Indiscriminate violence against civilians is a recurrent problem in armed conflicts of all sorts. However, from a social science perspective this type of violence poses a puzzle. The literature on government and non-government violence mostly assumes that indiscriminate violence has counter-productive effect and is ultimately self-defeating. Yet, this begs the question as to why an actor should use indiscriminate violence at all? This dissertation tries to solve at least part of the puzzle. First, it critically reviews the literature and points to some misunderstandings that have made progress in comprehending indiscriminate violence more difficult. Second, the dissertation provides a theory on the effects of indiscriminate violence that targets groups, i.e. group-selective violence. While most of the literature assumes that violence against groups seeks to coerce the groups that are attacked, this dissertation widens the view and includes non-targeted groups in the calculation as well. It thereby demonstrates that group-selective violence can be able to produce coercive effects among those groups that are not targeted while generating only limited counter-productive effects. Empirically, this dissertation provides two types of supporting evidence. First, it will provide several case studies as a plausibility probe. These cases are designed to highlight that group-selective violence is used in the way proposed by the theory and has the hypothesized effects. Second, the dissertation will test the hypotheses of the theory of group-selective violence with data on violence against civilians in ethnic wars. Here quantitative methods are used to investigate the patterns and the consequences of violence. Both empirical investigations provide support for the notion that group-selective violence can be beneficial for the perpetrator and that it is used to achieve those benefits. In sum, this dissertation puts forth the theoretical background and empirical support for the effectiveness of group-selective violence.

There is only passing reference made to human rights law in United Kingdom armed forces doctrine and military publications. Moreover, there is no reference made to the United Kingdom's right to life obligations in respect of those affected by the actions of the state's armed forces, or armed forces personnel themselves, during international and non-international armed conflict. As a consequence, no formal mechanism exists to ensure that the United Kingdom can comply with its right to life obligations pursuant to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, advisory opinions and a judgment of the International Court of Justice, and views of numerous United Nations human rights bodies and rapporteurs would appear to indicate that human rights law can and does, however, apply during armed conflict. The exact nature of how human rights law, and the right to life specifically, apply during armed conflict and the obligations thus created, remain largely unresolved and generate considerable debate. This study therefore aims to consider both the extent to which the United Kingdom has right to life obligations during international and non-international armed conflict and, on the basis of current doctrine and procedures, how far the state complies with such obligations. Implicit in this analysis is a determination of what positive and negative right to life obligations are created by the ECHR and ICCPR, the extent to which these obligations have extraterritorial effect during armed conflict, how these obligations interact with the United Kingdom's obligations pursuant to international humanitarian law, and the effect of a derogation from the ECHR during armed conflict. This study concludes that the United Kingdom has both substantive and procedural right to life obligations during armed conflict, albeit partially modified by reference to international humanitarian law. Adhering to current United Kingdom military doctrine and procedures does not, however, always ensure full compliance with these obligations.

Local Self-Defence Militias as Counterinsurgents The Possibility, Willingness and Rationality of Selective Violence against Insurgents Autor: Jakob J. Gilg Submitted: 31.07.2019 Abstract How do local self-defence militias (LSDMs) influence violence against civilians in civil conflicts? Compared to other types of pro-government militias (PGMs), LSDMs are active in their home area. This results in abundant local information that can be used to identify and target insurgents and their supporters selectively. Furthermore, LSDMs are part of the local community, resulting in strong social ties, making indiscriminate violence against the community less likely. Finally, since LSDMs are dependent on popular support and cannot move on to a new area after violent acts, they are incentivised to retain local support by abstaining from civilian targeting. Therefore, I hypothesise that LSDMs are more likely to employ selective violence, and that their deployment decreases civilian fatalities in civil conflicts. To empirically test this claim in a global sample, I use 1) a logistic regression to assess the likelihood of selective violence of PGMs (H1), and 2) a negative binomial regression to evaluate the expected number of civilians killed by the government (H2). The results for the first hypothesis suggest an increased...

This thesis aims to investigate how civilians coped with life-threatening situations in WWII through analyzing the diary of a civilian from the siege of Breslau in 1945. There are two main issues this study attempts to address. Firstly, current Peace and Conflict Studies lack integration from theories from psychology. Furthermore, civilian experiences of war should be addressed in their historical context. Drawing from Suedfeld et al.’s Ways of Coping Scale (1997), which derives from Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) theory on psychological stress and coping, a directed, qualitative content analysis explores the coping strategies used by the diarist. The study finds that the diarist mostly uses problem-oriented coping strategies, aiming at altering the threat, consisting of escaping from bombs, analyzing, preparing for, and altering the damage caused by artillery and seeking social support. Emotion-oriented coping, aimed at regulating the emotional response to a threat, mostly shows through denying the threat to get sleep and to keep normality, and through distancing from the threat through humor, hope and a positive attitude. My findings form a base to adapt Suedfeld et al.’s Ways of Coping Scale to better assess civilian coping strategies in war.

