Pub Date : 2019-12-26DOI: 10.1080/17467586.2019.1700542
Victor Asal, Amira Jadoon
ABSTRACT Recent scholarship suggests that the prevalence of female fighters is determined by various demand and supply factors. On one hand, the voluntary supply of female fighters is dependent on women who are driven by various motivations, ranging from grievances to ideology. On the other hand, violent organizations frequently employ female fighters to gain important tactical and strategic advantages. Focusing on insurgent groups, we posit that two situational factors are critical in determining female participation in combat; lower opportunity costs for women to participate, and a high demand for armed fighters by groups. We argue that high levels of unemployment amongst the female labour force within a state result in lower opportunity costs for women to join an insurgency, while territorial control by groups generates a higher need for armed fighters. Both of these conditions generate the optimal conditions for women to participate in combat roles. We test our arguments by using logistical regression models on a sample of 140 insurgent groups globally from 1998 to 2012. Our findings provide support for our hypotheses that both high levels of female unemployment, and territorial control by insurgent groups increase the likelihood of the prevalence of women fighters in insurgencies.
{"title":"When women fight: unemployment, territorial control and the prevalence of female combatants in insurgent organizations","authors":"Victor Asal, Amira Jadoon","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1700542","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1700542","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Recent scholarship suggests that the prevalence of female fighters is determined by various demand and supply factors. On one hand, the voluntary supply of female fighters is dependent on women who are driven by various motivations, ranging from grievances to ideology. On the other hand, violent organizations frequently employ female fighters to gain important tactical and strategic advantages. Focusing on insurgent groups, we posit that two situational factors are critical in determining female participation in combat; lower opportunity costs for women to participate, and a high demand for armed fighters by groups. We argue that high levels of unemployment amongst the female labour force within a state result in lower opportunity costs for women to join an insurgency, while territorial control by groups generates a higher need for armed fighters. Both of these conditions generate the optimal conditions for women to participate in combat roles. We test our arguments by using logistical regression models on a sample of 140 insurgent groups globally from 1998 to 2012. Our findings provide support for our hypotheses that both high levels of female unemployment, and territorial control by insurgent groups increase the likelihood of the prevalence of women fighters in insurgencies.","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":"13 1","pages":"258 - 281"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1700542","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46351749","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-12-06DOI: 10.1080/17467586.2019.1700539
L. Schlegel
ABSTRACT Radicalisation is influenced by a multitude of factors such as situational, social and psychological factors, including social-cognitive processes. This article explores how homegrown extremists are influenced by their perceived agency and how the beliefs of their own abilities to change their situation are directly shaped by the online-propaganda they consume using ISIS propaganda as a case study. The article serves as an exploratory analysis of the potential explanatory qualities of Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy. This preliminary theoretical work explores how online-propaganda seeks to increase perceived personal self-efficacy to inspire action. The findings indicate that an increased focus on agency beliefs may facilitate a more holistic understanding of the psycho-social processes influencing radicalization and factors driving certain individuals to perpetrate violence while others do not. More research needs to be conducted, but this work is a first exploratory step in advancing our understanding of self-efficacy beliefs in the radicalization of homegrown extremists.
{"title":"“Yes, I can”: what is the role of perceived self-efficacy in violent online-radicalisation processes of “homegrown” terrorists?","authors":"L. Schlegel","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1700539","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1700539","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Radicalisation is influenced by a multitude of factors such as situational, social and psychological factors, including social-cognitive processes. This article explores how homegrown extremists are influenced by their perceived agency and how the beliefs of their own abilities to change their situation are directly shaped by the online-propaganda they consume using ISIS propaganda as a case study. The article serves as an exploratory analysis of the potential explanatory qualities of Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy. This preliminary theoretical work explores how online-propaganda seeks to increase perceived personal self-efficacy to inspire action. The findings indicate that an increased focus on agency beliefs may facilitate a more holistic understanding of the psycho-social processes influencing radicalization and factors driving certain individuals to perpetrate violence while others do not. More research needs to be conducted, but this work is a first exploratory step in advancing our understanding of self-efficacy beliefs in the radicalization of homegrown extremists.","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":"13 1","pages":"212 - 229"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1700539","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45985992","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-28DOI: 10.1080/17467586.2019.1680854
Adrian Cherney, E. Belton
ABSTRACT The evaluation of interventions aimed at countering violent extremism (CVE) remains an underdeveloped field. While various evaluation frameworks and metrics have been proposed in the literature, few have been tested against actual program data. The same observation applies to theories of disengagement, which can provide guidance on the types of changes CVE program evaluations should aim to measure. In this paper, we use one theory of extremist disengagement – Barrelle’s pro-integration model (PIM) – to examine outcomes for clients who have participated in an Australian intervention targeting convicted terrorists and prison inmates identified as at risk of radicalization, the Proactive Integrated Support Model (PRISM) intervention. PRISM has been operated by Corrective Services New South Wales since 2016. The PIM looks at extremist disengagement across five domains – “Social Relations”, “Coping”, “Identity”, “Ideology” and “Action Orientation” – with each constituted by a series of sub-domains. We undertake an exploratory case study across three PRISM clients and code different data sources for observations related to these five PIM domains. The aim is to inform CVE evaluation design and decisions about the types of metrics that can be used to assess programs targeting individuals at risk of radicalization or convicted of terrorism. We acknowledge limitations in the study’s design.
