The aim of this thesis is to analyze factors responsible for onset of ethnic conflicts and selected characteristics. By comparing to non-ethnic conflicts it was determined, if there are any differences in onset mechanisms of these two types of conflicts and thus if there is a space for explanatory role of ethnicity as a cause of ethnic conflicts. Selection of examined factors is congruent with the relevant literature and existing analyses and reflects the context of contemporary conflict research. The influence of male unemployment rate, level of Human development index and its inequality-adjusted version, human rights and finally the influence of conflicts in neighbouring countries on the onset of conflict is tested by statistical methods in component analyses. Also the intensity of ethnic and non-ethnic conflicts, war years and HDI are also compared. The comparative style of the research helps to understand the true nature of causes of intrastate conflicts and indicates, that there is no difference between the two types. Empirical character of this thesis is also the reason for assessing it within the context of other quantitative studies of conflict, comparing the results and defining the proper level of analysis for reaching tangible contributions.

This dissertation examines the role of third parties in civil war mediation and peacekeeping efforts. The dissertation makes two primary contributions to the literature. First, it builds upon existing literature by applying state-level arguments of third party involvement in mediation and peacekeeping efforts to the United Nations Security Council and regional IGOs. Second, it investigates the role of communication and coordination between third parties in their conflict management efforts.

This paper aims to answer the question Why do some ceasefires de-escalate conflict better than others? By applying a theory-driven empirical comparative approach, a theoretical argument focused on compliance provisions is presented. The argument holds that more comprehensive compliance provisions in ceasefire agreements are more likely to de-escalate conflict than limited ones. The causal mechanism argues that more comprehensive compliance provisions will increase transparency and raise costs for non-compliance. This will result in an increase of trust between conflict parties, leading to greater de-escalation. The thesis studies two ceasefires, one in Colombia from 2017, and one in Nicaragua from 1990. Through a structured focused comparison, the study finds that the Nicaraguan ceasefire, which has more comprehensive compliance provisions, de-escalated violence more compared to the Colombian case, which has limited compliance provisions. Therefore, the study finds support for the hypothesis with the caveat that compliance provisions do not appear to influence agreement resilience for long-term goals in the agreements.

This assessment addresses the intervention of intrastate conflict through the coordination of humanitarian aid and military force. The coordination, known as humanitarian intervention, dates back to the philosophy of Hugo Grotius and the debate of the Just War doctrine. Through the evolution of international law and the concept of sovereignty, justification of intervention continued to develop though the establishment of the United Nations Charter. Several moral, legal and political debates that formed in early philosophies persist through the implementation of humanitarian intervention in modern warfare. The historical background and of philosophical challenges of humanitarian intervention are reflected in recent cases studies such as the conflicts in Somalia, former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. With the consideration of this assessment, one can conclude the necessary conditions needed for a successful humanitarian intervention. In the twenty-first century, a time when weapons range from nuclear arms to homemade explosives and when political instability endangers an interconnected international community, there exists a need for adaptation to any given threat. Humanitarian intervention is one possible solution to redress human rights violations and maintain international peace and security.

Despite being outnumbered, underfunded, and militarily weaker than the state-backed armed forces they challenge, insurgents have continually mounted long-term challenges. To that end, the puzzle on which many conflict scholars have focused their efforts is that of insurgent war duration. The theory posited in this dissertation claims the capacity of insurgents to survive wartime is a function of choices made before large-scale dyadic conflict erupted––or during a time period I call incubation. Using qualitative case studies of Latin American insurgencies such as Sendero Luminoso and the FMLN, I demonstrate the capacity to endure conflict long-term was a direct correlate of both type and length of their prewar preparation. Incubation was used to set up processes for recruitment, procuring resources from durable networks, and coordinating personnel. After controlling for standard explanations, I also offer statistical evidence that insurgent incubation duration is statistically significant and positively related to conflict duration. The theory and empirical evidence presented here provides a new approach for explaining insurgent war duration. / Political Science

