documents and transcripts surrounding its development. The Manual was developed in responses to the apparent failure of the Rumsfeld Revolution in Military Affairs to produce success in Iraq. General David Patreaus and John Nagl headed up a team of military personnel, journalists, human rights activists, academics and politicians to develop a new theory of warfare. The manual represents a victory for those like John Nagl that insisted that the U.S. armed forces had willfully ignored the lessons and failures of Vietnam. According Nagl insurgency defines modern warfare and the United State military is in no way structured to fight a war of insurgency.

The second body of source material comes from an international network of academics, security intellectuals, and military theorist named Project Proteus. The focus of the program and their sponsored publications and conferences is the integration of new scientific insights into complexity and chaos to benefit the national security of the United States.

The basic upshot of this chapter is that the Counter-insurgency manual and Project Proteus are attempts to control or dominate complexity. There is in both an attachment to transcendence or redemption. Complexity is reduced to an effect of limited knowledge rather than accepting it as a metaphysical principle of the universe. The alleatory is not actually a ‘chance’ or the entry of the new it is simply the inability to accurately quantify the terms. Even when those within Proteus seem to accept the chaos at the heart of the system being studied—the earth—it is instrumentalized as a necessary precondition for making better, more effective decisions. Risk and the possibility of eliminating risk just-in-case fills in the for the ‘incomplete’ calculation of the system. Proteus’s harnessing of complexity theory becomes a way to ensure the logic of the preemptive doctrine. Uncertainty can only be managed by determining potentiality and violently ‘erring on the side of caution.’

By way of critique I attempt in this chapter to explain why the attempt to mimic the enemy ‘swarm’ and predict the future ultimate fail. In part, I argue, this is because the insurgent approach is much closer to the war machine. The weapons used are almost purely expressive or excessive in the sense that they exist in a liminal space between strategic and tactical actions. The tactic of creating more death and disorder (normally indexed in military terms as failure) is an end in itself. The anti-colonial lesson that is apparent in the fighting stile of those in Iraq and Afghanistan is that there is power in “weakness.” While the U.S. Military can mimic network organizations it cannot give up on the chain of command, unified war aims and other control protocols that predispose it to an aboreal liability.

I also speculate that Al-Qaeda in so far as it exists is also more aborescent than insurgency and thus is more likely to engage the U.S. Military on the battlefield. Al-Qaeda is ‘tree-like’ at the level of religious ideology. Al-Qaeda like the U.S. military aspires for the state form in relationship to territory. As a result the U.S. Military and Al-Qaeda will fail to succeed at holding their respective territories because of the war machines that disrupt or re-territorialize the battlefield.


Proteus Mission Statement