Virtuous War/Virtual Theory

Author(s): James Der Derian

Source: International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 76, No. 4
(Oct., 2000), pp. 771-788
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Royal Institute of International Affairs
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2626459 .
Accessed: 19/01/2015 12:05

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley and Royal Institute of International Affairs are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-).

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Virtuouswar/virtualtheory

JAMES DER DERIAN

The destructiveness
ofwarfurnishesproofthatsocietyhasnotbeenmatureenoughto
incorporate
technology
asitsorgan,thattechnologyhasnotbeensufficiently
developed
to copewiththeelementalforcesofsociety.
WalterBenjamin, The workofartin theage oftechnical
reproducibility

My searchfora virtualtheoryof war and peace began severalyearsago on a

hilltopin the highMojave Desert,watchingthe firstdigitizedwar game at the
US army'sNational Training Center. According to the briefingpapers for
DesertHammerVI, a new arrayofhightechnologywas beingtested'to enhance
lethality,operationstempo, and survivability'.It was hard to tell if it was
working.I had spentmost of the firstmorningtryingand, forthe most part,
failingto discernthe significanceof distantdust trailsof MiA2 Abramstanks,
Bradleyarmouredpersonnelcarriers, and swarminghumvees.The NTC at Fort
Irwin mightbe a militarybase stuckin the middle of the Mojave Desert, but
like nearbyLas Vegas, it was a perfectstageforthe evocationofpastand future,
hopes and fears.I had enteredthe theatreof war, not literallybut virtually.
This was to be thefirstof severalencounterswiththevirtualcontinuationof
war by othermeans. The meanswere technological;the continuationwas one
of distanceforeshortenedby speed of bytes and bits, missivesand missiles.
Distance was affordedby the F-i6s and A-ios flyingoverhead; the simulated
launch of precision munitions;the remote video cameras perched on the
hilltops;thelaser-sensorarrayson everysoldierand everyweapon; the computer
networkswhich controlledthe battlespace; and all the other digitaltechno-
logies operatingas 'force-multipliers'.To be sure,accident,friction,or miscal-
culationcould, and at timesdid collapse thisvirtualdistancing.However, the
ultimatemeasureof distancein war, the difference between lifeand death,was
nowherein sight.
At firsttake,thisrepresents a worrying-perhapseven shocking-but hardly
revolutionarytransformation of militaryand diplomaticaffairs.Afterall, the
telephonein the FirstWorld War provided generalswith the means and the
arroganceto send hundredsof thousandsof soldiersto theirdeathsfromthe

International
Affairs
76, 4 (2000) 77I-788 77I

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JamesDer Derian

relativesafetyoftheirchateauxheadquarters.The radio,thetank,and especially

the airplanebeforethe Second World War, and then thermonuclearweapons
after,were all vauntedby one strategist or anotheras technologiesthatwould
radicallytransform ifnot end traditionalwarfare.Obviously,it takesmore than
technologicalinnovationto make a revolution.However, unlikepriorradical
developmentsin means of transportation, communicationand information,
virtualinnovationis drivenmore by softwarethan hardware,and enabled by
networksratherthanagents,which meansadaptation(and mutation)is not only
easier,but much more rapid. Moreover, the 'Advanced Warfighting Experi-
ment',as it and a seriesof subsequentwar games are called,is takingplace at a
pivot-pointin history.Post-ford,post-modern,or just post-Cold War, the
politicaland economic as well as rhetoricaland culturalforcesthatshape the
international systemhave entereda stateof flux.
So, is the virtualizationof violence a revolutionin diplomatic,military,let
alone human affairs? On its own, no. However, deployedwith a new ethical
imperativeforglobal democraticreform,it could well be so. In spite of, and
perhapssoon because of, efforts to spreada democraticpeace throughglobali-
zationand humanitarian intervention, war is ascendingto an even higherplane,
fromthevirtualto the virtuous. At one time,the two wordsvirtualand virtuous
were hardlydistinguishable (althoughthe Latinvirtuosos precededvirtualis).
Both
in
originated the medievalnotion of a power inherentin the supernatural, of a
divine being endowed with naturalvirtue.And both carrieda moral weight,
fromthe Greek and Roman sense of virtue,of propertiesand qualitiesof right
conduct.But theirmeaningsdivergedin modernusage,with 'virtual'takinga
morallyneutral,more technicaltone, while 'virtuous'lost itssense of exerting
influenceby meansofinherentqualities.Now theyseemreadyto be rejoinedby
currentefforts to effectethicalchangethroughtechnologicaland martialmeans.
The United States,as deusex machinaof global politics,is leadingthe way in
thisvirtualrevolution.Its diplomaticand military based
policiesare increasingly
on technologicaland representational formsof discipline,deterrence,and com-
pellence thatcould bestbe describedas virtuous war.At theheartofvirtuouswar
is the technicalcapabilityand ethicalimperativeto threatenand, if necessary,
actualize violence froma distance-with no or minimalcasualties.Using net-
worked information and virtualtechnologiesto bring'there' here in near-real
timeand with near-verisimilitude, virtuouswar exercisesa comparativeas well
as strategicadvantageforthe digitallyadvanced.It has become the 'fifthdimen-
sion' of US global hegemony.
On the surface,virtuouswar cleans up the politicaldiscourseas well as the
battlefield.Fought in the same manneras theyare represented,by real-time
surveillanceand TV 'live-feeds',virtuouswars promote a vision of bloodless,
humanitarian,hygienicwars. We can rattleoffcasualtyratesof prototypical
virtuousconflictslike the Gulfwar (270 Americanslost theirlives-more than
half throughaccidents),the Mogadishu raid (i8 Americanskilled), and the
Kosovo air campaign(barringaccidents,a remarkablezero casualtyconflictfor

772

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Virtuous
war/virtual
theory

the NATO forces).Yet, in spite of valorous efforts by human rightsorgani-

zations,most people would probablycome up shorton acceptablefiguresfor
the other side of the casualtylist. Post-Vietnam,the United Stateshas made
manydigitaladvances;public body countsof the enemyare not one of them.
Unlike otherformsof warfare,virtuouswar has an unsurpassedpower to
commutedeath,to keep it out of sight,out of mind. In simulatedpreparations
and virtualexecutionsofwar,thereis a highriskthatone learnshow to killbut
not to take responsibilityfor it, one experiences 'death' but not the tragic
consequencesof it. In virtuouswar we now facenotjust the confusionbut the
pixillationof war and game on the same screen.
The United Statesleads the way, but othercountriesare in hot pursuitof
virtualsolutionsto long-runningpoliticalconflicts.At the heightof the Israeli
withdrawalfromLebanon, the BritishDaily Telegraph newspaperpronounced
froma safedistanceon its 'real' meaning:

[T]he Israelidot-comgeneration
seemsnot to have thestomachformortalcombat.
Theyhavestarted to askwhytheyshouldrisktheirliveswhenprecision
weaponscan
reducewarto a videogame.For thepony-tailedyouthofTel Aviv'snightspots,the
warin LebanonwasbecomingtheirVietnamandtheywouldrather theirgovernment
fought itbyremotecontrol.'

