What is (not) asymmetric conflict? From conceptual stretching to conceptual structuring

Abstract

In the second half of the 1990s, the label "asymmetric" conflict rose to prominence among scholars and strategists, as a term for capturing the rising challenge that violent non-state actors posed to the liberal world order. However, the concept soon became a catchphrase for a range of disparate phenomena, and other buzzwords arose to describe the threats of concern to decision-makers. Conceptual confusion beset the field. This article dissects the notion of asymmetric conflicts, and distinguishes between asymmetries involving differences in (1) status, (2) capabilities, or (3) strategies between belligerents. It argues that "asymmetric" conflicts can take numerous forms depending on the combination of differences present, and offers a blue-print for keeping track of the meaning of this concept in the hope of bringing greater precision to future debates.

Violencia contra migrantes: comprensión del crimen organizado más allá de la violencia

“…Dentro de los estudios de seguridad, la asimetría ha sido considerablemente bien estudiada en relación con los conflictos armados. En ese respecto, el objetivo es comprender de qué forma las capacidades militares de dos actores pueden afectar su desempeño en una confrontación violenta (Berglund & Souleimanov, 2020;Tasseron & Lawson, 2022).…”

Ethos of Conflict in the International Arena: Power Predicts Expression of Threat for Security and Hope for Peace in Speeches of Leaders of Nations in Conflict

“…In international relations, power is determined by factors such as the size of nations' population and territory, access to resources, economic capability, military strength, and political stability (Berglund & Souleimanov, 2020; Kriesberg, 2009). An asymmetrical power balance characterizes many international conflicts, like the one in Northern Ireland or the one in Israel‐Palestine (Gallo & Marzano, 2009; McAuley et al, 2008).…”