Este trabalho tem como objetivo avaliar o papel da autoridade estatal e do desenvolvimento na estabilidade dos Estados da África Subsaariana e a influência que têm nos processos de falência estatal e de eclosão de guerras intraestatais. Desde o fim da Guerra Fria, a corrente de pensamento que fundia segurança e desenvolvimento tornou-se predominante para analisar as causas e fornecer sugestões de políticas para impedir que os Estados sucumbissem a dinâmicas de violência, fomentadas por necessidade, ganância e agravo - todos gerados e intensificados em situações de subdesenvolvimento. Palco de boa parte dos países menos desenvolvidos (PMDs) do mundo e da grande maioria dos conflitos intraestatais que ocorreram nos últimos trinta anos, a África Subsaariana foi retratada como locus immutabilis, cujos problemas tinham poucas ou nenhuma solução possível. Desta forma, o subdesenvolvimento endêmico da região foi usado como guarda-chuva conceitual uma vez que intensificaria as consequências nocivas de certos tipos de regimes políticos, da distribuição desigual das riquezas e oportunidades econômicas e da incompatibilidade étnica que existiria em seus países. Seguindo esta linha de pensamento, bastaria resolver a situação do subdesenvolvimento nos Estados da África Subsaariana que seus processos de falência seriam revertidos e as guerras civis não mais aconteceriam. No entanto, é possível questionar esta relação entre segurança e desenvolvimento dado que países que têm o mesmo nível de subdesenvolvimento diferiram em seus destinos, tendo alguns sucumbido às dinâmicas violentas e outros não. Este trabalho pretende, portanto, identificar as causas das guerras civis e da falência de Estados na região. Este trabalho argumenta que é a baixa autoridade estatal (e não o subdesenvolvimento) a condição determinante para o advento de guerras civis e da falência de Estado na África Subsaariana. Para chegar a tal resultado, analisou-se os dados de 44 Estados da região fornecidos pelo Worldwide Governance Indicators do Banco Mundial e os mesmos dados utilizados pela ONU para classificar os PMDs. Também se utilizou análise qualitativa sobre a história dos países onde a paz imperou desde a independência para avaliar as fundações da autoridade estatal. / This thesis looks forward to assessing the role of state authority and development in the stability of Sub-Saharan African states and their influence on state failure processes and on the outbreak of intra-state wars. Since the end of the Cold War, the current of thought that merged security and development has become prevalent in analysing the causes and in providing policy suggestions to prevent states from succumbing to dynamics of violence fuelled by need, greed, and grievance - which are generated and intensified in situations of underdevelopment. As the stage for most of the world\'s least developed countries and the largest number of intrastate conflicts that have taken place over the last thirty years, Sub-Saharan Africa has been portrayed as locus immutabilis, whose problems had few or none feasible solutions. In this regard, the region\'s endemic underdevelopment was used as a conceptual umbrella since it would intensify the harmful consequences of certain types of political regimes, of the unequal distribution of wealth and economic opportunities, and the ethnic incompatibility that would exist in their countries. Following this line of thought, resolving the situation of underdevelopment in Sub-Saharan African states would suffice to reverse processes of state failure and civil wars would no longer happen. However, it is possible to question this relationship between security and development since countries that have the same level of underdevelopment had different outcomes, having some of them capitulated to violent dynamics and others not. This thesis therefore aims to identify the causes of civil wars and state failure in the region. It argues that it is the low level of state authority (and not underdevelopment) that is the determining factor for the advent of civil wars and state failure in Sub-Saharan Africa. In order to achieve this result data from 44 countries in the region provided by the World Bank\'s Worldwide Governance Indicators and the same data used by the UN to classify the LDCs were analysed. Qualitative analysis was also conducted about the history of countries where peace has prevailed since independence to assess the foundations of state authority.

In recent decades we have seen an increase in peace processes aimed at solving armed conflicts through peaceful means. The often fragile characteristics of such processes and the settlements that they produce underline the essential importance of improving our understanding of the dynamics at play in transitions from war to peace. This thesis aims to contribute to this overarching objective by analysing ceasefire agreements in relation to peace processes in two protracted intrastate armed conflicts: Aceh, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka. In the scholarly literature, ceasefire agreements are often assumed to create momentum due to their ability to pave the way to a peaceful solution. At the same time, it has also been suggested that ceasefires can influence conflict dynamics in negative ways. Although there are many unanswered questions about ceasefire agreements in contemporary peace processes, few studies have been devoted to systematic and in-depth analysis of how ceasefire agreements can be characterized and analysed in relation to peace processes in protracted intrastate conflicts. This thesis, which is based on written documents and on interviews conducted during four research trips to the region, contributes to filling this research gap by presenting comparative case studies of Aceh and Sri Lanka. The point of departure in the study is a process-oriented, conflict dynamics approach and a view that war-to-peace transitions require changes in the conflicting parties’ attitudes, behaviours and relationships. I analyse and compare ceasefire agreements by looking at their initiation, form and content, and by examining their implementation and the unfolding of the processes. I identify six key factors in the literature that can influence the conflicting parties’ attitudes, behaviours and relationships. I then use these factors to analyse ceasefire agreements in relation to the dynamics of the broader peace processes. In this thesis I show how these key factors – including issues of recognition, trust, whether the parties’ claims are met, international involvement, contextual changes and intra-party dynamics – have mattered. I also show that context is important for understanding how and why they have mattered. The results suggest that ceasefire agreements can facilitate war-topeace transitions; however, it also illuminates challenges and the risk that such agreements can be counter-productive in the context of intrastate conflicts. The study also shows that ceasefire agreements have a historical legacy, as illustrated by their impact on subsequent interactions and agreements, and it underlines the symbolic politics of ceasefires in asymmetrical intrastate conflicts. The thesis ends with a number of propositions, among others that ceasefire agreements tend to become more comprehensive over time and that power struggles and developments within the conflicting parties are important for understanding ceasefire agreements in relation to contemporary peace processes.