However, the Daily Telegraph articleconspicuouslyfailedto note thatvirtuous

war is anythingbutlessdestructive, deadly,or bloody forthoseon the shortend
of thebig technologicalstick.And thenewspaperis not alone in thissometimes
blithe but often intentionaloversight.Bloody ethnic and religiousconflicts
involvingland mines,smallarms,and even machetespersist.For the last few
yearsI have been tryingto comprehendhow the sanitizationof violence that
began withthe GulfWar has come to overpowerthemortification of thebody
in
thatcontinuesto markcommunalwars Nagorno-Karabakh,Somalia,Bosnia,
Rwanda, and elsewhere.A felicitousoxymoron,a growingparadox,an ominous
signof thingsto come, virtuouswar is,in thatfinalanalysisit seeksto evade, still
about killing.
In a sense,war has alwaysbeen a virtualreality,too traumaticforimmediate
comprehension.Trauma,Freudtellsus, can be re-enacted,even re-experienced,
but cannotbe understoodat the momentof shock. This is what Michael Herr
was gettingat in Dispatches, when he wrote about his experiencesin Vietnam:
'It took thewar to teachit,thatyou were as responsibleforeverything you saw
as you were foreverything you did. The problem was that you didn't always
know what you were seeinguntillater,maybeyearslater,thata lot of it never
made it in at all, itjust stayedstoredtherein your eyes'.2 But now thereis an
added danger,a furtherdistancingof understanding.When compared to the
real traumaof war, the pseudo-traumaof simulationpales. But an insidious

I Daily Telegraph,
23 May 2000 (online).
2
See Michael Herr, Dispatches(New York: Avon Books, I978), p. 20.

773

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JamesDer Derian

threatemergesfromitsshadowingof reality.In thishigh-techrehearsalforwar,

one learnshow to kill but not to take responsibility for it, one experiences
'death' but not the tragicconsequences of it. In the extremecase, with the
predisposedpathologiesof a Milosevic in Serbia,a McVeigh in Oklahoma City,
or a Harrisin Littleton,Colorado, thiscan lead to a kindof doublingor splitting
of the selfthatpsychologistsRobert Jay Liftonand Erik Markusen see as a
sourceof the 'genocidalmentality'.But what I have witnessedis more a closing
thanan openingofa schism,betweenhow we see and live,represent and experi-
ence, simulateand fightwar. New technologiesof imitationand simulationas
well as surveillanceand speed have collapsedthegeographicaldistance,chrono-
logical duration,the gap itselfbetween the realityand virtuality of war. As the
confusionof one forthe othergrows,we now facethe dangerof a new kind of
traumawithoutsight,dramawithouttragedy,where televisionwarsand video
war gamesblurtogether.
From the I950s cyberneticnotion of the 'automaton',to William Gibson's
I987 coiningof'cyberspace'as a 'consensualhallucination', thevirtualhas shared
an isomorphicrelationshipto the dream.And like the dream,it requirescritical
interpretationsifwe are not to sleepwalkthroughthemanifoldtravesties ofwar,
whether between statesor tribes,classes or castes, genders or generations.
Quoting Karl Marx-'The reformof consciousness consists solelyin the
awakeningoftheworldfromitsdreamaboutitself'-the Jewish-German literary
criticWalter Benjamin wonders how the modern, seduced and traducedby
radio, film,and other new formsof technologicalreproduction,can possibly
awake fromtheinterwarcrisis.In Thearcades project,he identifies two firststeps,
one virtuousthe othernot, to escape modernity'smostperniciouseffects:

The genuineliberation froman epoch,thatis, hasthestructure of awakening in this

as well:is entirely
respect ruledbycunning.Onlywithcunning, notwithoutit,canwe
workfreeoftherealmofdreams. Butthereis alsoa falseliberation;
itssignis violence.3

Virtuouswar is much more than a new formof organizedviolence. Call it a

dream-state, a symbolicrealm,or an unreality:virtuouswar projectsa mythosas
well as an ethos,a kindofcollectiveunconsciousforan epoch'sgreatest aspirations
and greatestinsecurities.Indeed, it is heroic ifnot Homeric in itspracticeand
promise:on one side,thefaceofAchilles,a tragicfigurewho represents thevirtu'
(as well as hubris)of the greatwarrior,of honour,loyalty,and violence,willing
to sacrificehis lifeforothersin a strangeland; and on the other,Odysseus,a
man of many devices (polymechanos) and many contrivances(polymetis), who
preferstechne' to virtu,cunning(and punning)to warringand wandering,who
just wants to come home. Again, Benjamin: 'Only a thoughtlessobservercan
deny that correspondencescome into play between the world of modern
technologyand the archaicsymbol-worldof mythology'.4
3 See Walter Benjamin, The arcadesproject(Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, I999), pp. 456 and I73.
4 Ibid.,p. 46I.

774

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Virtuous
war/virtual
theory

Anyportrayal ofwar presentsdangersforthe chronicler, manyobvious,some

not so obvious; but virtuouswar in particularposes some seriousobstacles.One
tacticis to recordwar fromthe bunkerand the beaches,so close thatthe word
on the page, the image on the filmis imprintedby, practicallydripswith the
carnageof war. We mightcali thisapproach,pace Spielberg,'savingthe reality
principle'.Another,most oftenpractisedin IR theory,is to keep a distance,to
extractor abstractthe causes, structures, and patternsof war. Eitherway, the
choice seems to be Hobbes or Hobson: the blood-drenchedprose, the cine'ma
verite',
thepermanentwar-of-all-against-all of therealist;or thebloodless,value-
free,hygienicwars of the social scientist.Some writers,likeJohnKeegan and
Stephen Ambrose, have managed to work effectively, even eloquently,the
space betweenthetrenchesand theivorytower.But thewarstheywroteabout,
full of heroic figurescaught in black-and-whiterepresentations, are not the
wars thatwe face now and in the future.These wars are foughtin the same
manneras theyare represented, by mihitarysimulationsand publicdissimulations,
by real-timesurveillanceand TV 'live-feeds'.
Clearly,the problem of representation is compounded when the foxhole
itselfgoes virtual.The natureof war is mutating,morphing,virtualizingwith
new technologiesand strategies.New media, generallyidentifiedas digitized,
interactive, networkedformsof communication,now exercisea global effectif
not ubiquitouspresencethroughreal timeaccess. Moreover,withthe magnifi-
cation and dramatizationof old ailmentslike nationalism,balkanization,and
civil war by new media, virtuouswar reachesnot only into everylivingroom
but splashesonto everyscreen,TV, computerand cinema. People will live and
die, figurativelyand literally,
by the power of images,previewedby the famine
child that drew American troops into Somalia, and of the dead US Ranger
draggedthroughthe streetsthathastenedtheirdeparture.
Today, in war,diplomacy,and themedia,thevirtualproliferates. As war goes
virtual,throughinfowar,netwar,cyberwar,througha convergenceof the PC
and the TV, itsfoundationas the ultimatereality-check of international
politics
beginsto erode. Sovereignty,the primarymeansby which the supremepower
fixedin international
and legitimateviolence of the stateis territorially politics,
declared once, many-timesdead, now seems to regain its vigour virtually,
throughmedia spasmsabout new terrorist threatsthatnever materialize,like
States-of-Concern-formerly-known-as-Rogues (to invoke the other Prince)
that warranta $60 billion ballisticmissile defence, or new strainsof killer
diseasesthatmake the X-Filesseem understated.The favouritevirtualthreatis
the'cyber-attack', ominouslymootedby themediaand anticipated by thePenta-
gon as the 'next Pearl Harbor'-which must amuse (and motivate)teenage
hackerswho make up the overwhelmingbulk of such 'attacks'.5

5 In March I999, Air Force Major GeneralJohn Campbell, then vice-directorof the Defense Information
and provides worldwide communication,network
SystemsAgency (DISA is in charge of cybersecurity
and softwaresupportto the Defense Department),told Congress thattherewere a total of 22,I44
'attacks'detected on Defense Departmentnetworks,an increase of 5,844 in I998. FromJanuaryto