This thesis investigates the portrayal of the Mariupol Theatre Airstrike withinthe Russo-Ukrainian War through a discourse analysis of news articles fromdiverse media outlets in Russia, Ukraine, France, Germany, the UK, and theUS. The study employs a qualitative comparative case study approach withinthe academic domain of targeting civilians in war. By applying the lenses oftraditionalist and revisionist perspectives within the theoretical framework ofJust War Theory, the research aims to understand how moral judgements aremanifested in the discourses presented by the media outlets reporting on theMariupol Theatre Airstrike. Notably, the findings reveal a dichotomy in media reporting: Russian mediaadopts a blend of traditionalist and revisionist positions, while Westernmedia also exhibits a blend of both positions, leaning more towards therevisionist perspective. By focusing on the specific case of the MariupolTheatre Airstrike, the study aims to provide a comprehensive analysis thatcontributes to the broader understanding of the complexities of media and theprovide a nuanced understanding on how moral judgments are being exhibited in the Russo-Ukrainian War.

Au printemps 1944, les bombardements aériens alliés sur la France atteignent leur intensité maximale depuis le début de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Près de deux années après les grands tournants de l’année 1942, la situation militaire est à présent largement en faveur des Alliés. La défaite finale du Troisième Reich semble désormais inéluctable. La préparation d’Overlord, le retour en force à grande échelle sur le continent européen, se heurte à des difficultés stratégiques et techniques inédites. Un scientifique peu connu, Solly Zuckerman, brillant zoologiste mais aussi civil inconnu des cercles militaires, réussit à persuader le haut-commandement allié de l’intérêt de son plan aérien. Son Transportation Plan se propose de frapper décisivement le système ferroviaire français, de manière à bouleverser le flux de renforts ennemis vers la tête de pont alliée lors de l’exécution du débarquement. Audacieux par son innovation stratégique, risqué par la menace évidente pesant sur les civils français, le plan de Zuckerman se heurte immédiatement à la susceptibilité des grands chefs du bombardement stratégique, engagés dans une campagne aérienne presque « privée » sur l’Allemagne. La question des pertes civiles secoue brutalement les milieux politiques avec notamment Winston Churchill, et remonte in fine jusqu’à Franklin Roosevelt. Méconnu de l’historiographie, le Transportation Plan représente pourtant une histoire fascinante de la préparation du débarquement de Normandie. / In spring 1944, Allied bombing of France was to reach its maximum intensity since the beginning of World War II. Nearly two years after the great turning points in 1942, the military situation was now largely in favour of the Allies. The final defeat of the Third Reich now appeared inevitable. The preparation of OVERLORD, the renewed application of large-scale power on the European continent, faced strategic challenges and required novel techniques. A little-known scientist, Solly Zuckerman, a brilliant zoologist but also a civilian unknown in military circles, persuaded the Allied high command of the validity of his air plan. This “Transportation Plan” proposed to strike decisively at the French railway system in order to disrupt the flow of enemy reinforcements to the Allied beachhead during the landings. Daring by strategic innovation, risky by the obvious threat to French civilians, Zuckerman's plan ran immediately into the hostile scrutiny of the great chiefs of strategic bombing, who were engaged in their almost "private" air campaign against Germany. The issue of civilian casualties brutally shook politicians including Winston Churchill, and ultimately went back to Franklin Roosevelt. Unknown in historiography, the “Transportation Plan” represents a fascinating history of the preparation of the Normandy landings.

This research aims to illuminate how and why war challenges the limits of poetic representation, through an analysis of non-combatant poetry of the Second World War. It is motivated by the question: how can one portray, represent, or talk about war? Literature on war poetry tends to concentrate on the combatant poets of the First World War, or their influence, while literature on the Second World War tends to focus on prose as the only expression of literary war experience. With a historicist approach, this thesis advances our understanding of both the Second World War, and our inherited notions of 'war poetry,' by parsing its historiography, and investigating the role critical appraisals have played in marginalising this area of poetic response. This thesis examines four poets as case studies in this field of research-W.H. Auden, Louis MacNeice, Dylan Thomas, and Stevie Smith-and evaluates them on both their individual explorations of poetic tone, faith systems, linguistic innovations, subversive performativity, and their collective trajectory towards a commitment to represent the war in their poetry. The findings from this research illustrate how too many critical appraisals have minimised or misrepresented Second World War poetry, and how the poets responded with a self-reflexivity that bespoke a deeper concern with how war is remembered and represented. The significance of these findings is breaking down the notion of objective fact in poetic representations of war, which are ineluctably subjective texts. These findings also offer insight into the 'failure' of poetry to represent war as a necessary part of war representation and prompt a rethinking of who has the 'right' experience-or simply the right-to talk about war.