Malaysia’s chairmanship sought to fend off short-term challenges while laying the groundwork for minimizing ASEAN’s longer-term exposure to external stresses.
Elina Noor
{
"authors": [
"Ariel (Eli) Levite"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "NPP",
"programs": [
"Nuclear Policy"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"Israel",
"North Africa",
"Egypt",
"Palestine"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Global Governance",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
It is argued that several Western states currently similarly engage in such warfare, but without fully admitting as much or effectively adjusting their strategies, doctrines and force structures.
Source: Vie de I’IRSEM
Shimshoni and Levite offer a fresh look at the transformation of warfare, focusing on its evolution from post-Westphalian struggle predominantly taking place between opposing military organizations into society centric confrontations. They submit that all contemporary opponents of the West have made the social dimension central to warfare, de facto pursuing society-centric strategies even when they apply traditional force. They argue that several Western states currently similarly engage in such warfare, but without fully admitting as much or effectively adjusting their strategies, doctrines and force structures. Building on their recent expose in Survival of the theoretical and historical underpinnings of this phenomenon, the authors turn to the rich and varied Israeli warfighting experience for additional insights into the nature and dynamics of contemporary societycentric confrontation.
In this paper the authors examine the societal warfare phenomenon in four Arab-Israeli cases: Ben Gurion’s formulation of Israel’s foundational grand strategy and doctrine; the Egyptian-Israeli War of Attrition; Israel’s ongoing confrontation with Hamas; and with Hezbollah these past two decades. They conclude with observations on factors that tend to escalate and increase the undesired societization of warfare, discussing critical implications for the study and practice of strategy.
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
Malaysia’s chairmanship sought to fend off short-term challenges while laying the groundwork for minimizing ASEAN’s longer-term exposure to external stresses.
Elina Noor
For Malaysia, the conjunction that works is “and” not “or” when it comes to the United States and China.
Elina Noor
In July 2025, Vietnam and China held their first joint army drill, a modest but symbolic move reflecting Hanoi’s strategic hedging amid U.S.–China rivalry.
Nguyễn Khắc Giang
The Thai-Cambodian conflict highlights the limits to China's peacemaker ambition and the significance of this role on Southeast Asia’s balance of power.
Pongphisoot (Paul) Busbarat
Beijing believes that Washington is overestimating its own leverage and its ability to handle the trade war’s impacts.
Rick Waters, Sheena Chestnut Greitens