{"title":"Assessing intervention outcomes targeting radicalised offenders: Testing the pro integration model of extremist disengagement as an evaluation tool","authors":"Adrian Cherney, E. Belton","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1680854","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1680854","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The evaluation of interventions aimed at countering violent extremism (CVE) remains an underdeveloped field. While various evaluation frameworks and metrics have been proposed in the literature, few have been tested against actual program data. The same observation applies to theories of disengagement, which can provide guidance on the types of changes CVE program evaluations should aim to measure. In this paper, we use one theory of extremist disengagement – Barrelle’s pro-integration model (PIM) – to examine outcomes for clients who have participated in an Australian intervention targeting convicted terrorists and prison inmates identified as at risk of radicalization, the Proactive Integrated Support Model (PRISM) intervention. PRISM has been operated by Corrective Services New South Wales since 2016. The PIM looks at extremist disengagement across five domains – “Social Relations”, “Coping”, “Identity”, “Ideology” and “Action Orientation” – with each constituted by a series of sub-domains. We undertake an exploratory case study across three PRISM clients and code different data sources for observations related to these five PIM domains. The aim is to inform CVE evaluation design and decisions about the types of metrics that can be used to assess programs targeting individuals at risk of radicalization or convicted of terrorism. We acknowledge limitations in the study’s design.","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":"13 1","pages":"193 - 211"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1680854","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44993585","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-02DOI: 10.1080/17467586.2019.1664066
G. Ligon, Michael K. Logan
Dear Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict Readers: Welcome to the twelfth volume, third issue of the Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide Journal. I will start this letter with a brief overview of the five articles in this Issue, followed by an introduction to our new Editor Board members as well as our new Editorial Assistant Michael Logan. We have four exceptional articles to share with you in this Issue, ranging from Udi Sommer and colleagues’ analysis of extrajudicial killings to Laura Bell’s research on social unrest in Africa. While they are varied in style, from authors with distinct academic training, and cover a range of issues, the commonality across them is that they are all focused on the dynamics of asymmetric conflict. Moreover, in their own unique way, each addresses a specific tactic or strategy underlying conflict among actors and/or its effects on different segments of the population. For example, in the first article, Udi Sommer and Victor Asal examine why States engage in extrajudicial killings. Using data collected from 146 countries between 1981 and 2004, the authors found that infringements in the form of extrajudicial killings or in the form of political disappearances are less likely when there is an independent judiciary. Furthermore, armed conflicts increase the likelihood of extrajudicial killings and of political imprisonment. In another study, Victor Asal, William Ayres, and Yuichi Kubota explore why States seek to influence political outcomes in other states by supporting non-governmental groups. The authors pay specific attention to ethnopolitical organizations and the influence of the use of violence, sociopolitical events, and organizational characteristics on State support. Drawing from the Middle East Minorities at Risk Organizational Behavior (ME-MAROB) dataset, the authors find that violent organizations are more likely to than nonviolent organizations to obtain external support in both the Cold War and the post-Cold War periods. Only in the post-Cold War period did organizational popularity, capability, and kinship with the state sponsor encourage state support. The authors suggest these findings illustrate how state actors reconsidered their behaviours in supporting ethnopolitical organizations after the Cold War. In the third article, Christopher Linebarger, Angela Nichols and Andrew Enterline examine how revolutionary threats influence the likelihood that status quo states will intervene to assist governments confronting civil violence. Using the Uppsala Conflict Data Programme’s External Support Data, the authors find that status quo states respond to the proximity of a revolutionary state, but not to the proximity of support for rebels. In other words, the likelihood status quo states engage in counterrevolutionary foreign policies is based on the relative closeness of a revolutionary state. In the fourth article, Laura Bell analyse the intersection between social unrest an
