There is an interesting set of ideas. The military folks are kicking around the implications of what they are calling " fourth generation warfare". The shift in network organizing to the point that both states and non-states can wage war.
Can we also assume that states and non-states will be able to wage peace ? Will loose networks (the Second Superpower) be able to coordinate efforts to drive diplomacy? Will power bases connect directly to diffuse conflict?
In an advocacy context how are the small bands of people victimized by multi-nationals connecting to fight for human dignity? (Coke in India)
In all contexts of struggle borders and boundaries are becoming fluid. Given many fake conflicts that are stirred and created between disconnected people the true answer to Fourth Generation Warfare will hopefully be something besides killing, torture and weapons of mass destruction.
It is interesting contextual information in these articles for those of us thinking about creating network effectiveness across distributed nodes.
Link: Fourth Generation Warfare.
That world is breaking down. We appear to be returning to the situation that characterizes most of human experience, where both states and non-states wage war. In 4GW, at least one side is something other than a military force organized and operating under the control of a national government, and one that often exploits the weakness of the state system in many parts of the world.