775

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JamesDer Derian

With the virtualizationof war comes the simulationof peace and perhaps
even more obscure yet obdurate dangers. 'Virtual diplomacy'-from tele-
conferencingto preventivemedia-is presented at high-level Washington
conferencesand in beltwaydefenceindustriesas the ultimatetechnicalfixfor
intractablepoliticalproblems.And, where virtualdiplomacyfails,the virtual
economy supposedlyamends. According to the techno-wizardsof the 'new
economy',the global economyis on the vergeof totalvirtualization.6 Whereas
many policy-makers,includingthe presentand previousUS presidents,view
thisas one more steptowardsa global,democraticpeace, some specialistsin the
fieldfear otherwise.As the Asian financialcrisisswept westward,the global
economy vergedfurthertowardsthe viraland the virtual:one financialexpert
emphaticallystated that 'the distinctionbetween softwareand money is
disappearing',to which a Citibank executive responded,'it's revolutionary-
and we shouldbe scaredas hell'.7
Questionsgo begging.Is virtualization, not globalization,turningthe millen-
nial tide?Is the sovereignstatedisappearingin all but legal form,soon to be a
relic for the museum of modernity?Or has it virtuallybecome the undead,
hauntinginternational politicslike a spectre?Is virtualizationthe continuation
ofwar (as well as politics)by othermeans?Is it repudiating, reversing, or merely
updatingClausewitz?Is virtuality replacingthe realityof war?Will real or just
simulatedpeaces result?In short,is virtuouswar and simulatedpeace the
harbingerof a new world order,or a bravenew world?
New technologiesengendernew questions,which requirenew approaches.
Digitized, interactive,networkedformsof communicationnow exercise a
global presence:instantvideo-feeds,satellitelink-ups,Ti-T3 links,overhead
surveillance,global mapping, distributedcomputer profiling,programmed
trading,and movies with Arnold Schwarzeneggermake up some of the most
visible forms.Virtualizationrepresentsthe most penetratingand sharpest-to
the point of invisibility-edgeof globalization.The power of virtuality lies in
its abilityto collapse distance,between here and there,near and far,factand
fiction.And so far,it has only widened the distancebetween those who have
and thosewho have not.
We are in need of a virtualtheory for the militarystrategies,philosophical
questions,ethicalissues,and political controversiessurroundingthe futureof
war and peace. All journeysentailritualsin which the end is prefigured by the
negotiationsand preparationsthattake place at the beginning. The choice of
what to and not to believe,where to go and who to see, whatto recordon tape
and finallyto interpret in writing,alwaysinvolvesritualsof knowledge (techne)

August 2000, therehave been a total of I3,998 reported'events', according to Betsy Flood, a
spokeswoman at DISA (she defined'events' as 'probes, scans,virusincidentsand intrusions').However,
according to Richard Thieme, a technologyconsultantand one of the chairsof the annual 'DEF CON'
computerhackersconvention,all but i,ooo of lastyear's reportedattackswere attributedto recreational
hackers.See JimWolf, 'Hacking of Pentagon computerspersists',Washington Post,9 August 2000, p. 23.
6 See e.g. cover storyof TimeMagazine I5I: i6, 27 April I998.
7 Ibid.

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Virtuous
war/virtual
theory

and negotiationsofpower (virtu'). In searchof thevirtual,it is a struggle

between
the disappearingoriginaland the infinitely reproducible.It is about interests:
which interests mattermostin an increasingly virtualizedworld;which interests
obstruct, whichinterests facilitate
theinvestigation;
and, of course,whatinterests
me versuswhat mightinterestthe reader.Most fundamentalis the negotiation
at the root of interestitself(inter-est), between statesof being, between the
sensesof selfand realitywithwhich one beginsand one ends a journey.8
In searchof a virtualtheory,I travelledwith a ratherunconventionalset of
intellectualtools. To be sure,the who, when, where,and whateverdid inform
myinterests, questions,and eventualconclusions.I had like manyothersin our
fieldread the classicworkson war: Sun Tzu, Machiavelli,Jomini,Clausewitz,
Delbriick, Mahan, Hart, and others. Tutorials,seminars,and lecturesfrom
professorssuch as Charles Taylor, Hedley Bull, Michael Howard, and Adam
Robertsprovideda deeperhistorical and theoretical
context,as well as an attitude
of intellectualscepticismthattestedthe canon as it was taught.Moreover, a
four-year stintat Oxfordcoincidedwiththemostdangerousyearsofthesecond
Cold War, when much of Europe was divided over NATO war fighting
strategiesand the stationingof SS-20, Cruise, and Pershingmissiles.The anti-
nuclear movement-especially the writingsand remarkablepublic presenta-
tionsby E. P. Thompson-also informedmuch of my thinkingabout war and
peace. And I spentas much of my spare time as I could in Paris,where my
French-Armenian relativesand a brilliantgroup of continentalphilosophers-
Roland Barthes,Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, JeanBaudrillard,and, at the
head of the pack, Paul Virilio-provided valuable Frenchantidotesto British
weather,food and common sense.
Together it made for an eclectic group of travelcompanions; but when
you're settingofffor the belly of the beast, it's best to be diplomaticallyand
theoreticallyover-equipped. On my researchtripsI made it a habit to take
along one of the small,cheap Semiotext(e)books, withthe excerptedquotes on
the back cover that confuse many and provoke others. They included:
Baudrillard'sSimulations ('The very definitionof the real has become: thatof
which it is possible to give an equivalentreproduction...The real is not only
what can be reproduced,but thatwhich is alwaysalreadyreproduced:That is,
the hyperreal...which is entirelyin simulation'); Deleuze's and Guattari's
Nomadology: thewarmachine ('The war machineis exteriorto theStateapparatus...
It is the inventionof the nomads...The very conditionsthatmake the State
possible...trace creativelines of escape'); and Virilio's Purewar ('We triedto
reveal a numberof importanttendencies:the question of speed; speed as the
essenceofwar; technologyas theproducerofspeed;war as logistics,notstrategy;
8 In his I994 Dewey Lecturesat Columbia University,the philosopherHilary Putnam provided the best
word of caution fora virtualjourney, warningagainst'the common philosophical errorof supposing that
the term"reality"mustreferto a single super thing,insteadof looking at the ways in which we endlessly
renegotiateand areforcedto renegotiateour sense of realityas our language and our lifedevelops'. 'Sense,
nonsense,and the senses: an inquiryinto the powers of the human mind, TheJournalofPhilosophy, vol.
XCI, I995, p. 452.

