12.10.2013 Views

Gulf and European Energy Supply Security - Feem-project.net

Gulf and European Energy Supply Security - Feem-project.net

Gulf and European Energy Supply Security - Feem-project.net

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Interstate wars involve the armed forces of<br />

two or more states, generally fighting for control<br />

of disputed territory, or engaging in occupation of<br />

enemy territory beyond what is contested in order<br />

to force the enemy’s surrender. It involves the use<br />

of the states’ armed forces: they are sometimes<br />

officially declared by the belligerents <strong>and</strong> have a<br />

clearly identifiable end in a peace treaty or at least a<br />

ceasefire of indefinite duration.<br />

Civil war is distinguished from interstate war<br />

because it is fought between forces belonging to<br />

the same state <strong>and</strong> fighting either for redefinition of<br />

that state (e.g. secession of a province) or for control<br />

of power in the state as a whole. The distinguishing<br />

feature of a civil war is that either side (or all sides, if<br />

there are more than two) controls a portion of the<br />

national territory.<br />

Terrorist activities are distinguished from a<br />

civil war because one side has no permanent <strong>and</strong><br />

continuous control of a portion of the national<br />

territory. The distinction between resistance,<br />

terrorism, <strong>and</strong> b<strong>and</strong>itry is one of motivations <strong>and</strong><br />

rights, not one of observed behavior.<br />

We shall in the rest of this paper refer to the<br />

technically preferable terminology of “violent nonstate<br />

actors” to encompass all forms of violence on<br />

the part of non-state actors who do not continuously<br />

control a portion of the state territory.<br />

As far as our discussion is concerned, this<br />

distinction is important because in a civil war the<br />

state may lose access to some oil resources, while in<br />

the case of violent non-state action, the state may<br />

not be able to avoid damage to oil installations, but<br />

maintains access to the same.<br />

2.1 Trends in Armed Conflict<br />

The frequency, duration <strong>and</strong> scope of interstate<br />

conflict have dramatically diminished. Interstate<br />

war in its classic form has today almost completely<br />

disappeared in all parts of the world, except the<br />

Middle East.<br />

In contrast, civil war <strong>and</strong> the use of violence<br />

on the part of non-state actors have continued. A<br />

majority of large-scale conflict which solicited major<br />

power intervention in the past 50-60 years originated<br />

as civil wars: Korea, Vietnam/Laos/Cambodia,<br />

Threats to Oil <strong>Supply</strong> <strong>Security</strong><br />

former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan. Other civil wars<br />

did not solicit direct major power intervention but<br />

have had significant impact nevertheless: Nigeria<br />

(Biafra), Angola, Zaire, Congo (Brazzaville), Sudan,<br />

Somalia, Lebanon, Yemen. We may also regard<br />

the intervention of the US-led coalition in Iraq as<br />

outside intervention in a civil war (the Baghdad<br />

government had in fact lost control over Northern<br />

Iraq; nevertheless, this is a sui generis case, because<br />

the opposition to Saddam was not able to operate in<br />

the rest of the country).<br />

Further detailed analysis would show that a<br />

majority of wars are fought over relatively short<br />

periods of time (the major recent exception being<br />

the Iraq-Iran war, which turned into something<br />

resembling the First World War in Europe) <strong>and</strong> then<br />

resolved either by the decisive military victory of<br />

one side (where military victory does not necessarily<br />

translate into political victory) or by forceful<br />

international pressure <strong>and</strong> intervention.<br />

We also see that domestic conflicts, sometimes<br />

leading to outside armed intervention, are primarily<br />

linked to complex historical transitions that leave<br />

unresolved issues behind. We can thus cite the<br />

process of decolonisation (in the Near East; in South<br />

<strong>and</strong> Southeast Asia; in Africa) as being a primary<br />

cause or occasion for violent domestic conflict.<br />

In most cases, a period of acute instability is<br />

followed by consolidation of existing structures <strong>and</strong><br />

eventual progressive decline of the use of violence.<br />

This process may be said to have concluded in<br />

Southeast Asia (where it has been extraordinarily<br />

costly in terms of human casualties), <strong>and</strong> conflicts<br />

have been essentially frozen elsewhere (between<br />

India <strong>and</strong> Pakistan; <strong>and</strong> in the Balkans) but a clear<br />

trend towards pacification is not visible elsewhere,<br />

notably in Sub-Saharan Africa. In the Near East,<br />

the main conflict (between Israel <strong>and</strong> its Arab<br />

neighbors) has progressively been reduced in<br />

scope, following the peace treaties signed with<br />

Egypt <strong>and</strong> Jordan, <strong>and</strong> the freezing of war with<br />

Syria. Lebanon still constitutes a problem area;<br />

otherwise, the conflict has now become a purely<br />

Israeli-Palestinian affair, into which Arab neighbors<br />

are not willing to be drawn <strong>and</strong> intervene militarily.<br />

The future of Iraq <strong>and</strong> Afghanistan also remains

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!