Drones y el orden legal internacional. Tecnología, estrategia y largas cadenas de acción

The main thesis of this article is that the increasing recourse to the use of unmanned aerial systems in asymmetric warfare and the beginning routinization of U.S. drone operations represent part of an evolutionary change in the spatial ordering of global politics -- Using a heuristic framework based on actor-network theory, it is argued that practices of panoptic observation and selective airstrikes, being in need of legal justification, contribute to a reterritorialization of asymmetric conflicts -- Under a new normative spatial regime, a legal condition of state immaturity is constructed, which establishes a zone of conditional sovereignty subject to transnational aerial policing -- At the same time, this process is neither a deterministic result of the new technology nor a deliberate effect of policies to which drones are merely neutral instruments -- Rather, military technology and political decisions both form part of a long chain of action which has evolved under the specific circumstances of recent military interventionsEste artículo propone que la creciente utilización de sistemas aéreos no tripulados y la rutinización de sus operaciones en guerras asimétricas representan parte de un cambio evolutivo en el ordenamiento espacial de la política global -- Utilizando un marco heurístico basado en la teoría del actor-red, se argumenta que las prácticas de observación panóptica y ataques aéreos selectivos, carentes aún de justificación legal, contribuyen a una reterritorialización de los conflictos asimétricos -- En virtud de un nuevo régimen normativo espacial, se construye una condición legal de inmadurez estatal que facilita el establecimiento de una zona de soberanía condicionada, sometida a la vigilancia aérea transnacional -- Al mismo tiempo, esté proceso no es resultado predeterminado de la nueva tecnología, ni efecto deliberado de decisiones políticas para las que los drones son solo instrumentos neutros -- Antes que ello, la tecnología militar y las decisiones políticas forman parte importante de una larga cadena de acción que se ha desarrollado en las circunstancias específicas de intervenciones militares más reciente

State-building, war and violence : evidence from Latin America

In European history, war has played a major role in state‐building and the state monopoly on violence. But war is a very specific form of organized political violence, and it is decreasing on a global scale. Other patterns of armed violence now dominate, ones that seem to undermine state‐building, thus preventing the replication of European experiences. As a consequence, the main focus of the current state‐building debate is on fragility and a lack of violence control inside these states. Evidence from Latin American history shows that the specific patterns of the termination of both war and violence are more important than the specific patterns of their organization. Hence these patterns can be conceptualized as a critical juncture for state‐building. While military victories in war, the subordination of competing armed actors and the prosecution of perpetrators are conducive for state‐building, negotiated settlements, coexistence, and impunity produce instability due to competing patterns of authority, legitimacy, and social cohesion