Militias in Civil Wars

Jentzsch, Corinna; Kalyvas, Stathis N.; Schubiger, Livia Isabella

doi:10.1177/0022002715576753

Cited by 202 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With efficiency gains and the rebel threat, militias serve as complements to the regular forces. The literature identifies three efficiency gains (Donahue and Zeckhauser 2011:122;Jentzsch, Kalyvas, and Schubiger 2015). First, these groups act as force multipliers.…”

Section: Collaboration In the Security Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Mitigation, Regime Security, and Militias: Beyond Coup-proofing

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this supplementary file we present further predictions and explore additional tests of the connection between coups, civil war risk, accountability avoidance, and the presence of progovernment militias. We argued in the main paper that based on pre-existing research, semiofficial militias that are outside of the regular military chain-of-command but with a visible link to the government will be most likely to be used for coup-proofing. However, it is possible that governments may also utilize irregular militias to coup-proof that are not obviously tied to the government. These more informal militias are also coded in our underlying data. Therefore, we re-analyze six models from the main paper using a new indicator that includes both semi-official and informal militia linkages in a state as the dependent variable. These results can be found in Table A1 and A2.The inferences from these models remain consistent with our conclusions in the text.Coup risk in isolation (Model 2.1 and Model 2.2) aids in predicting the presence of militias, but there is room for improvement. The addition of civil war risk and accountability avoidance

show abstract

Section: Collaboration In the Security Sectormentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Mitigation, Regime Security, and Militias: Beyond Coup-proofing

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Understanding small arms disarmament in this way could result in the development of subtle policies which may target men and women differently. Furthermore, adopting a gender perspective encourages development of an inclusive approach which potentially results in 'fuller ownership of efforts to eradicate the illicit trade in small arms' (IANSA 2014). An approach which considers gender as purely an instrumental 'add on' or box to tick may miss the opportunity to take gender seriously through all aspects of a work programme.…”

Section: A Corrective To a Binarymentioning

confidence: 99%

TheJournal of Intervention and StatebuildingTen Years on: Critical Reflections and Stimulating Ideas on an Evolving Scholarship

Aaronson¹,

Ahram²,

Duffield³

et al. 2016

Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding celebrates its tenth anniversary this year. This special volume opens up with a selection of nine of the most influential articles published in the journal. JISB's editorial team has asked the authors for their reflections on their original articles, telling us more about the writing process at that time, what they would do differently (with hindsight), or how they see their articles contributing to current debates on intervention and statebuilding. We have selected one article per volume, and we have ordered the contribution starting from volume 1 (2007) to volume 9 (2015). The articles will be made open access for the year, and we highly recommend (re-)reading the original articles along with the comments from the authors. Strong data provided by Minxin Pei and Sara Kasper support the thesis of the limits of the democratization that can be brought about by foreign powers. In their study 'Lessons from the Past: The American Record on Nation Building', they examined 18 US interventions seeking to promote democratization by coercive regime change prior to the recent Iraq and Afghanistan wars. They found that 13 failed to produce long-term democratic rule, including sustained attempts in the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Guatemala. The five successful interventions include a tiny country (Grenada); one that is far from clearly democratic (Panama); Italy (in which the US did not play much of a role), and two that are indeed great successes: post-World War II Germany and Japan (Pei and Kasper 2003).I hence set out to ask what sociological conditions set these cases apart from the others, and whether these might be reproduced in the Middle East, Africa, and elsewhere. I found that these conditions include (a) cessation of all hostility, (b) a high level of domestic security, and (c) local acceptance of the foreign occupation and the democratization drive. In addition, these nations had (d) a strong national unity, (e) competent government personnel, and (f) a low level of corruption. Furthermore, they had (g) strong economic © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.JOURNAL OF INTERVENTION AND STATEBUILDING, 2016 VOL. 10, NO. 1, 3-24 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2015 fundamentals, including strong industrial bases, established infrastructure, educated populations, and vigorous support for science and technology, corporations, business and commerce. Their (h) cultural values included hard work, high levels of saving, and other forms of self-restraint and capacity to defer gratification, essential for democratic development. (i) Finally...

show abstract

“…Amongst the rich array of work recently published, 87 Jentzsch et al have called for detailed engagement with the multiple cases where local militias have been recruited to assist the incumbent forces of the state in their battles against insurgents. 88 Though the focus of political science research on this question has concentrated on conflicts since the 1980s, 89 and especially since the end of the Cold War, there is clearly considerable value to be gained from including Cold War and late colonial wars of decolonization examples in such comparative studies. From all of these cases, historical and more contemporary, there is a great deal yet to be learned about why local communities form militias to fight against anti-government insurgents and how loyalist bargains are struck.…”

Section: Exits From Empirementioning

confidence: 99%

Allies at the End of Empire—Loyalists, Nationalists and the Cold War, 1945–76

Anderson¹,

Branch

2016

The International History Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The wars of decolonization fought by European colonial powers after 1945 had their origins in the fraught history of imperial domination, but were framed and shaped by the emerging politics of the Cold War. Militia recruited from amongst the local population was a common feature in all the counter-insurgencies mounted against armed nationalist risings in this period. Styled here as 'loyalists', these militia fought against nationalists. Loyalist histories have often been obscured by nationalist narratives, but their experience was varied and illuminates the deeper ambiguities of the decolonization story, some loyalists being subjected to vengeful violence at liberation, others actually claiming the victory for themselves and seizing control of the emergent state, while others still maintained a role as fighting units into the Cold War. This introductory essay discusses the categorization of these 'irregular auxiliary' forces that constituted the armed element of loyalism after 1945, and introduces seven case studies from five European colonialisms-Portugal (Angola), the Netherlands (Indonesia), France (Algeria), Belgium (Congo) and Britain (Cyprus, Kenya and southern Arabia).

show abstract

Militias in Civil Wars

Cited by 202 publications

References 47 publications

Risk Mitigation, Regime Security, and Militias: Beyond Coup-proofing

Risk Mitigation, Regime Security, and Militias: Beyond Coup-proofing

TheJournal of Intervention and StatebuildingTen Years on: Critical Reflections and Stimulating Ideas on an Evolving Scholarship

Allies at the End of Empire—Loyalists, Nationalists and the Cold War, 1945–76

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About