777

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JamesDer Derian

endocolonization;deterrence;ultimateweapons; Pure War'). The books came

along forinspiration, but also because theyfitnicelyin a back pocket; and, on
more thanone occasion, theytriggeredconversationswith soldiers,sailors,and
marinesthatwent much deeper thanthe usual public affair's sound-bite.
At thispoint, one usuallydefendsor apologizes fortheirchoice of fellow
travellers.I won't: whichevertheoristhelps me best understandthe subjectof
my inquirygets to the head of the class. For some time, it meant thatpost-
modernists, post-anything
post-structuralists, ruled.As a concept,'post-modern',
enjoyedfromthe outsetthe curiousutilityoftransparent meaningforsome and
uttermeaninglessforothers.Debates ragedon the veryexistenceof an epochal
break ('post-modernity') and the explanatoryvalue of such an incoherentbody
of intellectualattitudes('post-modernism').For me, it representedan interpre-
tive struggleto comprehendhow modernhistoryneverseemed fullyto awake
fromthe Enlightenmentdreamof linearprogress;how culturesas advanced as
the ones thatproducedBach and Goethe, orJefferson and Emerson could also
produce an Auschwitzor Hiroshima;how thepastwas uprootedand the future
predeterminedby new technologiesof representation;how every universal
meta-narrative and foundationalgrand theory(be it Immanuel Kant or Karl
Marx) was unravellingin the face of acceleratedchange in global politics;how
talk-radio,reality-based TV, and webcamsmade everydaylifea public spectacle
above and beyond conventionalmeans of comprehension.
At some point academic fatigueset in, and I grew weary of the theoretical
debatessurrounding post-modernism. I just couldn'tsee thepointofwriting(or
refereeing)one more journal articleon whetherwe are pre-, post- or just
preposterously modern.And truthbe told-never an easytaskin post-modern
circles-I had a problemwith 'problematize',and all the othercant termsthat
have increasingly come to signifymembershipand littleelse. Taking pluralism
seriously,I had littletimeforany academic approach-from rationalchoice to
post-positivisttheory-that prescribesone way of inquiry over and against
anotherat a purelytheoretical level.Besides,isn'tit time- aftertheUS President
statesin a courtvideo thatthetruthof thematterdependson whatyou mean by
'is', the US War College publishesa book on 'Post-modernwarfare',and
Amazon.com heavilydiscountsPostmodernism forbeginners-tomove on?9 Are
we not 'alwaysalready',as Derridawrote,whatDevo sang(withno gendersensi-
tivity)in theirironicsequel to theirmemorablehit,'post-post-modern men'?
But where to next?As is so often the case, the destinationwas to be foundin
thejourney. In my travelsI discoveredample evidence thatwe had accelerated
beyonda 'post-moderncondition',first identifiedas suchbyphilosopherFrancois
Lyotardin I979, and thatwe were enteringa digitally enhancedvirtual immersion,
9 My lastforayinto the theorywars can be found in, 'Post-theory:the eternalreturnof ethicsin
internationalrelations',in Michael Doyle and John Ikenberry,eds, New thinking in international
relations
theory(Boulder, CO: Westview Press, I997), pp. 54-76. For my take on the superannuationof post-
modernism,see JamesDer Derian, ed., The Virilioreader(Oxford: Blackwell Publishers,i998),
Introduction,pp. I-I5. See also Steven Metz, Armedconflict in the21Stcentury:
theinformation
revolutionand
post-modernwarfare (Carlisle,PA: StrategicStudies Institute,2000).

778

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Virtuous
war/virtual
theory

in which instantscandals,catastrophicaccidents,impendingweatherdisasters,
'wag-the-dog' foreignpolicy, live-feedwars, and quick-in, quick-out inter-
ventionsinto still-bornor moribundstatesare all available,notjust primetime,
real time but 24/7, on the TV, PC, and PDA. Both on and offthe road, in
searchof supplementalmodes of understanding, I began to see the need fora
virtualtheory of war and peace.
From the beginningrightup to the end of my travels,I also held to what
some cali a given, othersa belief,and a few an episteme:thatglobal politics
remainsa place ofpower and identity,space and borders,legitimacyand mean-
ing. But where I once trustedthinkerslike Hobbes, Grotiusand Kant to tellthe
completestoryof securityin thelanguageof sovereignty, I increasingly came to
rely on criticaltheoristslike Nietzsche, Benjamin, Baudrillard,Deleuze and
Virilio to interpretnew mimeticcodes of competingauthoritiesand cultural
clashesthathad yetto be mappedlet alone decipheredin globalpolitics.Facing
new hyper-realmsof economic penetration,technologicalacceleration,and
new media, the spatialist, positivistperspectivethatinformsrealism
materialist,
and other traditionalapproaches cannot begin fully to comprehend the
temporal,representational, and potentiallydangerouspowers of
deterritorial
virtualism. By tracingthe reconfiguration of power into new immaterialforms,
post-modernists providea starting point. They help us to understandhow acts
ofinscription and theproductionofinformation, how metaphor,discourse,and
languagein general,can reifyconsciousness,rigidify concepts,predetermine the
future.But theyalso providethe criticaltoolsto floatsignifiers, dismantlebinary
hierarchies, freethe imagination.As the realitiesof internationalpoliticsincreas-
inglyare generated,mediated,simulatedby new digitalmeans of reproduction,
as the globalizationof new media furtherconfusesactual and virtualforms;as
thereis not so much a distancingfromsome original,power-emitting, truth-
bearingsource as thereis an implosion;as meaningis set adriftand thendisap-
pearsinto media black-holesof insignificance, a littlepo-mo can go a long way.
I took mybearingsregularly, withinterviewsand archivalresearchas well as
strategicand diplomatictheory;but it would be an act of stupidity, arrogance,
or, as is oftenthe case, both,to thinkone could map thisnew virtualterrainby
conventionalmeans alone. I soughtnot to enclose but to encompassvirtuous
war,witha mix ofnew and old techniquesand theories,rangingfrommapsthat
had sea monstersat the edge (humanitarianinterventionmust go no further
than Bosnia-darkness lurksin Rwanda) and global positioningsystemsthat
made weapons smarterand diplomacydumber('We hitwhat we were aiming
for...But we did not mean to hitthe Chinese Embassy').'0
Obviously it wasn'tjust a love of the open air thatspurredthisvirtualroad
trip.I mustadmitthatI also saw it as a way to escape the disciplinaryboundaries
(and extensiveborderskinmishes) oftheacademicfieldofInternational Relations.
In general,the social sciences,an intellectuallaggardwhen it comes to tech-
? Unnamed NATO representative, quoted in Michael Gordon, 'NATO saysit thoughtembassywas arms
agency', New YorkTimes,2 May 2000, p. I.

