Unraveling Rebel Strategies: Exploring Patterns of Violence in Civil War

Abstract

What explains variation in patterns of violence across time and space in armed conflict? Answering this question is critical to the study of political violence and to the development of policies aimed at reducing its occurrence. However, this task is often complicated by the reliance on narrow or incomplete measures, the study of different violent strategies in isolation, and the tendency to conduct analysis at high levels of aggregation. These factors can hinder the identification of relevant trends and the examination of underlying mechanisms responsible for the heterogeneity in violence. Consequently, addressing these limitations is an important goal for conflict scholars, as it can help resolve theoretical gaps, improve our understanding of the dynamics of political violence, and contribute to more effective policy interventions.

As such, this dissertation considers why, when, and how patterns of violence evolves in contemporary civil wars and presents three papers that focus on different aspects of this phenomenon. In the first paper, "Changes: Patterns of Violence in Civil War," I transform widely-used, off-the-shelf conflict event datasets to create novel measures of patterns of violence in civil war. Events are classified by target, force, and magnitude for government/state forces and insurgent/rebel organizations in 33 civil wars in 26 countries from 1997 to 2021. I demonstrate how this measurement approach can aid in the identification and analysis of unique trends and highlight the types of research questions it can help answer. In particular, there is promise that these measures can provide new insights into shifts in capabilities and strategies for different actors, provide new insights into levels of territorial control, and help localized variation in conflict outcomes.

In the next two papers, "Under Pressure: Diversification in Rebel Strategies" and "Rebel Rebel: Competition on the Battlefield," I use the POV typology to construct a monthly measure of strategic diversity for hundreds of rebel groups around the globe and dynamic measure of state pressure to explore the reasons why certain rebels choose to adopt a diverse bundle of strategies while others specialize in just one or two in their pursuit of desired objectives in civil wars. Traditionally, it was assumed that rebel groups substitute violent strategies in different circumstances. However, this dissertation challenges that assumption, theorizing and demonstrating that rebels are more likely to adopt multiple strategies simultaneously rather than specializing in just one or two, in response to increases in external pressure levied upon them by the state and rival challengers.

Diversification serves several purposes: stretching the state's resources, circumventing defensive measures, and differentiating themselves from rival groups. Diversification is associated with increased operational output, measured by the number of attacks and the associated fatalities, and may increase longevity of these organizations. This suggests that rebel groups that diversify their strategies are better equipped to adapt to changing circumstances and challenges. These findings help explain the persistence and expansion of certain militant organizations. By adopting additional strategies, rebel groups enhance their ability to respond to evolving threats, counteract government forces, and exploit new opportunities. By reducing their reliance on a single or small numbers of approaches, they make it harder for their adversaries to counteract them effectively, enhancing their resilience and ability to withstand external pressures. In competitive environments where multiple rebel groups compete for support and resources, strategic diversification enables rebels to differentiate themselves.