Many of the world’s most violent conflicts involve proxy wars, involving powerful states using local actors to advance their own interests. These conflicts often escalate violence, destabilize regions and create lasting resentment of foreign powers among local populations. But the underlying causes of these disputes can be complex. The rise of China and the resurgence of Russia highlight some of the issues at play.
Proxies provide a useful tool for intervening states that lack the power projection capacity of global powers. They can help a state pursue its interests without triggering a backlash by blending in with local communities and providing intelligence to its sponsoring government. However, proxies also have significant drawbacks. They are rarely as effective or capable as the sponsoring state’s own forces. They may be corrupt or brutal, and they often lack political legitimacy. Their sponsors may not care about their behavior, assuming that the gains outweigh the cost.
During the Cold War, a number of major and minor proxy conflicts erupted around the globe. These wars involved not only communist and capitalist countries but also a variety of regional and global powers.
While proxy warfare can be an effective tool for intervention, policy makers and strategists must understand its limitations. Proxy war strategies can be categorized into four distinct types: in it to win it, holding action, meddling and feeding the chaos. An intervening state should continuously assess the overall convergence and divergence of its objectives with those of its proxy, including how these goals change over time.