Towards an Understanding of Contemporary Intrastate War

2015

PATH DEPENDENCE IN INTRASTATE CONFLICTS: RESOURCES, REGIMES, AND INTERVENTIONS Ivan Medynskyi Old Dominion University, 2015 Director: Dr. David C. Earnest This dissertation investigates the patterns of path dependence in intrastate conflicts. It is motivated by three research questions: What factors determine a particular outcome of a civil war? How strong is their impact? What are the causal mechanisms in play? To examine these questions, this study introduces a theory of path dependence to the study of intrastate conflicts that bridges the gap between analyses of the phases of contention. First, it examines the broad understanding of path dependence that highlights the impact of initial conditions on civil war outcomes. Then, this dissertation explores the narrower notion which focuses on the role of timing and sequence of internal factors and intervening events in shaping different resolutions to intrastate conflicts. Using multinomial logistic regression and event history models...

Doctoral Thesis Table of Contents

The focus of this study is on the concept and contours of NIAC under IHL. Its purpose is to provide further clarity to the process of identifying NIACs under international law. At its most basic, conflict identification is the real-time objective assessment of prevailing factual circumstances in order to determine the applicable legal regime(s). It is thus an exercise in the classification of armed violence providing a detailed critical examination of the material concept of NIAC, including its threshold of activation and corresponding personal, geographical and temporal scope of applicability under IHL.

Third World Quarterly, 2007

Most internal wars end on the battlefield. In comparison to interstate conflicts, a relatively small percentage of these fights are concluded at the negotiating table. While significant attention has been given to how and why internal wars begin and even how they begin to evolve, little attention has been given to how they are concluded. What research has been done on this subject has focused on the problems that stand in the way of achieving a negotiated outcome, not how these conflicts are resolved by force. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the dynamics of the end game struggle and the differing ways in which states and insurgencies "win" and "lose" internal wars.

Annual Survey of International Comparative Law, 2015

of international law. How might our failure to prevent or swiftly resolve these conflicts be explained? A closer look reveals that the overwhelming majorities of armed conflicts in the past decades have been, and continue to be, intrastate as opposed to conflicts between States. Most of these conflicts relate to the power to govern a State or a portion of that State, and their underlying causes often involve the violation of human rights, including issues of linguistic, cultural or religious rights of certain groups of the population, the abuse of power by rulers and questions of political representation, land rights and uneven distribution of resources. One type of intrastate conflict is fought over who wields power in the central government of the State, often pitting an oppositional party or rebel movement against an incumbent determined not to relinquish or share the instruments of power. Another type involves the government of a State on one side and a group within that State, be it a people, an indigenous people, a tribe, a minority or the population of a distinct region within the State (referred to hereinafter collectively as 'population group'), on the other. Such conflicts are identity based and parties fight over the exercise of authority, for example in the political, economic, cultural or religious spheres. They fight over control over territory, environmental issues and security matters and, more broadly over autonomy andin some casesindependence. Both types of conflict 3.

In South Asia the notion of intrastate wars are prevalent and prolonged. Most of the countries in the region have faced or are still struggling with such wars. Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) rebellion movement in Sri Lanka, till very recently, violent Nexal movement and Maoist insurgency in India and sectarian violence in Pakistan, Taliban and Al-Qaida in Afghanistan have all been the part of intra-state wars. These wars challenge the authority and the integrity of the state. The state’s monopoly over the means of violence seems eroded in South Asia due to certain developments in the international system. The issue of intra-state war has become major problem for the states in South Asia to deal with. This paper argues that these intra-state wars challenge and influence the power of the state particularly in South Asia. It further analyses the state capacity and tries to look that how state finds itself constrained to in dealing with such intrastate wars. In a precise manner this paper also attempts to understand the changing conceptions of security due to the changed nature of modern warfare. Keywords: Intrastate Wars, State Capacity, Regimes, Globalisation, Information Communications Technology.