Non-State Actors: The Spectrum of Political Violence

1
Non-State Actors The Spectrum of Political
Violence

• PO 325 International Politics

2
State and Non-State Actors

• As noted, the state has historically been
  considered the primary actor in the study of
  international politics, and we have focused
  solely on the state up to this point
• Even those major theories that disagree with the
  undisputed centrality of the state recognize that
  organized state power is very important in global
  politics

3
State and Non-State Actors

• However, there may be reason to believe that
  ignoring non-state actors causes us to miss an
  important facet of global relations and conflict.
  The remainder of this section deals with such
  actors.
• What about nations? Are they different than
  states? Are they important?
• What about insurgent groups (e.g., terrorism)?
• What about international organizations
  (liberalism)?

4
Example of Non-State Actors The Nation

• Nations are groups of people who live in a
  specific geographic region and claim a
  commonality based on ethnic, religious, racial or
  other characteristics
• Some nations are states (or have sovereignty in
  the international system), but not all nations
  are states and very few states are exclusively
  comprised of the people of one nation
• Japan Nation-State
• Old USSR Multinational State
• Kurds Nation without a State
• As the Kurdish example shows, actors who are not
  states can have an important impact on global
  relations (is International Relations a
  misnomer?)

5
Conflict Reconsidered Why is the State so
Important?

• The state is powerful (can impose and absorb many
  costs)
• Deters action from non-state actors altogether
• Actual or threatened violence makes opponents
  costs outweigh potential benefits
• Violence can destroy opponent
• Due mainly to sovereignty and pro-status quo bias

6
Conflict Reconsidered Why is the State so
Important?

• HOWEVER State power is limited
• Even states can suffer prohibitively high costs
• Weaker potential revisionist entities may take
  advantage of this (insurgency see below)

7
Non-State Actors and Conflict Insurgency

• Probably the most prevalent form of violence
  involving non-state actors is the use of force by
  such actors against states for the purposes of
  changing some perceived injustice or unfavorable
  status quo. This form of violence is normally
  known as insurgency

8
Why is Insurgency Important to the Study of IR?

• In addition to causing domestic concerns for
  states, insurgent groups impact international
  relations
• Insurgent groups, though normally fighting
  against the government of one state, often gain
  the backing of other states, thereby making the
  conflict international
• Example French Involvement in the American
  Revolution
• Insurgencies can be transnational when this
  occurs, the actions can change the foreign
  policies of the target and their relations with
  other states
• Example Al Qaeda, the US, and the NATO allies

9
Non-State Actors and Conflict Insurgency

• From a rational perspective, when might less
  powerful entities engage in insurgent violence
  against more powerful entities?
• They feel that there is at least some probability
  that they can use what power they have to impose
  enough costs on the stronger opponent as to make
  it reconsider its position
• AND
• They are willing to attempt to reach their goals
  despite the massive costs the stronger opponent
  can impose
• OR
• They do not think the full power of the stronger
  opponent will be brought to bear on them for
  whatever reason (e.g., will not be caught, access
  to sanctuary)

10
Non-State Actors and Conflict Insurgency

• There are several different classes of insurgent
  violence in which non-state actors can engage
  against states
• From a rational perspective, the type of violence
  that a group chooses is commensurate with the
  amount of relative capabilities that it possesses
  vis-à-vis its opponent (state)

11
The Spectrum of Political Violence

• 1. War
• Interstate War Dealt with Exclusively by Major
  Theories of IR
• Example 2003 Gulf War
• Civil War Insurgency, Involving Intrastate
  Groups with Similarly Matched Military
  Capabilities, in which Insurgents Wish to
  Establish Separate State
• Example US Civil War
• Revolutionary War Insurgency, Involving
  Intrastate Groups with Similarly Matched Military
  Capabilities, in which Insurgents Wish to
  Overthrow Existing Government and Establish New
  One
• Example Russian Civil War (Misnomer)

12
The Spectrum of Political Violence

• 2. Coup Détat
• Insurgency in which a small number of elites in
  an established state maneuvers to gain control of
  military apparatus, thus effecting regime change
  by presenting existing leadership with fait
  accompli
• Power disposition is uncertain until point of
  coup if plotters fail, they possess no power
  resources
• Example Pakistani coup of 2000

13
The Spectrum of Political Violence

• 3. The Police State (Totalitarianism)
• The State itself is technically the revisionist
  power (not insurgency)
• State leadership attempts to use its vast power
  resources to preclude threats to its rule through
  physical intimidation, coercion, and purposeful
  or random kidnapping and murder of citizens
• Examples Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia

14
The Spectrum of Political Violence

• 4. Guerilla Warfare
• Insurgency in which non-state actors with
  considerably fewer power resources (including
  numbers) than the state engage in political
  violence against the state
• Though they possess some of the equipment of
  conventional war and normally operate from a
  defined territorial base, guerillas recognize
  that victory cannot be achieved through
  full-scale frontal engagement
• Engage in small, diffuse ambushes to inflict
  costs on state forces, thus forcing the state to
  reconsider its position
• Use sanctuary to ensure secrecy, minimize costs
  suffered
• Example East Timorese insurgency

15
The Spectrum of Political Violence

• 5. Terrorism
• Insurgency in which non-state actors are
  overwhelmingly overmatched by state forces
• Insurgents do not use the resources of
  conventional war because they do not possess
  them rather, they engage in tactics and
  strategies that utilize rudimentary materials to
  inflict costs on the civilians, not the forces,
  of the state
• Costs are almost always political in nature the
  goal is to make the citizenry fearful enough to
  force its government to change status quo
• Secrecy of utmost importance defeat spells
  disaster
• Examples Hezbollah, Al Qaeda

16
(No Transcript)
17
Insurgency Conclusion

• Traditional IR theories seem to deal with only a
  small part of conflict in the global community
  that occurring amongst states
• In fact, the most pressing form of conflict
  (terrorism) is left unaddressed
• Insurgent groups do not choose strategies and
  tactics based on any consideration other than
  relative capabilities