Why do civil wars occur? Another look at the theoretical dichotomy of opportunity versus grievance

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to review major theoretical arguments with regard to the causes of civil war and identify problems associated with the conceptual juxtaposition of opportunity versus grievance that predominates in the field. While they are critical aspects of conflict processes, perception of opportunity and grievance as two mutually competing explanations or separate categories ultimately can limit, rather than facilitate, our understanding of civil conflicts. For example, we show that not all motives can be designated easily as deriving from one or the other. In addition, the existing dichotomous framework masks other important questions about the way that collective action is achieved in some circumstances and not others or the way that some factors seem to generate grievances at one stage, perhaps, but then an opportunity at another orvice versa. Thus the priority should be to develop an integrated, comprehensive approach that can account for fundamental aspects of complex conflict processes. We conclude by providing suggestions for future research on civil conflict.

COVID-19 and armed conflict

“…Broadly speaking, armed conflicts can be driven by grievances and opportunities ( Taydas, Enia, & James, 2011 ). Grievances refer to intense perceptions of inequality or unfairness by individuals or social groups.…”

Disaggregating Opportunities: Opportunity Structures and Organisational Resources in the Study of Armed Conflict

“…Ron, 2005;Sobek, 2010), others invoking the concept when referring to factors that strengthen the capacity of non-state actors to realize a rebellion (e.g. Le Billon, 2001;Lujala, 2010), and still others using the term in reference to diverse influences on the feasibility of insurgency (Kuhn 2018, 390;Taydas et al, 2011;Denny & Walter, 2014). This inconsistent use of the term, I propose, creates at least two problems for opportunity-based approaches to the study of conflict.…”

“…In studies of the causes of armed conflict and civil war, it is common to distinguish between accounts that focus on the motives of actors who mobilize for violent rebellion, and explanations that explore opportunities for violent insurgency (e.g Cederman & Vogt, 2017;Taydas et al, 2011). But what do conflict scholars actually mean by 'opportunities' for insurgency?…”

Size Matters: Strength of Force in Peace Building Missions

“…External pressure to liberalize has been suggested as a contributing factor to the conflict, since privatization led to declining incomes, unemployment, and depressed wages. A reduction in public services followed, spurring resentment and making it easier to recruit individuals to join rebel movements (Taydas et al 2011). The nationalist sentiment that fueled conflict in the Balkans was built on economic selfinterest (Hardin 1995).…”