779

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JamesDer Derian

nologicalchange,are not the bestvehicle forunderstanding the virtual.Highly

complex in the philosophical idiom, yet practicallyubiquitous in popular
discourse,it understandablycomes with an intellectualtaboo in the social
sciences.Itjust doesn'tseem to fitinto a disciplinary
inquiry.I've neverneeded
a reason,but I do thinkgoing off-roadis about the onlyway to assessfullythe
benefitsagainstthe dangersof the virtual.
Some mightplace it further down on theladderthantheoreticalinspiration,
conceptualincentives,ethicalimperatives,or disciplinary escapism,but thereis
as well a good etymologicalreasonto undertakethevirtualtrip.'Theory', from
containswithinit the notionsof a journey or embassy
itsGreek root of theorein,
whichinvolvesan attentive
(theoria), contemplation(horao)ofa spectacle(theama),
or oraculardeity(theon)."'Virtual',fromtheLatinvirtualis,
like theatre(theatron)
conveysa senseofinherentqualitiesthatcan exertinfluence,by will (thevirtu' of
Machiavelli'sPrince) or by potential(the virtualcapacityof the computer).By
this unificationof the classicaland the digital,virtualtheorybecomes both
softwareand hardware:it has thepotentialto make meaning,producepresence,
createtheactualthrougha theatricaldifferentiation and technicalvision.It con-
structsa world-not ex nihiliobut ex machina-wheretherewas none before.'2
On theepistemological spectrum, thisclearlyplacesthevirtualists
nearerto the
constructiviststhantherationalists Virtualtheoryrepudiatesthephilo-
or realists.
sophical realismand positivismunderlyingmost social science theory,where
words transparently mirrorobjects,factsresideapartfromvalues,and theoryis
independentof the realitythatit represents.'3Yet, I have foundlittleof intel-
lectual or pragmaticutilityin the metatheoretical, structuralist,
and curiously
amorphousforms(again,where are the bodies/agents?)thatconstructivism has
takenin InternationalRelations.To me it is a stepbackwards,fromstructuralism
to bloburalism,to invokethatclassicof the I950s, 'The Blob', wheremisunder-
stood teenagers(somethingofa stretchforthestar,Steve McQueen) took on an
gooey blob thathad emergedfroma meteor.In spiteof efforts
extra-terrestrial
to destroyit by conventionalmeans (i.e. lots of firepower),it growsto gargan-
tuanproportionsby parasitically suckingthe lifeout of humans.
" This etymologyis drawn fromMartin Heidegger, The questionconcerniing technologyand otheressays,trans.
William Lovitt (New York: Harper, I977); Costas Constantinou, Ot theway to diplomacy (Minneapolis,
MN: Universityof Minnesota Press, I996); and the always insightfulsuggestionsof Michael Degener.
I2 This definitionand the descriptionof the virtualwhich followsis a shorthand,highlycondensed
interpretation drawn fromthe work of Martin Heidegger, Gilles Deleuze, F6lix Guattari,Jacques
Derrida, Pierre L6vy and Paul Virilio. See Heidegger, The questionconcerningtechnology;Gilles Deleuze,
Bergsonism, trans.Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam (New York: Zone Books, I988), Difference et
(Paris: PUF, I968); Gilles Deleuze and F6lix Guattari,A thousand
repetitiotn plateaus:capitalismand
schizophrenia,trans.Brian Massumi (Minneapolis, MN: Universityof Minnesota Press, I987); Jacques
Derrida, Specters ofMarx, trans.Peggy Kamuf (New York and London: Routledge, I994); Pierre Levy,
Becoming virtual:realityin thedigitalage,trans.Robert Bononno (New York and London: Plenum, I998);
Paul Virilio, The Virilioreader,trans.Michael Degener, Lauren Osepchuk and JamesDer Derian (Oxford:
Blackwell Publishers,I998). I have found the best philosophical synopsisto be WolfgangWelsch's,
'Virtualanyway?',in Candido Mendes and Enrique Larreta,eds, Media and socialperceptiotn (Rio de
Janeiro,Brazil: UNESCO, I999), pp. 242-85.
I3 See JamesDer Derian, 'A reinterpretation of realism:genealogy,semiology,and dromology',in Der
Derian, ed., Internationaltheory:critical (New York: New York UniversityPress, I995), pp.
investigations
363-96.

780

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Virtuous
war/virtual
theory

This mightbe somethingof a dramaticexaggeration,but some hyperbole

mightbe warranted,ifwe are not to awake one dayin thefuture,to findwhere
once regimetheorists ruled,criticaltheorists
critiqued,standpointfeministsstood,
epistemiccommunitiescommuned,and post-structuralists problematized,only
a protoplasmictrace remains.Not even the 'English school' of international
theoryappearsto have raisedthe Oxbridge in time againstthe constructivist
onslaught.Only neo-realistsand neo-liberals,occupyingthe higherreachesof
the discipline,protectedby positivismfromnon-observablephenomena like
the Blob, have so farescaped itssaprophyticattack.
Constructivismin InternationalRelations has demonstrateda remarkable
capabilityto absorbanyapproachthatprivilegesepistemology overmethodology,
identityover interest,relativismover rationalism,social factsover empirical
data. To be fair,thereare lessmetaphorical,not quite so philosophicallyobtuse,
more practicalreasonsforthe growthof constructivism. It can be attributedto
the qualityof itsscholarship,the proselytizing energyof itsproponents,as well
as thestrategicifsomewhatcompromisingpositionit strivesto occupybetween
other'post-modem','rigid','hardcore','radical'or 'strong'approaches.'4It could
be arguedthatconstructivism is spreadingbecause it providesnew and valuable
conceptsforinterpreting a rapidlychangingworld thatolder approachesin IR
have not,and perhapscannotprovide.'5Indeed,it could be arguedthatargumen-
tationitself,now thrivingin theincreasingly and fragmented
pluralistic subfields
of IR and schools of the social sciences,favoursconstructivism, which at least
theoretically practises(a pragmaticevaluationof competingtruth-claims) what
it preaches(theworld is what we make of it).i6
'4 These are termsused by many constructivists to self-differentiatefromsimilarapproaches,as well as to
claim the 'modern', 'soft'and 'mediative'; 'milder'; or more 'conventional' middle ground in IR theory.
See respectivelyAlexander Wendt, 'Anarchyis what statesmake of it: the social constructionof power
politics',in JamesDer Derian, ed., International theory: critical (New York: New York
investigations
University Press,I995), pp. I3I-3, I53-5; EmanuelAdler,'Seizingthemiddleground:constructivism in
world politics',EuropeanJournal ofInternational Relations3: 3, September I997, pp. 32I-3, 333-7; Ronald
Jepperson,Alexander Wendt and Peter Katzenstein,'Norms, identity,and culturein national security',
in Peter Katzenstein,ed., The culture ofnationalsecurity (New York: Columbia UniversityPress, I996),
pp. 33-75; Daniel Deudney, 'Binding sovereigns:authorities,structures,and geopoliticsin Philadelphian
systems',in Thomas Bierstekerand CynthiaWeber, eds, Statesovereignty as socialconstruct
(Cambridge:
Cambridge UniversityPress, I996), pp. I92-5; and Ted Hopf, 'The promise of constructivism in
InternationalRelations theory',International Security 23: I, summer I998, pp. I7I-200.
Dating back at least to Aristotle,the via mediais hardlya novel move. However, earlierpractitionersof
it in the so-called 'English school' of IR, such as MartinWight and Hedley Bull who advocated a
'Grotian' approach against'Kantian' or 'Machiavellian' ones, recognized and advertizedthisgambitas an
ethical preference,especiallywhen one takes into account the cultural,social, and economic diversityin
typologicalclassification.See Hedley Bull (pp. xiv, xxi) and MartinWight (pp. 259, and esp. 265, where
he also distinguishes'soft'from'hard' versionsof realism,rationalism,and revolution,in Gabriele Wight
and Brian Porter,eds, International theory: thethreetraditions (Leicester:LeicesterUniversityPress, I99I).
I5 As fortestingconstructivism by its abilityto interpretor explain internationalpolitics,thereis another
obstacle: the singulartendencyin IR to confusecausal linksbetween theoryand practicewith the food
chain of disciplinaryschools of thoughtand proximityto powerfulinstitutions(forprimafacieevidence,
see the ingratiatingnotes of acknowledgementwhich grace most IO or ISQ articles).
I6 Two recentarticlesstandout in thisregard:Ted Hopf, in one of the best overviews to date of
constructivism, makes a virtueof its 'heterogamousresearchapproach: thatis, it readilycombines with
different fieldsand disciplines'.(see 'The promise of constructivism',p. I96); and Neta Crawford
presentsa persuasivecase fora constructivist ethicsin post-modem times (see 'Postmodem ethicsand the
criticalchallenge', Ethicsand International AffairsI2, I998).