Through geopolitical theory this thesis explores how conflicts within states can be read and understood according to an analytical model determining one or several possible causes for the conflict.  The model is created by the author and reflects geopolitical theory by giving three possible explanations to an intrastate conflict: culture, economy or territorial construction. The aim of the thesis is testing this model on two selectively chosen case studies – i.e. two intrastate conflicts – namely: the upcoming referendum in Scotland and the terror attack at Tiananmen Square in China. These conflicts are compared by applying the model on each case and then providing a qualitative analysis through it. This comparison has shown that the geopolitical model of conflicts can be used in determining the cause or several possible causes for an intrastate conflict, and by doing so determining the need for geopolitical perspective to better understand states as actors in international relations.

Este trabalho tem como objetivo avaliar o papel da autoridade estatal e do desenvolvimento na estabilidade dos Estados da África Subsaariana e a influência que têm nos processos de falência estatal e de eclosão de guerras intraestatais. Desde o fim da Guerra Fria, a corrente de pensamento que fundia segurança e desenvolvimento tornou-se predominante para analisar as causas e fornecer sugestões de políticas para impedir que os Estados sucumbissem a dinâmicas de violência, fomentadas por necessidade, ganância e agravo - todos gerados e intensificados em situações de subdesenvolvimento. Palco de boa parte dos países menos desenvolvidos (PMDs) do mundo e da grande maioria dos conflitos intraestatais que ocorreram nos últimos trinta anos, a África Subsaariana foi retratada como locus immutabilis, cujos problemas tinham poucas ou nenhuma solução possível. Desta forma, o subdesenvolvimento endêmico da região foi usado como guarda-chuva conceitual uma vez que intensificaria as consequências nocivas de certos tipos de regimes políticos, da distribuição desigual das riquezas e oportunidades econômicas e da incompatibilidade étnica que existiria em seus países. Seguindo esta linha de pensamento, bastaria resolver a situação do subdesenvolvimento nos Estados da África Subsaariana que seus processos de falência seriam revertidos e as guerras civis não mais aconteceriam. No entanto, é possível questionar esta relação entre segurança e desenvolvimento dado que países que têm o mesmo nível de subdesenvolvimento diferiram em seus destinos, tendo alguns sucumbido às dinâmicas violentas e outros não. Este trabalho pretende, portanto, identificar as causas das guerras civis e da falência de Estados na região. Este trabalho argumenta que é a baixa autoridade estatal (e não o subdesenvolvimento) a condição determinante para o advento de guerras civis e da falência de Estado na África Subsaariana. Para chegar a tal resultado, analisou-se os dados de 44 Estados da região fornecidos pelo Worldwide Governance Indicators do Banco Mundial e os mesmos dados utilizados pela ONU para classificar os PMDs. Também se utilizou análise qualitativa sobre a história dos países onde a paz imperou desde a independência para avaliar as fundações da autoridade estatal. / This thesis looks forward to assessing the role of state authority and development in the stability of Sub-Saharan African states and their influence on state failure processes and on the outbreak of intra-state wars. Since the end of the Cold War, the current of thought that merged security and development has become prevalent in analysing the causes and in providing policy suggestions to prevent states from succumbing to dynamics of violence fuelled by need, greed, and grievance - which are generated and intensified in situations of underdevelopment. As the stage for most of the world\'s least developed countries and the largest number of intrastate conflicts that have taken place over the last thirty years, Sub-Saharan Africa has been portrayed as locus immutabilis, whose problems had few or none feasible solutions. In this regard, the region\'s endemic underdevelopment was used as a conceptual umbrella since it would intensify the harmful consequences of certain types of political regimes, of the unequal distribution of wealth and economic opportunities, and the ethnic incompatibility that would exist in their countries. Following this line of thought, resolving the situation of underdevelopment in Sub-Saharan African states would suffice to reverse processes of state failure and civil wars would no longer happen. However, it is possible to question this relationship between security and development since countries that have the same level of underdevelopment had different outcomes, having some of them capitulated to violent dynamics and others not. This thesis therefore aims to identify the causes of civil wars and state failure in the region. It argues that it is the low level of state authority (and not underdevelopment) that is the determining factor for the advent of civil wars and state failure in Sub-Saharan Africa. In order to achieve this result data from 44 countries in the region provided by the World Bank\'s Worldwide Governance Indicators and the same data used by the UN to classify the LDCs were analysed. Qualitative analysis was also conducted about the history of countries where peace has prevailed since independence to assess the foundations of state authority.

No description available.