Counterinsurgency as order-making: refining the concepts of insurgency and counterinsurgency in light of the Somali civil war

IF 0.9 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Small Wars and Insurgencies Pub Date : 2023-07-11 DOI:10.1080/09592318.2023.2231203
M. Skjelderup, Mukhtar Ainashe
{"title":"Counterinsurgency as order-making: refining the concepts of insurgency and counterinsurgency in light of the Somali civil war","authors":"M. Skjelderup, Mukhtar Ainashe","doi":"10.1080/09592318.2023.2231203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this paper, we argue that the current insurgency and counterinsurgency discourse is dominated by concepts that are too narrow and too isolated from the wider civil war literature within which insurgency and counterinsurgency occur. Rather than accounting for the complex political processes and wide range of forces and actors that shape conflict dynamics, the dominant insurgency and counterinsurgency debate tends to reduce highly messy contexts to a competition between the often false dichotomy of insurgents and counterinsurgents, usually understood as the state versus one or more non-state violent actors. In order to understand civil war contexts like South-Central Somalia, we argue that orthodox reductionist concepts and assumptions underpinning the dominant insurgency and counterinsurgency discourse provide limited value. Building on recent critical literature, the paper proposes a refined conceptualization. Instead of understanding insurgency and counterinsurgency as peculiar forms of war, strategies, or sets of guerilla tactics, we follow Jaqueline Hazelton’s line of thought, suggesting that insurgency and counterinsurgency are mere elements of a broader process of violent order-making. Thus, insurgency and counterinsurgency are, in our view, comprehensive processes of organized challenge to and consolidation of established political order within the context of civil war.","PeriodicalId":46215,"journal":{"name":"Small Wars and Insurgencies","volume":"34 1","pages":"1180 - 1203"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Small Wars and Insurgencies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09592318.2023.2231203","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT In this paper, we argue that the current insurgency and counterinsurgency discourse is dominated by concepts that are too narrow and too isolated from the wider civil war literature within which insurgency and counterinsurgency occur. Rather than accounting for the complex political processes and wide range of forces and actors that shape conflict dynamics, the dominant insurgency and counterinsurgency debate tends to reduce highly messy contexts to a competition between the often false dichotomy of insurgents and counterinsurgents, usually understood as the state versus one or more non-state violent actors. In order to understand civil war contexts like South-Central Somalia, we argue that orthodox reductionist concepts and assumptions underpinning the dominant insurgency and counterinsurgency discourse provide limited value. Building on recent critical literature, the paper proposes a refined conceptualization. Instead of understanding insurgency and counterinsurgency as peculiar forms of war, strategies, or sets of guerilla tactics, we follow Jaqueline Hazelton’s line of thought, suggesting that insurgency and counterinsurgency are mere elements of a broader process of violent order-making. Thus, insurgency and counterinsurgency are, in our view, comprehensive processes of organized challenge to and consolidation of established political order within the context of civil war.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
反叛乱作为秩序的制定:从索马里内战的角度提炼叛乱和反叛乱的概念
摘要在本文中,我们认为当前的叛乱和反叛乱话语被过于狭隘的概念所主导,这些概念与发生叛乱和反叛扰的更广泛的内战文献过于孤立。占主导地位的叛乱和反叛乱辩论并没有考虑到复杂的政治进程以及影响冲突动态的广泛力量和行为者,而是倾向于将高度混乱的背景简化为叛乱分子和反叛乱者之间的竞争,通常被理解为国家与一个或多个非国家暴力行为者之间的竞争。为了理解索马里中南部等内战背景,我们认为,支撑主导叛乱和反叛乱话语的正统简化主义概念和假设提供了有限的价值。在最近的批评文献的基础上,本文提出了一个精细的概念化。我们没有将叛乱和反叛乱理解为战争、战略或游击战术的特殊形式,而是遵循Jaqueline Hazelton的思路,认为叛乱和反叛叛乱只是更广泛的暴力秩序制定过程的要素。因此,在我们看来,叛乱和反叛乱是在内战背景下有组织地挑战和巩固既定政治秩序的综合过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Small Wars and Insurgencies
Small Wars and Insurgencies INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
65
期刊最新文献
When Militias capture the state: evidence from Lebanon, Iraq, and Sudan High-modernist intervention and the prolonged frontier conflict in Metekel, North-West Ethiopia: the case of the grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam Rwanda’s War in Mozambique: Road-Testing a Kigali Principles approach to counterinsurgency? Multinational Joint Task Force’s counterinsurgency in the Lake Chad Basin and the consequences of Chadian exit for the Northeast, Nigeria Negotiating ‘Hearts and Minds’: conflict, infrastructure, and community support in Colombia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1