Ethnic group rebellion in civil war
Abstract/Contents
- Abstract
- Why do some ethnic groups involve themselves in civil wars, fighting in rebel groups against the state, while others do not? In particular, what explains variation in ethnic group involvement within the same country? The conventional wisdom is that poverty and political grievances are to blame for this involvement and participation in political violence more generally. Such conclusions tend to be based on studies of single cases or large-N studies that analyze a biased sample of ethnic groups. Countering these hypotheses, I propose a theory of ethnic group rebellion that predicts ethnic group involvement in civil war based on sub-national variation in the ability of the state to exercise a monopoly of control over territory and people, and its administrative strength in an area. Using original geographic, economic, and political data collected on an exhaustive set of ethnic groups from 48 African countries, I test hypotheses emanating from my theory and those of traditional explanations in the context of African civil wars between 1980 and 2006. I find that the distance between an ethnic group's inhabited region of the country and the capital city -- an important measure of the state's presence and capacity for control -- is positively related to the probability of involvement in rebellion. The periphery is a high risk region for involvement in both territorial (separatist/secessionist) rebellion and rebellion designed to take over the state and oust the government. The goals and organizational requirements for these two types of rebellion are quite different, and my theory proposes that these differences should attract ethnic groups from opposite ends of the economic spectrum. Territorial rebellions are likely to involve the poorest ethnic groups living in the periphery, as these movements do not require a high degree of organization or funding to continue a low-level insurgency against the state. In contrast, wealthier groups, which are likely to be better organized and better able to act collectively, are more likely to be involved in government takeover rebellions, which require a higher degree of rebel competence and strength to confront the forces of the state directly. The evidence from statistical analysis and case study examination is strongly supportive of the elements of my theory, suggesting that traditional emphasis on poverty, political representation, and transnational ethnic ties as central factors in this type of political violence is misguided and more focus should be placed on the ability of the state to administer its territory effectively and ethnic group responses to variation in this capacity.
Description
| Type of resource | text |
|---|---|
| Form | electronic; electronic resource; remote |
| Extent | 1 online resource. |
| Publication date | 2010 |
| Issuance | monographic |
| Language | English |
Creators/Contributors
| Associated with | Condra, Luke Nayef |
|---|---|
| Associated with | Stanford University, Department of Political Science |
| Primary advisor | Fearon, James D |
| Thesis advisor | Fearon, James D |
| Thesis advisor | Rodden, Jonathan |
| Thesis advisor | Schultz, Kenneth A |
| Advisor | Rodden, Jonathan |
| Advisor | Schultz, Kenneth A |
Subjects
| Genre | Theses |
|---|
Bibliographic information
| Statement of responsibility | Luke N. Condra. |
|---|---|
| Note | Submitted to the Department of Political Science. |
| Thesis | Thesis (Ph.D.)--Stanford University, 2010. |
| Location | electronic resource |
Access conditions
- Copyright
- © 2010 by Luke Nayef Condra
- License
- This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 3.0 Unported license (CC BY-NC).
Also listed in
Loading usage metrics...