CIVIL WARS
AP Photo
Summer 2008
"Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 1, volume 33
By Maria Stephan, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program/Intrastate Conflict Program and Erica Chenoweth, Research Fellow, International Security Program
The historical record indicates that nonviolent campaigns have been more successful than armed campaigns in achieving ultimate goals in political struggles, even when used against similar opponents and in the face of repression. Nonviolent campaigns are more likely to win legitimacy, attract widespread domestic and international support, neutralize the opponent's security forces, and compel loyalty shifts among erstwhile opponent supporters than are armed campaigns, which enjoin the active support of a relatively small number of people, offer the opponent a justification for violent counterattacks, and are less likely to prompt loyalty shifts and defections. An original, aggregate data set of all known major nonviolent and violent resistance campaigns from 1900 to 2006 is used to test these claims. These dynamics are further explored in case studies of resistance campaigns in Southeast Asia that have featured periods of both violent and nonviolent resistance.
AP Photo
June 2, 2008
"Why Islam Lies at the Heart of Iraq's Civil War"
Op-Ed, Christian Science Monitor
By Monica Duffy Toft, Associate Professor of Public Policy
"...[N]ot until 2007 did the Pentagon acknowledge that Iraqi sectarian violence had crossed a threshold to become a civil war.
But policymakers still haven't come to terms with the implications of that fact. If they did, they'd see that a wisely executed withdrawal of US-led forces could well be the surest path to peace. That's because withdrawal is likely to transform the fighting in Iraq into a defensive struggle for power in a nation-state, as opposed to an offensive battle rooted in religion."
Spring 2008
"Partitioning to Peace: Sovereignty, Demography, and Ethnic Civil Wars"
Journal Article, International Security, issue 4, volume 32
Partitioning states along ethnic lines is a debatable solution to solving ethnic civil wars. Advocates argue that partition offers the best chance for lasting peace, while opponents claim that it takes a huge toll on the populations involved and that its effectiveness has yet to be proven. The evidence suggests that only partitions that completely separate the warring groups succeed in creating peaceful states. Policymakers should thus consider partition as an option only where populations are already separated or where population transfers can be accomplished safely. Partitioning Kosovo into distinct ethnic districts could lead to lasting peace, whereas partitioning Iraq would most likely increase human suffering and violence.
April 28, 2008
International Security Program "Paths to Violence" Research Workshop
News
The International Security Program (ISP) at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs hosted a research workshop in Cambridge, Massachusetts, on April 25, 2008. Workshop organizers Erica Chenoweth (ISP) and Adria Lawrence (ISP/Intrastate Conflict Program) brought together leading scholars to explore the conditions under which non-state actors resort to violence and the various strategies state actors use to address aggrieved populations. Workshop participants addressed issues such as why the use of violence varies among non-state actors, how the decision to use violence affects strategic outcomes of internal and international conflicts, and how states arrive at decisions to accommodate, assimilate, or ethnically cleanse minority groups. Participants received feedback on original research papers prepared in advance of the workshop. The final drafts of the papers will be compiled into an edited volume, which will be submitted for review in fall 2008.
AP Photo
March 2008
"Strategic Engineered Migration as a Weapon of War"
Journal Article, Civil Wars, issue 1, volume 10
By Kelly M. Greenhill, Research Fellow, Intrastate Conflct Program/International Security Program
In recent years, it has been widely argued that a new and different armament — i.e., the refugee as weapon — has entered the world's arsenals. But just how new and different is this weapon? Can it only be used in wartime? And just how successful has been its exploitation?
Ahron de Leeuw
February 17, 2008
"Bangladesh's model"
Op-Ed, Chicago Tribune
By Robert Rotberg, Director, Program on Intrastate Conflict and Conflict Resolution
With Pakistan on edge ahead of Monday's parliamentary elections and opponents vowing to oust beleaguered President Pervez Musharraf, this is a good time to look at how another nearby predominantly Muslim country is faring under military rule.
February 1, 2008
"Kenya Countdown"
Magazine or Newspaper Article, Newsweek
Should foreign peacekeepers be deployed to Kenya? In spite of the involvement of high-profile facilitators, like former U.N. secretary-general Kofi Annan, killings are continuing in what was once one of Africa's most stable countries.
AP Photo
January 9, 2008
"Kenya's Real Problem (It's Not Ethnic)"
Op-Ed, The Washington Post
By M. Steven Fish and Matthew Kroenig, Research Fellow, Project on Managing the Atom/International Security Program
"Like Kenya, Benin and Ghana are ethnically divided countries that have experienced closely fought and possibly flawed presidential elections in recent years. But Benin and Ghana have stronger legislatures, so the losers in presidential elections have less fear of being politically excluded. They have reacted to defeat by using their sway in parliament to control the president, and they have not resorted to mass violence."
AP Photo
December 1, 2007
"The United Nations–African Union Mission in Darfur: Implications and Prospects for Success"
Journal Article, African Security Review, issue 4, volume 16
By Sarah Kreps, Research Fellow, International Security Program
With the security situation in Darfur remaining grim, the international community passed United Nations Security Resolution 1769 that authorised a more robust peacekeeping force. This article addresses the security concerns motivating the United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID), highlights the mandate and implications of the force, and compares the potential command and control issues to the experiences of the Somalia intervention in the 1990s. It closes by analysing the prospects for success of the intervention and offering some limited recommendations on ways to mitigate the risks associated with the peacekeeping effort.
(AP Photo)
October 7, 2007
"Playing Favorites on Dictators Robs U.S. of High Ground"
Op-Ed, Chicago Tribune
By Robert Rotberg, Director, Program on Intrastate Conflict and Conflict Resolution
Myanmar (formerly Burma) is among the four most repressive countries on Earth, and President Bush is right to strengthen sanctions against the junta of aging generals who have pummeled protesting monks in their monasteries. But what about equally odious regimes with which Washington maintains cordial relations despite appalling human-rights records?