78I

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JamesDer Derian

How, then,to linkvirtualtheoryto constructivism withoutfallingpreyto its

blob-likequalities?There is theconventionalapproach,thatwould restconstruc-
tivistclaimswithprecisedefinitions, comparativeliteraturereviews,theoretical
analysis,and the reductionistdiagramviz., the kind of professionalactivitythat
keeps us all busyand ourjournalsin business.Followingeconomic models,this
primitiveaccumulationof knowledgemightwell resultin a greatleap forward
to a new stageofintellectualdevelopmentin International Relations.However,
progressin history,as well as discontinuous,epistemicinnovationin science,
rarelytakesthe linearpath of incrementalism. A less directcritiquemightbe
more effective.It need not be on the orderof pastpolemics,like Hedley Bull's
infamousfrontalassaulton behaviouralists, which, we should remember,was
spurredby his beliefthatone should 'studytheirpositionuntilone could state
theirown argumentsbetterthan theycould and then-when theywere least
suspecting-to turnon them and slaughterthem in an academic massacreof
Glencoe'.17 Given the natureof the beast,it mightbe more appropriateto play
down the minordifferences, to mimicconstructivism, say,as predatorsdo their
prey,and co-opt it fromwithout.As Steve McQueen discoveredthe hardway,
Blobs are prettymuch immuneto flamingor caging:directconfrontation isjust
more thoughtforfood. Not wishingto escalateto the thermonuclear level (as
theydid, counter-productively, in the sequel, 'Beware the Blob!'), I suggesta
different strategyfor the de-blobbingof constructivism, one thatis empirical,
andpolitical,
historical, which refigures constructivism as a progenitorratherthan
pre-empterof virtualtheory.
This would clearlyrequireanotherarticle.But I can give threegood reasons
for undertakingsuch an investigation.First,constructivism in IR, for all its
metatheoretical trappings,is a curiouslysui generiscreature;as conventionally
told in IR theory,constructivism couldjust as well as come fromouterspace.'8
Originaryconceitsare not confinedto constructivists, but one would thinkthat,
by stintof name and nature,theywould be less inclinedto contributeto the
philosophicalamnesiathatseems to strikesuccessivegenerationsof IR theory.
Some mightventureonlyso farfromthe mainstreamas the near-abroad,to the
recentlyemergent'schools' of constructivism clustered,not surprisingly, around
a varietyof universitieswhich have expedientlyassembledover thelastdecade a
criticalmass of professors, graduatestudents,and finescholarship,as demon-
stratedby the 'Minnesota', 'Copenhagen' and 'Aberystwyth' schools. Others
have recognizedthe extra-disciplinary influenceof social and politicaltheorists
such as AnthonyGiddens andJiirgenHabermas.But we need to travelfurther
afield, to avoid the internecinewars of taxonomy that pose as theoretical

'7 Wight and Porter,eds, International

theory,p. xi.
I8 The two earlyexceptions,by Nicholas Onuf and FriedrichKratochwil,provide extensive,critical
expositionsof the precursorsof constructivism in IR. The factthattheyrelyforthe most parton legal
philosophersand speech-act theorists,not a favouredanalyticin North American IR, helps to explain
theirlimitedimpact on the development of constructivism.See Onuf, Worldofourmaking(Columbia,
SC: Universityof South Carolina Press I989); and Kratochwil,Rules, norms,and decisions
(Cambridge:
Cambridge UniversityPress, I989).

782

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Virtuous
war/virtual
theory

dialogue,but also to estrangethroughgenealogythe parochialversionof con-

structivism which currentlyprevailsin IR. A genealogyof constructivism is
long overdue,and doubly needed, to re-establishthe disparatebeginningsand
multiplealternatives that have escaped the officialstory.A genealogy-what
Nietzcherefers to as 'effective
history'(wirklicheHistorie)
and Foucaultas a 'history
of the present'-functions as a theoreticalinterventioninto the past that
illuminatesand seeksto transform presentpoliticalpractices.'9
Second, a genealogyis neededbecauseconstructivism in IR hasbeen bleached
of politics as well as history.Although it mightmnakeconstructivism more
amenableto the disciplinary imperativeof a value-freesocialscience,thisrenders
itlessusefulfora transformative and transvaluative periodin contemporary Inter-
nationalRelations. Third, constructivism, in its currentlyde-historicizedand
de-politicizedadaptationof structuralism, is leftincapableof respondingto the
most vexing ethicalquestion thatit firstraised (ifnot then begged). If we do
indeed constructthe world we live in, if our theoriesare inextricablyinter-
dependentwith our practices,why do we go on reproducingso much of its
violence,criminality, and outrightevil?Such politicalquestionsand hardethical
choices have become subsumedby the constructivist equivalentof a 'structural
adjustment'.
Perhapstheselastremarksare unfairly directedand overlyrighteous.Afterall,
most constructivists are quick to claim thatthereis no theory of constructivism
per se: it is only an 'approach', 'analysis','model' or, at best, a 'researchpro-
gramme'forIR, and as such shouldnot be held to strictscientific, predictive,or
prescriptive standards.20 Nor do I-as someone close to the constructivist pro-
ject (and identifiedby othersas one2")-wish to contributeto one of the least
attractive pathologiesof the academy,the narcissismof pettyintellectualdiffer-
ences. Theory-boundand structurationally constrained, nonethe-
constructivists
less should sufferfroman ethicalimperativethatotherapproaches-or at least
those on its epistemologicalright-do not. Post-structuralism has, from its
beginningsoutsideand throughitsdeliberationsinsideInternationalRelations,

'9 If one takes a strictly

nominalistapproach, constructivism
firstappears in Russian in the early I920S to
describethe revolutionaryeffort'to create a new world' out of new technologyand politicsby artistslike
ValdimirTatlin, El Lissitzky,Naum Gabo, Antoine Pevsner,and most prominently,Aleksandr
Rodchenko. From the outset,the concept is a site of greatsemantic,artisticand political contestation.
One of its earliestinvocations,'The realisticmanifesto',writtenby Gabo and Pevsner foran opein-air
exhibitionand posted all over Moscow in I920, calls for'the constructionof the inewGreat Style' which
would succeed where the Futurists('clad in the tattersof worn-out words like "Patriotism",
"militarism","contempt forthe female"') and Cubists ('broken in shardsby theirlogical anarchy') had
failed: 'We constructour work as the universeconstructsits own, as the engineerconstructshis bridges,
as the mathematicianhis formulaof the orbits....We affirmin these artsa new element,the kinetic
rhythmsas the basic formsof our perceptionof real time. We assertthatthe shoutsabout the futureare
forus the same as the tearsabout the past: a renovatedday-dreamof the romantics'.See Naum Gabo and
Antoine Pevsner, 'The realisticmanifesto',in Stephen Bann, ed., The tradition (New
ofconstructivism
York: Da Capo Press, I974), pp. 3-IO.
20 See respectivelyAdler (I997), pp. 32I-3; Wendt (i995), pp, I53-6; Wendt (I996), pp. 242-5; and Hopf
(I998), pp. I96-7.
21 See Hopf (I998), p. I82.

