Shesterinina Anastasia
The University of Sheffield, UK.
Eur J Int Relat. 2022 Sep;28(3):538-562. doi: 10.1177/13540661221095970. Epub 2022 Jun 6.
What accounts for overarching trajectories of civil wars? This article develops an account of civil war as a social process that connects dynamics of conflict from pre- to post-war periods through evolving interactions between nonstate, state, civilian, and external actors involved. It traces these dynamics to the mobilization and organization of nascent nonstate armed groups before the war, which can induce state repression and in some settings escalation of tensions through radicalization of actors, militarization of tactics, and polarization of societies, propelled by internal divisions and external support. Whether armed groups form from a small, clandestine core of dedicated recruits, broader networks, social movements, and/or fragmentation within the regime has consequences for their internal and external relations during the war. However, not only path-dependent but also endogenous dynamics shape overarching trajectories of civil wars. During the war, armed groups develop cohesion and fragment in the context of evolving internal politics, including socialization of fighters, institution-building in the areas that they control, which civilians can collectively resist, competition and cooperation with other nonstate and state forces, and external influence. After the war, armed groups transform to participate in continuing conflict and violence in different ways in interaction with multiple actors. This analysis highlights the contingency of civil wars and suggests that future research should focus on how relevant actors form and transform as they relate to one another to understand linkages between conflict dynamics over time and on continuities and discontinuities in these dynamics to grasp overarching trajectories of civil wars.
内战的总体发展轨迹是由什么决定的?本文将内战描述为一个社会过程,它通过参与其中的非国家行为体、国家行为体、平民和外部行为体之间不断演变的互动,将战前到战后时期的冲突动态联系起来。它将这些动态追溯到战争爆发前新生非国家武装团体的动员和组织,这可能会引发国家镇压,并在某些情况下,由于行为体的激进化、战术的军事化以及社会的两极分化,在内部分歧和外部支持的推动下,导致紧张局势升级。武装团体是由一小批秘密招募的核心成员、更广泛的网络、社会运动和/或政权内部的分裂形成的,这对它们在战争期间的内部和外部关系都会产生影响。然而,内战的总体发展轨迹不仅取决于路径,而且还受到内生动态的影响。在战争期间,武装团体在不断演变的内部政治背景下发展凝聚力并分裂,这些内部政治包括战斗人员的社会化、他们控制地区的机构建设(平民可能会集体抵制)、与其他非国家和国家力量的竞争与合作以及外部影响。战后,武装团体以不同方式转型,与多个行为体相互作用,参与持续的冲突和暴力。这一分析突出了内战的偶然性,并表明未来的研究应关注相关行为体如何在相互关系中形成和转变,以理解冲突动态随时间的联系,以及这些动态中的连续性和不连续性,从而把握内战的总体发展轨迹。