Rethinking Civil War Onset and Escalation

Rethinking Civil War Onset and Escalation

Kaitlyn Webster

Duke University

Abstract:

Why do some civil conflicts simmer at low-intensity, while others escalate to war? This paper challenges traditional approaches to the start of intrastate conflict by arguing the need to distinguish both theoretically and methodologically between the onset and escalation of civil conflict. I use a formal model to develop a novel, strategic argument about three causal mechanisms that differentially drive low-intensity violence (LIV) versus full-blown war: the information environment, the types of rebel group in operation, and the state's capacity. Violence yields information on group identity and type, but differentially so over time; this inter-temporal variation in information colors the state's strategic response, conditional on state capacity. For example, stronger groups become relatively more common past LIV, whereas before LIV, states have limited information on challenger type and so less ability to bargain. Empirical implications are tested using data on self-determination disputes from 1960-2005, with strong support for my argument. Results also highlight the changing role of state capacity: stronger states are less likely to face LIV, but if they do, they are more likely to escalate to war. This approach therefore forces a reexamination of the seminal findings in civil war literature by showing how failing to properly account for LIV when examining war has led to misspecified results.

Discussants:

Janet Lewis (United States Naval Academy)

William Reed (University of Maryland)

Christopher Sullivan (Louisiana State University)

Joseph Young (American University)

OPSC Coordinator:

Emily Hencken Ritter (University of California Merced)

Graduate Assistant:

Peter D. Carey II (University of California Merced)