What wars and ‘war bodies’ know about international relations

AbstractWhat happens when the ‘international’ as a distinct social space is approached from the perspective of war rather than war from the perspective of the ‘international’? Tarak Barkawi's question (Millennium, 39:3, 2011, 701–706) is best answered by attempts to understand war not as part of inter/intra-state relations but as a socio-cultural, trans-historical institution that impacts on the ‘everyday’ lives of men, women and children. In this article I argue that war is not a disruption of the ‘everyday’, an abstraction that has a definite beginning and end, something we enter into and exit. Instead, it can be captured in daily and mundane lived experiences of people and in powerful emotions that constitute ‘self’, community and the ‘other.’ Drawing upon my research on wars in South Asia, I particularly reflect on how war shapes the banal and the fervent and how cultural and political narratives of ‘war bodies’ perform the ‘international’ in a variety of ways. Most significantly I want to draw attention to how international relations as a scholarly discipline is so deeply engaged with war and yet seems to have an estranged relationship with it. Notes 1 This acronym stands for the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam, who fought for a separatist Tamil homeland in the north and east of Sri Lanka. The LTTE was defeated in a civil war that lasted three decades and finally ended in May 2009 when the government security forces killed the LTTE chief Prabhakaran and other top leaders. 2 This book was published after the defeat of the LTTE and the killing of its top leadership in 2009. The questions asked of Niromi include why she did not write this book when the LTTE was powerful and when its leaders, particularly Prabhakaran, were alive (so that the ‘authenticity’ of her story could be verified). 3 Name changed to protect identity. 4 Interview, June 2011. 5 By her own admission, Niromi was able to leave the LTTE by writing a letter to them which they accepted. They even helped her reunite with her family. 6 For details about Ranjini's story, see , accessed 12 May 2013 and Gordon (2012). 7 A large number of books, conferences and panels on IR remain focused on war, military strategy, and security. 8 Maria is a personal friend who was visiting Australia in May 2009. We had some serious conversations about the intersections between her work as a UNHCR official who sees things on the ground and is an IR practitioner and mine as a student/teacher of IR. 9 Niromi said this at a guest lecture at the University of Wollongong on 20 August 2012.10 The People's Guerrilla Liberation Army (PGLA) is the armed wing of the Communist Party of India (CPI)–Maoist engaged in a bitter armed conflict with government forces in India.11 Many people have asked me these questions during my fieldwork in India.12 See , accessed 15 May 2013.13 See , accessed 14 May 2013.14 See , accessed 12 May 2013.15 Indian Maoists are a well-organized and well-trained insurgent group of socially and economically marginalized populations (untouchable castes, Dalits and indigenous tribals, Adivasis) that operates under the umbrella of the CPI-Maoist. The CPI-Maoist emerged as a uniting force only in 2004 with the merger of two major guerrilla factions, the People's War Group (PWG) and the Maoist Communist Centre (MCC). They have an armed unit, the PGLA, and cultural, political and administrative units operating in several parts of India. Their armed resistance is based on the Leninist and Maoist notion of a protracted people's war against the bourgeois state and its oppressive practices. The Maoists perceive the state as a neo-liberal/upper-caste oppressor that forces its own citizens to the margins and destroys them in its quest for natural resources and political power. The Indian state perceives the Maoists as ‘deviant’ citizens who must either be militarily eliminated or rehabilitated into the social and political mainstream. This is neither an ethnic nor a religious war but a political contest for power and resources between the state and its citizens.16 See ‘2 Maoists involved in Indwar killing held’, Times of India, 15 October 2009, amp;#9; , accessed 21 August 2012.17 See ‘Outrage over dead Maoists’ pictures’, 18 June 2010. , accessed 20 August 2012.18 See , accessed 14 May 2013.19 Prabhakaran's mother's cremation site was also desecrated in 2011. See , accessed 13 May 2013.20 See , accessed 15 March 2013.21 See ‘UN adopts resolution on Sri Lanka war crimes probe’, , accessed 22 March 2012.22 Field notes, August 2008. Also see , accessed 13 May 2013.23 By ‘elsewhere’ I mean that IR has been looking for war narratives in state behaviour, policies or abstract stories, not in the physical and emotional experiences of common people.24 Translated from Hindi and part of a conversation in July 2008.25 This was a three-day conference (6–8 September 2012) attended by post-colonial scholars working on India and Australia. Well-known Indian post-colonial thinker Ashish Nandy was present and his works were engaged with by the presenters in a variety of ways.26 See footnote 18.27 He mentioned this at his talk at the India–Australia Post-Colonial Conference in Melbourne, 6–8 September 2012.28 I was asked this at a job interview in December 2011 when I made a presentation on India's Maoists wars.Additional informationNotes on contributorsSwati ParasharSwati Parashar is a lecturer in politics and international relations at Monash University in Melbourne. She has previously worked with policy thinktanks in Singapore and New Delhi. Her research publications and teaching focus on critical war and security studies, feminist international relations and women, gender and political violence in South Asia. Email: swatiparashar@gmail.com