{"title":"Letter from the Editor","authors":"G. Ligon, Michael K. Logan","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1664066","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1664066","url":null,"abstract":"Dear Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict Readers: Welcome to the twelfth volume, third issue of the Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide Journal. I will start this letter with a brief overview of the five articles in this Issue, followed by an introduction to our new Editor Board members as well as our new Editorial Assistant Michael Logan. We have four exceptional articles to share with you in this Issue, ranging from Udi Sommer and colleagues’ analysis of extrajudicial killings to Laura Bell’s research on social unrest in Africa. While they are varied in style, from authors with distinct academic training, and cover a range of issues, the commonality across them is that they are all focused on the dynamics of asymmetric conflict. Moreover, in their own unique way, each addresses a specific tactic or strategy underlying conflict among actors and/or its effects on different segments of the population. For example, in the first article, Udi Sommer and Victor Asal examine why States engage in extrajudicial killings. Using data collected from 146 countries between 1981 and 2004, the authors found that infringements in the form of extrajudicial killings or in the form of political disappearances are less likely when there is an independent judiciary. Furthermore, armed conflicts increase the likelihood of extrajudicial killings and of political imprisonment. In another study, Victor Asal, William Ayres, and Yuichi Kubota explore why States seek to influence political outcomes in other states by supporting non-governmental groups. The authors pay specific attention to ethnopolitical organizations and the influence of the use of violence, sociopolitical events, and organizational characteristics on State support. Drawing from the Middle East Minorities at Risk Organizational Behavior (ME-MAROB) dataset, the authors find that violent organizations are more likely to than nonviolent organizations to obtain external support in both the Cold War and the post-Cold War periods. Only in the post-Cold War period did organizational popularity, capability, and kinship with the state sponsor encourage state support. The authors suggest these findings illustrate how state actors reconsidered their behaviours in supporting ethnopolitical organizations after the Cold War. In the third article, Christopher Linebarger, Angela Nichols and Andrew Enterline examine how revolutionary threats influence the likelihood that status quo states will intervene to assist governments confronting civil violence. Using the Uppsala Conflict Data Programme’s External Support Data, the authors find that status quo states respond to the proximity of a revolutionary state, but not to the proximity of support for rebels. In other words, the likelihood status quo states engage in counterrevolutionary foreign policies is based on the relative closeness of a revolutionary state. In the fourth article, Laura Bell analyse the intersection between social unrest an","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":"12 1","pages":"183 - 184"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1664066","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41775241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-02DOI: 10.1080/17467586.2019.1650386
Michelle Black
ABSTRACT Many have attempted to answer the questions of “what went wrong in Iraq” arguing that insurgency developed because there was a lack of security. However, on the ground observations and empirical data collection are proving this to not necessarily be the case. This paper tackles what went wrong in Iraq and explains why we saw violence escalate into an insurgency during postwar reconstruction. This paper argues that individuals have certain expectations within a postwar environment, and those unmet expectations will lead certain individuals to join an insurgency. The argument of this paper empirically tests and supports the theoretical framework of relative deprivation, providing a clear explanation of what “actually” led people down a path towards insurgency. Finally, the empirical contribution of this paper is the presentation of primary data demonstrating that it was, in fact, a lack of services, followed by a lack of security, that motivated individuals towards insurgency.
