Hunt-states replace conquest rights with pursuit rights that void territorial sovereignty.
Evidence
What is emerging is the idea of an invasive power based not so much on the rights of conquest as on the rights of pursuit: a right of universal intrusion or encroachment that would authorize charging after the prey wherever it found refuge, thereby trampling underfoot the principal of territorial integrity classically attached to state sovereignty. According to such a concept, the sovereignty of other states becomes a contingent matter. Full enjoyment of that sovereignty is recognized only if those states take imperial tracking to heart. If they do not—“failed” states cannot, “rogue” states will not—their territories can legitimately be violated by a hunter-state. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 232
Categorization
- XREF: The contingency of sovereignty on imperial tracking supports the book’s thesis on new political norms of neither-war-nor-peace. — connects to: Borders shelter fugitives, so hunter-states claim a right to pursue across them. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 231; Industrialized weaponry and fixed borders make territorial conquest obsolete — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 392
Related
Broader Connections
- Borders shelter fugitives, so hunter-states claim a right to pursue across them.
#exemplifies(0.85) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 231 - Industrialized weaponry and fixed borders make territorial conquest obsolete
#complicates(0.82) — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 392