783

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JamesDer Derian

wrestledwiththisissue.22'Hardcore' realists,evincingmaterialinterests, amoral

actorsand repetitioushistory,need not botherwith such 'idealist' concerns,
therebyrepudiatingany responsibility forreproducinga world theyclaim only
to record.Even 'softer'rationalistvariantsof neo-realismand neo-liberalism,
focusingon the behaviour of given identitiesinteractingat domestic and
systemiclevels, can offerexplanatory,if not totallyexculpatoryanswersbased
on game-theoretic issueslike transactioncostand asymmetrical uncertainty that
resultin sub-optimaloutcomes. Constructivists, operatingin a more intersub-
jective, constitutive,normativemodel of the world, cannot so easilyduck the
ethical question. They might 'problematize'the subject of the question, by
attackingthe universalist and masculinistassumptionsbehind the use of a self-
identical'we' and a metaphysicalsense of human nature.23They might'disag-
gregate'theobject ofthe question,by positinga more 'mediative'and scientific,
ratherthan'constitutive'and criticalrole forconstructivism.24 They mighteven
'interpellate'
theanswer,by arguingthata 'bounded' rationality delimitsthecon-
stitutive optionsofthestructurally'embedded'agent.25However, demonstrations
of epistemologicalcorrectnessand ontologicalhair-splitting will not make the
ethicalquestiongo away, and like the dead upon the living,the questionwill
continueto hauntconstructivism untilit confrontsitsvariegatedpastas well as
itscurrentabeyanceof responsibility forthe future.
Constructinga de-territorialized sense of being-neither here nor thereas
being but always as becoming different-virtually representsa paradoxical
extra-realitythatdoes not fitthe dominantdyadsof the social sciences,the real
and the ideal, structureand agent,factand value. It representsand providesan
interzone, an intersticein which futurepossibilitiesare forgedfromthe en-
counterbetween criticalimaginationand technologicaldeterminism. It offersa
theoretical,historicaland politicalmediationfor InternationalRelations. It is
the firststep towards the awakening, of which Benjamin wrote, from a
perpetualstateof interwarto a potentialstateof postwar.
The French philosopherGilles Deleuze is most at home in this virtual
interzone.He views the virtualas possessinga realitythat is not yet actual,
somewhatlike Proust'sremembrances,which are 'real withoutbeing actual,
ideal withoutbeing abstract'.26 Unlike theAristotelian conceptionofthevirtual
as potential(dynamis),the virtualnow has a constitutivecapacityof its own,
creativeof ratherthandependentupon the actual. Deleuze tracesthismodern
22 There has been an continuingdebate in post-structuralism on subjectivityand ethics,based on the work
of Nietzche, Bakhtin,Foucault, Levinas, Derrida, Rorty and others,in the political theoryofJudith
Butler,Wendy Brown and William Connolly; and in the internationaltheoryof David Campbell,
Daniel Warner andJim George, among others.For a synopsis,see Der Derian, 'Post-theory',pp. 54-76.
23 See Ann Tickner, 'Identityin International Relations theory:feministperspectives',in Yosef Lapid and
FriedrichKratochwil, The return ofculture and idetntity
in IR theory
(Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, I996),
pp. I47-62; and Getnder in InternationalRelations(New York: Columbia UniversityPress,I992), pp. 22-66.
24 See Adler, 'Seizing the middle ground', pp. 330-36.
25
See Alexander Wendt and Daniel Friedheim,'Hierarchyunder anarchy:informalempire and the East
German state',in Statesovereignty as socialconstruct,
pp. 245-53.
26 See Deleuze, Bergsozism, pp. 96-7. See also ConstantinBoundas, 'Deleuze-Bergson: an ontology of the
virtual',in Paul Patton, ed., Deleuze: a critical
reader(Blackwell Publishers,I996), pp. 8i-io6.

784

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Virtuous
war/virtual
theory

formulation of thevirtualback to the coeval emergenceof cinemaand Bergson's

conceptof the e'lanvital.Justas imagesbegin 'to move' in cinema,so too do our
concepts need to incorporatemobilityand time if they are to keep up with
rapidlyshiftingevents.The moving image/conceptrepresentsa kind of 'self-
movingthought',which producespowerfuleffects ofperception,affection, and
action.Justas the simulacrumof the cinema has no 'real' identity,thereis no
natural'there'to thevirtual:itsidentityis based on pure difference, a difference-
in-itself,which privilegesdifferentiation over resemblance,and the creative
over the imitative-except,perhaps,in the case of the Diehardor Lethalweapon
sequels. 'The virtual',saysDeleuze, 'does not have to be realized,but rather
actualized; and the rules of actualizationare not those of resemblanceand
limitation,but those of difference or divergenceand of creation'.27
Deleuze providesa complex model of the virtualas a problematicwhich is
resolved through the interpretationof its eventual actualization. Organic
examples-like the seed thatcarriesthe virtualcode forbut cannotcontrolthe
circumstance of itsactualizationas a tree do not adequatelyconveythepower,
ambiguity,and complexityof the virtualin a media-saturatedenvironment.28
FollowingDeleuze's dictumthat'the taskof philosophyis to be worthyof the
event', one is better advised to pick up the newspaper to find potential
interzonesin searchof a worthytheory.Consider a singleday in the New York
Times.An Op-Ed piece by the economist Paul Krugman invokes the Wall
Streetcrashof I987 (whichwas virtually and literallyprogrammedby computer
trading)to demonstrate how the economic crisisin Asia and Russia will cease to
be a 'real-economynon-event' and could be transformed into a global slump
should the privatesector succumb to 'a self-fulfilling pessimism'.29Afterthe
movie Wag thedogbecame the virtualstandardby which PresidentClinton's
foreignpolicy was framed,it is no surprisethatin anotherarticle,thisone on
President Clinton's trip to Russia, former Secretary of State Lawrence
Eaglebergersays'the troubleClintonis going to have...is thatwe talkso much
abouthimweakenedthatit becomesa self-fulfilling prophecy'.30And in perhaps
theclearestifmostmetaphysical exampleofthepropheticpowersofthevirtual,
thefrontpage carriesa storyon AudreySanto,a girlfromWorcester,Massachu-
setts,'inertand unspeaking'fori i ofher I 4 yearsbecause of an accident,who is
believed by thousandsto have miraculoushealingpowers afterblood appeared
fourtimesin herpresenceon the eucharistichosts,thevirtualbody of Christ.3'
Most traditionalapproachesin the social sciences,assumingthe bifurcation
ratherthaninteractionof subjectivemind and objectivenature,are not philo-
sophicallyequipped to explore thisinterzoneof the virtual,where simulacra
reverse causality,being is simultaneouslyhere and there, and identityis

27 See Deleuze, Bergsonism,

p. 97.
28
See L6vy, Becoming virtual,p. 24.
29
See Paul Krugman, 'Let's not panic-yet', New YorkTimes,30 August I998, p. I3.
30 See Elaine Sciolino, 'Dear Mr President:what to do in Moscow', New YorkTimes,30 Aug. I998, p. I I.
3I See Gustav Niehbur, 'Unconscious girlinspiresstreamof pilgrims',New YorkTimes,30 Aug. I998, p. 24.

785

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JamesDer Derian

deterritorializedby interconnectivity. Virtualtheorypositsthatthe retrievalof

facts-empiricalor social-is precededby interpretation, conveyedby technical
media, conductedthroughexperimentation, and succeeded by the creationof
new virtualities.War and peace both are stillin need of approachesthatstudy
whatis being represented.But it is also in need of a virtualtheorythat can
explorehowrealityis seen,framed,read,andgenerated in the actualizationof the
event.Virtualtheorydoes not,as vulgarrealistswould claim,denythe existence
of 'reality'.Virtualtheoryseeksto understandhow new technologiescreatethe
effectsof reality,but it also beginswiththe premise,arguedforcefully by philo-
sophersfromLeibniz and Nietzsche to Peirce and Putnam, that realityhas
alwaysbeen inflectedby the virtual.
This does not preclude a scientificinvestigation-unlessone ignores the
advancesof Heisenberg,Einsteinand quantumtheoryin general,and confines
science (as is oftenthe case in the social sciences) to the Baconian-Cartesian-
Newtonian mechanisticmodel. Virtualtheoryrelieson the scientificapproach
mapped out with clarityifnot clairvoyanceby Heisenberg:

We canno longerspeakofthebehavioroftheparticle oftheprocessof

independently
observation.As a finalconsequence,the naturallaws formulatedmathematicallyin
quantumtheoryno longerdealwiththeelementary particles
themselvesbutwithour
knowledgeofthem...The atomicphysicist hashadto resignhimself
to thefactthathis
scienceis but a linkin theinfinite
chainof man'sargument withnature,and thatit
cannotsimplyspeakof nature'in itself.'Sciencealwayspresupposestheexistenceof
manand,asBohrhassaid,we mustbecomeconsciousofthefactthatwe arenotmerely
observersbutalsoactorson thestageoflife.32