{"title":"Explaining insurgency progression in Iraq, 2003–2011","authors":"Michelle Black","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1650386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1650386","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Many have attempted to answer the questions of “what went wrong in Iraq” arguing that insurgency developed because there was a lack of security. However, on the ground observations and empirical data collection are proving this to not necessarily be the case. This paper tackles what went wrong in Iraq and explains why we saw violence escalate into an insurgency during postwar reconstruction. This paper argues that individuals have certain expectations within a postwar environment, and those unmet expectations will lead certain individuals to join an insurgency. The argument of this paper empirically tests and supports the theoretical framework of relative deprivation, providing a clear explanation of what “actually” led people down a path towards insurgency. Finally, the empirical contribution of this paper is the presentation of primary data demonstrating that it was, in fact, a lack of services, followed by a lack of security, that motivated individuals towards insurgency.","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":"12 1","pages":"257 - 281"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1650386","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41860769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-07-05DOI: 10.1080/17467586.2019.1630746
Laura N. Bell
ABSTRACT This exploratory research brief examines social unrest in Africa in the aftermath of terrorist assassinations. Assassination is a tactic of violence in modern terrorist campaigns and assassinations are interwoven across the African continent with social conflict events such as demonstrations and riots. Utilizing survival analysis, this article finds variation in the likelihood of social unrest across five African subregions and tests for the type of event most likely to occur after a terrorist assassination. Analyses of data on thirty-seven African states drawn from the Global Terrorism Database and Social Conflict Analysis Database from 1990–2015 suggest that demonstrations may be more likely than riots in the aftermath of a terrorist assassination in Africa and that these events are more likely to be spontaneous, rather than organized, in nature.
{"title":"Terrorist assassinations and societal unrest in Africa: a research brief","authors":"Laura N. Bell","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1630746","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1630746","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This exploratory research brief examines social unrest in Africa in the aftermath of terrorist assassinations. Assassination is a tactic of violence in modern terrorist campaigns and assassinations are interwoven across the African continent with social conflict events such as demonstrations and riots. Utilizing survival analysis, this article finds variation in the likelihood of social unrest across five African subregions and tests for the type of event most likely to occur after a terrorist assassination. Analyses of data on thirty-seven African states drawn from the Global Terrorism Database and Social Conflict Analysis Database from 1990–2015 suggest that demonstrations may be more likely than riots in the aftermath of a terrorist assassination in Africa and that these events are more likely to be spontaneous, rather than organized, in nature.","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":"12 1","pages":"242 - 256"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1630746","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49207193","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-06-20DOI: 10.1080/17467586.2019.1622026
Udi Sommer, Victor Asal
ABSTRACT Extrajudicial killings are cases where a government kills citizens with no judicial oversight. We offer first-of-its-kind analyses of this phenomenon that by now is widely discussed in the context of international politics. The theoretical framework proposed here underscores the importance of two pillars: an independent judiciary and violent conflicts. Ordered logistic regression models and GEE time-series cross-sectional analyses with data for 146 countries from 1981–2004 lend support to our theory. Furthermore, the analyses compare extrajudicial killings as a political phenomenon with other phenomena they are often associated with or even lumped together with in empirical analyses. Those include political imprisonment and political disappearance. We find that in various ways extrajudicial killings are indeed unique.
{"title":"Examining extrajudicial killings: discriminant analyses of human rights’ violations","authors":"Udi Sommer, Victor Asal","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1622026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1622026","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Extrajudicial killings are cases where a government kills citizens with no judicial oversight. We offer first-of-its-kind analyses of this phenomenon that by now is widely discussed in the context of international politics. The theoretical framework proposed here underscores the importance of two pillars: an independent judiciary and violent conflicts. Ordered logistic regression models and GEE time-series cross-sectional analyses with data for 146 countries from 1981–2004 lend support to our theory. Furthermore, the analyses compare extrajudicial killings as a political phenomenon with other phenomena they are often associated with or even lumped together with in empirical analyses. Those include political imprisonment and political disappearance. We find that in various ways extrajudicial killings are indeed unique.","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":"12 1","pages":"185 - 207"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1622026","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47746117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-06-11DOI: 10.1080/17467586.2019.1622028
C. Linebarger, Angela D. Nichols, A. Enterline
ABSTRACT During the 1970s the military juntas in South America engaged in a cross-national campaign of repression, code-named Operation Condor, targeted against leftist militant groups inspired to action by the Cuban Revolution. This case illustrates an understudied motivation for third-party intervention in domestic conflict: counter-revolution. We therefore formulate a theory in which revolutions shock the international system by empowering new revolutionary regimes that, in turn, inspire dissidents abroad to take up arms. Status quo elites in foreign states seek to staunch this diffusion of revolution by engaging in international repressive campaigns, manifested as third party intervention in civil conflict. We test this expectation on a global sample of intervention opportunities for the period 1975–2004, and assess the threat that revolutionary regimes pose to status quo governments in two ways: (1) the geographic proximity of a revolutionary state to pairs of status quo states; and (2) the geographic proximity of internal-armed conflicts featuring rebels that are supported by a revolutionary states. We find evidence that status quo states respond to the proximity of a revolutionary state, but not to the proximity of support for rebels.
{"title":"Keeping threat at arm’s length: counter-revolutionary interventions by third-party states in support of governments","authors":"C. Linebarger, Angela D. Nichols, A. Enterline","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1622028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1622028","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT During the 1970s the military juntas in South America engaged in a cross-national campaign of repression, code-named Operation Condor, targeted against leftist militant groups inspired to action by the Cuban Revolution. This case illustrates an understudied motivation for third-party intervention in domestic conflict: counter-revolution. We therefore formulate a theory in which revolutions shock the international system by empowering new revolutionary regimes that, in turn, inspire dissidents abroad to take up arms. Status quo elites in foreign states seek to staunch this diffusion of revolution by engaging in international repressive campaigns, manifested as third party intervention in civil conflict. We test this expectation on a global sample of intervention opportunities for the period 1975–2004, and assess the threat that revolutionary regimes pose to status quo governments in two ways: (1) the geographic proximity of a revolutionary state to pairs of status quo states; and (2) the geographic proximity of internal-armed conflicts featuring rebels that are supported by a revolutionary states. We find evidence that status quo states respond to the proximity of a revolutionary state, but not to the proximity of support for rebels.","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":"12 1","pages":"223 - 241"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1622028","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49373556","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-06-05DOI: 10.1080/17467586.2019.1622027
Victor Asal, R. Ayres, Y. Kubota
ABSTRACT States seek to influence or alter political outcomes in other states by supporting non-governmental groups located within their rivals or enemies. While a dyadic-relation model explains much of state support for non-governmental ethnopolitical organizations, its static view fails to capture the changing nature of their relationships. By bringing violent and non-violent organizations into the same analysis, and examining data across different international systemic periods, we add new empirical evidence to previous studies, arguing that the external support for resistance is influenced by a specific context in the post-Cold War period as well as the behaviour and characteristics of the organizations vying for support. Analysing the Middle East Minorities at Risk Organizational Behavior (ME-MAROB) dataset, we find that violent organizations are more likely to obtain external support than those organizations adhering to the principles of non-violence in both the Cold War and the post-Cold War periods. However, organizational popularity, capability, and kinship with the state sponsor encourage state support only after the end of the Cold War. This suggests that the shift in the international system caused by the collapse in bipolarity encouraged state actors to reconsider their behaviour in supporting ethnopolitical organizations inside other states.
{"title":"Friends in high places: state support for violent and non-violent ethnopolitical organizations","authors":"Victor Asal, R. Ayres, Y. Kubota","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1622027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1622027","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT States seek to influence or alter political outcomes in other states by supporting non-governmental groups located within their rivals or enemies. While a dyadic-relation model explains much of state support for non-governmental ethnopolitical organizations, its static view fails to capture the changing nature of their relationships. By bringing violent and non-violent organizations into the same analysis, and examining data across different international systemic periods, we add new empirical evidence to previous studies, arguing that the external support for resistance is influenced by a specific context in the post-Cold War period as well as the behaviour and characteristics of the organizations vying for support. Analysing the Middle East Minorities at Risk Organizational Behavior (ME-MAROB) dataset, we find that violent organizations are more likely to obtain external support than those organizations adhering to the principles of non-violence in both the Cold War and the post-Cold War periods. However, organizational popularity, capability, and kinship with the state sponsor encourage state support only after the end of the Cold War. This suggests that the shift in the international system caused by the collapse in bipolarity encouraged state actors to reconsider their behaviour in supporting ethnopolitical organizations inside other states.","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":"12 1","pages":"208 - 222"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1622027","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45607237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17467586.2019.1622278
G. Ligon, Steven Windisch
Dear Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict Readers: Welcome to the twelfth volume, second issue of the Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide Journal. I will start this letter with a brief overview of the four articles in this Issue, followed by a solicitation for ideas to be included in our 2020 Special Issue. I conclude with a farewell to Assistant Editor Steven Windisch. We have four exceptional articles to share with you in this Issue. In addition to illustrating the scope of the Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict Journal through a diverse array of ideological groups, from the far-right to far-left extremism, Volume 12 Issue 2 articles use a host of analytic techniques and datasets to provide empirical support. For example, Laura Faragó, Anna Kende, and Péter Krekó relied on computer-assisted personal interviews to examine the social psychological mechanisms of justifying intergroup violence against symbolically or physically threatening outgroups. Using structural equation modeling, the authors found that right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) was a much stronger predictor of the justification of intergroup violence against both physically and symbolically threatening groups than a propensity for radical action. These findings highlight that RWA justifies politically motivated aggression against different target groups in Hungary. In another study, Michael K. Logan and Margeret Hall relied on Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) to identify psychologically-relevant patterns of language use – with a focus on affect and emotions, cognitive function, and pronoun usage used in communiqués associated with the earth and animal liberation movement between 2013 and 2017. The authors pay specific attention to differences in communiqués associated with different criminal events such as arson, animal liberation, sabotage, and vandalism and compared the communiqué data to a collection of lone actor terrorist’s writings. The results suggest that there were linguistic differences across crime types and relative to the lone-actor writing sample. In addition to examining extremism from the individual-level, this issue also considers group-level processes – for example, Victor Asal, Lindsay Heger, and Douglas M. Stinnett investigate why some organizations representing ethnic minorities receive outside diplomatic support from intergovernmental organizations in the Middle East from 1980 to 2004. The authors explore both normative principles and practical concerns that have the most influence and support for ethnopolitical organizations. Although the analysis finds evidence for both the normative and strategic views, the authors found that the variables associated with the strategic view have a larger substantive effect on the probability of support. Given the importance of this topic in the present counterterrorism environment, the Editorial Board selected this as the feature article on Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict Journal’s website,
{"title":"Letter from the Editor","authors":"G. Ligon, Steven Windisch","doi":"10.1080/17467586.2019.1622278","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17467586.2019.1622278","url":null,"abstract":"Dear Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict Readers: Welcome to the twelfth volume, second issue of the Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide Journal. I will start this letter with a brief overview of the four articles in this Issue, followed by a solicitation for ideas to be included in our 2020 Special Issue. I conclude with a farewell to Assistant Editor Steven Windisch. We have four exceptional articles to share with you in this Issue. In addition to illustrating the scope of the Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict Journal through a diverse array of ideological groups, from the far-right to far-left extremism, Volume 12 Issue 2 articles use a host of analytic techniques and datasets to provide empirical support. For example, Laura Faragó, Anna Kende, and Péter Krekó relied on computer-assisted personal interviews to examine the social psychological mechanisms of justifying intergroup violence against symbolically or physically threatening outgroups. Using structural equation modeling, the authors found that right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) was a much stronger predictor of the justification of intergroup violence against both physically and symbolically threatening groups than a propensity for radical action. These findings highlight that RWA justifies politically motivated aggression against different target groups in Hungary. In another study, Michael K. Logan and Margeret Hall relied on Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) to identify psychologically-relevant patterns of language use – with a focus on affect and emotions, cognitive function, and pronoun usage used in communiqués associated with the earth and animal liberation movement between 2013 and 2017. The authors pay specific attention to differences in communiqués associated with different criminal events such as arson, animal liberation, sabotage, and vandalism and compared the communiqué data to a collection of lone actor terrorist’s writings. The results suggest that there were linguistic differences across crime types and relative to the lone-actor writing sample. In addition to examining extremism from the individual-level, this issue also considers group-level processes – for example, Victor Asal, Lindsay Heger, and Douglas M. Stinnett investigate why some organizations representing ethnic minorities receive outside diplomatic support from intergovernmental organizations in the Middle East from 1980 to 2004. The authors explore both normative principles and practical concerns that have the most influence and support for ethnopolitical organizations. Although the analysis finds evidence for both the normative and strategic views, the authors found that the variables associated with the strategic view have a larger substantive effect on the probability of support. Given the importance of this topic in the present counterterrorism environment, the Editorial Board selected this as the feature article on Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict Journal’s website, ","PeriodicalId":38896,"journal":{"name":"Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict: Pathways toward Terrorism and Genocide","volume":"12 1","pages":"111 - 112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17467586.2019.1622278","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47631555","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：