War has increasingly concealed itself by way of euphemism and undeclared armed conflict, a practice that has unsettled the distinction between wartime and peacetime. Each of the four books reviewed herein touches upon this topic, either directly or indirectly. Carson addresses the features of and reasons for covert operations over the course of the twentieth century, focusing on concerted concerns over the risk of escalation. Hoffman and Weiss investigate the evolution of the mainstay commitment to humanitarianism in the international arena, and the extent to which it has become increasingly attached to security. Fazal largely agrees with this conclusion, but takes it one step further. She persuasively shows how the proliferation of international humanitarian law led to a decrease in formal declarations of war among states, a practice that contributed to semantic confusion as well as to the growing use of euphemism to account for armed conflict. Schadlow argues consistently for greater conceptual and practical links between war and postconflict governance, pointing, among other things, to how ill-conceived strategy regarding the broader meaning of war leads to unsuccessful military operations. The review essay subsequently links this common thread—particularly the concealed types of warfare, the use of euphemism, and limited conceptions of armed conflict—to ongoing debates on wartime and peacetime and their relationship to the international order. Overall, the international order's specific setup in conjunction with how war is no longer explicitly recognized or declared has resulted in a division of labor among the military, technocrats, and the police. This division of labor has in turn unsettled the traditional distinction between peacetime and wartime to the effect that the latter is no longer explicitly acknowledged.

中文翻译：

---

战时就是和平时期：20 世纪末和 21 世纪初未宣战的武装冲突

战争越来越多地通过委婉说法和未宣布的武装冲突来隐藏自己，这种做法扰乱了战时与和平时期的区别。本文回顾的四本书中的每一本书都直接或间接地触及了这个主题。卡森阐述了 20 世纪期间秘密行动的特点和原因，重点关注对升级风险的一致关注。霍夫曼和韦斯调查了国际舞台上对人道主义的主要承诺的演变，以及它在多大程度上越来越重视安全。Fazal 在很大程度上同意这一结论，但更进一步。她有说服力地展示了国际人道法的扩散如何导致国家之间正式宣战的减少，这种做法导致语义混乱以及越来越多地使用委婉语来解释武装冲突。沙德洛一贯主张在战争和冲突后治理之间建立更大的概念和实践联系，除其他外，指出关于战争更广泛含义的错误战略如何导致军事行动不成功。这篇评论文章随后将这一共同线索——特别是隐蔽的战争类型、委婉语的使用和对武装冲突的有限概念——与正在进行的关于战时和和平时期以及它们与国际秩序的关系的辩论联系起来。总体而言，国际秩序的具体设置以及不再明确承认或宣布战争的方式导致了军队、技术官僚和警察之间的分工。