Empirically, historically,
and politically,a virtualtheoryofInternationalRelations
beginswhere General,turnedPresident,Eisenhowerleftoffin his famous(but
now littledebated) I96I farewelladdress,warningof the 'danger thatpublic
policy could itselfbecome the captive of a scientific-technological elite'. But
with the addition of the media and entertainment industriesto the mix, a
seductivecaptivationnow augmentsthe powers of what he had labelled the
'military-industrial
complex'. When the simulationsused to trainfighterpilots
show up in the special effectsof the filmIndependence day,four-personMarine
fire-teamstrain with the videogame 'Doom', and Disney's formerhead-
Imagineer,Bran Ferrenshows up as the keynotespeakerat an annual joint
meetingofindustry and military on hightechnology,realitybecomes one more
attractionat the VirtualTheme Park of War and Peace.
With apologiesto Eisenhower,virtualtheorytakesaim at the cyborgheartof
the 'Military-Industrial-Media-Entertainment' network(MIME-NET forshort),
not only to investigateits role in the productionof war, but to studyup close
the mimeticpower that travelsalong the hyphens.It would be historically

32 See Werner Heisenberg, Thephysicist's ofNature,trans.ArnoldJ. Pomerans (New York:

conception
Hutchinson, I958), pp. I2-I6, 28-9, 33-4I.

786

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Virtuous
war/virtual
theory

speciousto claim thisrelationshipis whollynew. For instance,the Ford Motor

Company's River Rouge plantat which my grandfather worked owed a great
deal to Henry Ford's copyingof the BritishRoyal Navy's innovationsin the
mass productionof cannon and ships; and in turn,Ford's assemblyline pro-
ductionand hierarchicalsystemof manufacturing became a mimeticmodel for
the new Hollywood studiosystemof verticallycontrollingactors,movies,and
theatres.33The feedback loop between militaryand civilian technology,
particularlyduring and afterthe Second World War, fromthe crackingof
German codes at BletchleyPark (the computer),to the earlydevelopmentof
radar(thetelevision),to thefirstsemi-automated air defencesystems(networks),
has also been well documented.34What is qualitatively new is the power of the
MIME-NET seamlesslyto mergetheproduction,representation and execution
ofwar. The resultis not merelythecopy ofa copy,or the creationofsomething
new: it representsa convergence of the means by which we make the
distinctionsbetween the originaland the new, the real and the reproduced.
Where once the studyand practiceof war began and ended with the black
box of the state,new modes of productionand networksof information have
erased old and creatednew demarcationsof power and identity,realityand
virtuality.A virtualtheoryis needed to map thesenew developments:how new
technologiesand media of simulationcreate a fidelitybetween the represen-
tation and the realityof war; what are the political consequences when the
human mimeticfacultyfor entertainment and gamingjoins forceswith new
cyborgprogrammesforkillingand warring;and what does it mean forpeace
and security,in an increasinglyaccelerated,highlycontingent,uncertainglobal
condition,when war goes virtuous.
In searchof answers,and to separatethe hypefromthe hyperreality ofvirtu-
ous war,I decided earlyon to foregothepublic affairsmachineof thePentagon,
to avoid the vices of academic abstractionas well as second-handjournalism,
and to go where doctrineconfrontsreality(or, as my militaryhandlersliked to
put it, 'where the rubbermeets the road'). I have spent the last seven years
tryingto get behind and beyond the images of modernwarfare.My travelsin
virtualityhave takenme to places not usuallyvisitedby scholarsor pundits.My
stopsincluded Orlando, Florida,to see militaryofficersand corporateleaders
showcasetheirinformation technologyatjoint conferenceson simulations;the
East Mojave desertto chase afterthe 'KrasnovianBrigade' fortwo digitizedwar
gamesat the ArmyNational TrainingCenter; to CentralCommand in Tampa
to learnhow computergamerswere busyprogramming thelessonsof the Gulf
war forthe nextwar; to FortKnox, Kentucky,to observea distributed SimNet
tank exercisein action; to the Combat and ManeuveringTrainingCenter in
Hohenfels,Germany,to watch the FirstArmoredDivision 'peacegame' their

33 See Martin Walker, Americareborn (New York: Knopf, 2000).

34 See Paul Edwards, Closedworlds:computers
and thepoliticsofdiscourse
in Cold WarAmerica(Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press, I996); and FriedrichKittler,Literature,
media,informiation (Amsterdam:OPA,
systems
I 997).

787

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
JamesDer Derian

humanitarianinterventioninto Bosnia; to X-File territoryat the Defense

Advanced Research ProjectsAgency (DARPA) in Virginia,to learn how the
SyntheticTheater of War (STOW) was being createdto integratevirtual,live
and constructive simulationsof war in realtime;back again to visitSTRICOM
(Simulation,Training,and Instrumentation Command), the newest,and prob-
ablythe mostunusualcommandpost in the military;to theBay area to observe
its occupation by the Navy and Marines in the 'Urban Warrior' experiment;
and finallyto Vicenza, Italy,to comparethe claimsand the outcome of the air
campaignin Kosovo. I did eventuallymake the pilgrimageto the Pentagon,
interviewing,among others,Andrew Marshall,Director of the Officeof Net
Assessment,the Yoda of the 'Revolution in MilitaryAffairs'(RMA), and
GeneralWesley Clark,formerSupremeAllied Commanderin Europe, on the
day beforehis retirement fromthe army.
My travelsended not farfromwhere theystarted,in Los Angeles,where the
Pentagonand Hollywood announcedat theUniversityof SouthernCaliforniaa
new collaborativeproject.Over $40 milliondollarswill be spentto establishan
'InstituteforCreativeTechnologies',where thebestmilitarygamersand studio
artistswill gatherto prepareforthe nextwar. From the desertto the laboratory
to the studio,a virtualtheorychroniclesthe successivestages-and staging-of
virtuouswarfare.
Insideand outsidethemilitary, thefutureofwar is up forgrabs.Withlivesand
profitsat stake,wars of positionand manoeuvreare being foughton multiple
fronts,withinand amongthemilitary services,betweenCongressand theWhite
House, in think-tanksand defence industries,at home and abroad. In my
travels,I came acrossmanyothercases of open dissentand secretbattles,where
'mud soldiers'were fightinga rearguardaction againstthe 'virtuouswarriors'.
All are strugglingwiththe uncertainties of the post-Cold War.
When criticalthinkinglags behind new technologies,as Albert Einstein
famouslyremarkedabout the atom bomb, the resultscan be catastrophic.My
encountersin the field,interviewswith experts,and researchin the archivesdo
suggestthat the 'MIME', the 'RMA' and virtuouswar are emergingas the
preferred meansto securetheUnited Statesin highlyinsecuretimes.Yet critical
questionsgo unaskedby the proponents,planners,and practitioners ofvirtuous
war. Is thisone more attemptto finda technologicalfixforwhat is clearlya
political,even ontologicalproblem?Will the tailof militarystrategy and virtual
entertainment wag the dog of democraticchoice and civilian policy? Most
worrying,is therepotentialforcatastrophe,as with all new complex systems,
fromwhat organizationaltheoristscall negative synergy,'normalaccidents'of the
sortthatproduced Three Mile Island,Chernobyl,Mogadishu?Or even a system-
wide, networkedaccident?
In spite or because of virtuouswar and democraticpeace, global violence
persists-and continuesto resistboth moralindictmentand technologicalfixes.
Virtualtheorymightnot be the solution.But in a world where the virtualtail
increasingly wags the body politic,it can point us in the rightdirection.

788

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:05:15 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions