Proxy war is a form of indirect intervention in intrastate conflict by which major powers support and direct parties to a war without taking a significant portion of the fighting. The idea is that a proxy can better accomplish the intervening state’s objectives than could an overtly military force. It differs from a traditional war, in which the major power shoulders the burden of its defense or offense, and an alliance, when multiple major and minor powers make significant contributions according to their means.
The ideal proxy is one that can achieve its sponsor’s tactical military victories and can be easily controlled. However, the proxy’s political capability is also critical. Ideally, it will have a clear and defined ideology that aligns with the intervening state’s own. This reduces the likelihood that its own desires and ambitions will compromise the intervening state’s objectives.
Moreover, the proxy’s ability to engender support from a local population is important. This minimizes the risk that the intervening state will help to perpetuate a dictatorship whose goals and methods are inconsistent with its own democratic values and morals.
Developing such an ideal proxy is challenging. Attendees suggested that US officials need to communicate the moral benefits of engaging in such conflicts more effectively. They must also be more proactive about shaping the public narrative of a conflict, especially in online contexts, to counter voices from their great-power rivals. Lastly, they need to be more careful about ensuring that the supply of weapons and other resources to the proxy does not contribute to a wider local military conflict that harms the intervening state’s interests.
