Aveneu Park, Starling, Australia

For liberation of the homeland) and c)

For
Schmitt, having a political commitment helps the distinction between friends and
enemies. In addition to that, he presents three types of enmity: a) the `conventional
enmity´ (the enemy is someone equal and worth of respect), b) the `real enmity'(
there’re no limits, it ends to annihilation, but at the same time it’s happening
for defensive purposes and, of course, the liberation of the homeland) and c)
the ´absolute enmity´( the international revolutionary fights for abstract
ideas, i.e. when they fight the capitalists). In the theory and practice of
Mao, who based his struggles on a mixture of mutually reinforcing imageries of
real and absolute enmity, it’s noticeable that this signifies a different
political form; a form that doesn’t originate or correspond that much to the
European policies.

When it
comes to mobility, the partisan’s nature allows him to be fast, to obey, to
suddenly attack and retreat. For Schmitt all of these aspects connect to
technology, from which partisan is dependent to the point that he can be in
risk of becoming a puppet in the hands of the great powers. So, Schmitt has an ambivalent
position towards the partisan. He believes that on the one hand the partisan
carried the hope of redemption of the political, but on the other hand he
feared that the partisan would be swallowed by technological progress and universalistic
ideologies.

Lastly, he
talks about irregularity. He underlines the irregularity of their fights. The
partisan doesn’t wear a uniform, he does not display his weapon openly and he
mixes with the civilians for his own favor. The partisan also challenges the
basis of the laws of armed conflict and the distinction between combatants and
civilians. The combination of the partisan’s intense political commitment with
his irregular mode of fighting has an immediate effect on the possibilities for
international law to contain and limit war. There are still contemporary laws
based on the idea of conventional enmity, something that makes it more
difficult to regulate and deal with irregular warfare.

To
conclude, Schmitt’s analysis proves to continue to be relevant for an analysis
of international law and international politics. The issues of irregular
warfare as well as the emerging problem of terror and counter-terror are
problems that still exist on the international legal agenda. Schmitt´s Theory
of the Partisan does not provide solutions to these problems, thus it helps us gain
a better understanding of the structural changes that underlie them.