John Arquilla & David Ronfeldt: Networks and Netwars

RAND researchers may have prepared this collection of articles on netwar for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, but its claims are important for anyone invested in the potential of networked action, and particularly for those interested in media studies. Arquilla and Ronfeldt define netwar as “an emerging mode of conflict . . . in which protagonists use network forms of organization and related doctrines, strategies, and technologies attuned to the information age.” The primary tool of netwar is “swarming,” “a seemingly amorphous, but deliberately structured, coordinated, strategic way to strike from all directions at a particular point or points, by means of a sustainable pulsing of force and/or fire, close-in as well as from stand-off positions.” “Swarming occurs when the dispersed units of a network of small (and perhaps some large) forces converge on a target from multiple directions. The overall aim is sustainable pulsing—swarm networks must be able to coalesce rapidly and stealthily on a target, then dissever and redisperse, immediately ready to recombine for a new pulse.” Because it allows small and/or dispersed groups to create substantial results, netwar has made nonstate actors into major players in the contemporary world (“power is migrating to nonstate actors”). Netwar may be waged not only by terrorists and criminal organizations, but also by leftist radicals. Anarchist and autonomous Marxist organizations (such as the Black Blocks that appeared at the Battle of Seattle or the Zapatistas in Mexico) have used netwar against state forces. States have traditionally relied on hierarchical forms of organization, but these tend not to be successful in combating the networks involved in netwar, which tend to be “robust” because of their fluid, decentralized, and ambiguous organization. As a result, “It will become crucial for governments and their military and law enforcement establishments to begin networking themselves. Perhaps this will become the greatest challenge posted by the rise of netwar.” On a more positive note, the authors admit that netwar allows organizations such as NGOs to more successfully exert a kind of “soft power” that may be of great use for democracies as well as lessen the need for more troublesome forms of violent state “hard power.” New information technologies such as the Internet have been vital for the spread of netwar, but the authors don’t want to limit netwar to online actions such as hacktivism of cyberterrorism. They claim, “netwar may be waged in high-, low-, or no-tech fashion.” What is important is the use of network forms of organization, which can be created in many different ways. These networks may depend on technologies, but “social, narrative, organizational, and doctrinal” factors are also important for their effective functioning. Arquilla and Ronfeldt offer some theses on the challenges of netwar: “Hierarchies have a difficult time fighting networks.” “It takes networks to fight networks.” “Whoever masters the network form first and best will gain major advantages.”