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.

No description available.

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...

Ending civilian victimization has become a primary purpose for third-party intervening actors as the brutal violence i contemporary conflicts increasingly affects the civilian population. To mitigate the violence, third-party actors use conflict management tools such as mediation and peacekeeping. Previous research has excessively examined these tools in isolation from one another, however, their combined effect has been neglected. In seeking to explore further pathways to combat violence against, this study examines the combined effectiveness of peacekeeping and mediation. I argue that peacekeeping and mediation interact, enhancing the violence-reducing effect of the other, which creates a stronger reduction effect on violence against civilians. Using monthly data counting civilian casualties in all African intrastate conflicts between 1993-2007, I find that mediation and peacekeeping have an interactive effect on violence against civilians, which is both reducing and stronger in comparison to the independent effect of these tools. The theoretical implications extend to UN troops and UN police. However, they are not applicable for UN observers and non-UN troops. Additional implications of the findings indicate that mediation should be present as a conflict management tool first after a large size of UN troops or UN police forces are deployed to most effectively reduce the levels of violence against civilians in conflict.

In an attempt to understand the micro-dimensional mechanisms of how some individuals come to perpetrate violence against civilians during wartime, this thesis adopts a theory from organisational psychology. By looking at the military as a professional organisation, violence against civilians perpetrated by state armies during wartime is theorised to be the outcome of a process of script error wherein military scripts of non-combatant immunity fail. The theory is applied on the massacre in My Lai, during the Vietnam war. Findings showed that the mechanism of script error did not play out completely as theorised, however that military scripts did dictate behaviour and that a script error was present to some degree as civilians came to be targeted as if they were enemies. Some mechanisms used in previous research on violence against civilians were supported by this study and could also be integrated into the framework of organisational scripts, showing the explanatory value that organisational scripts have to further understand military violence. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of an important historical case, shows the value of introducing organisational psychology into studies of the military organisation and finally helps us further make sense of situations of violent transgression.  organisational scripts, script error, military violence, violence against civilians, mass violence, atrocity, My Lai

Beyond the material consequences, violence can have a great psychological impact on the individual. Violence can cause institutional and interpersonal distrust, and in turn harm economic growth and political stability. As of today, there is more knowledge about the consequences of trust than its determinants, and longitudinal studies are scarce. This paper exploits survey data and disaggregated data on violence from Mexico, a country which since 2007 has experienced a rapid increase in violence. With the use of a Linear Fixed Effects Model, I analyse the impact of municipal level violence on trust in crime-related institutions and in other individuals. I find a significant relationship, robust across different model specifications, between exposure to battles and trust in the federal, state, and municipal police forces. This positive effect is also found for battles involving police forces. Furthermore, I find evidence of a negative relationship between riots and interpersonal trust.

The issue of child soldiering continues to be a significant part of armed conflicts. The research on children in conflict has not fully been able to understand how children not only experience but also actively participate in war. This thesis is premised in the pre-condition of low civilian support which in varying rates of child soldiering are expected to explain different outcomes in rebel violence against civilians. The examination is done through the lens of socialization theory. During the 1990’s the rates of child soldiering were extreme, causing rise to groups such as the RUF, AIS and brought attention to the KNU. These three cases are compared using Mill’s method of difference and structured focused comparison. The thesis finds that low civilian support is instrumental but ultimately inefficient to explain the variation in outcomes and proposes to look further into the influence of natural resource dependency and political ideologies.

The aim of this thesis is to observe and analyze the effects of religious dimensions in armed conflict on violence against civilians. Focusing on rebel groups in intra-state conflicts, quantitative statistical analysis in form of Ordinary Least Squares multivariate regression, is utilized to examine data onreligious wars, one-sided violence, and conflict-related sexual violence. Two hypotheses are formulatedand tested; that (1) higher significance of religion in armed conflict leads to higher levels of one-sidedviolence, as well as that (2) higher significance of religion leads to higher levels of conflict-related sexual violence. The results, relying on four different datasets and 1107 observations, empirically support both hypotheses. The conclusion of this thesis suggests that civilians are found to be particularly vulnerable in religious armed conflict, pointing to the importance and urgency of further and closer examination of civilian victimization in these types of wars.

Whilst the academic discipline analysing violence against civilians from a strategic perspective has seen significant growth over the last decades, a key issue has been neglected: the goals of the perpetrating actors. This thesis aims to narrow this research gap through answering the question: How do the conflict aims of rebel groups impact levels of violence against civilians? To do so, a theoretical framework is built, based on a categorisation of rebel conflict aims through combining a multitude of academic fields, which is then analysed through a large-N quantitative method. This study analyses an extensive 30-year world-wide dataset on the aims of rebel groups and rebel violence against civilians, and finds that different aims have significant effects on both civilian casualties and mass violence. Whilst some results support the hypothesised theories, others are indicative of contradictory relationships, further indicating the necessity of continued and expanded research into the conflict aims of rebel groups.

Non-combatants, even though they not participate directly in a conflict, are often targeted by armed groups. This study seeks to answer to the question why some areas are more affected by violence against civilians than others. Considering their importance in the contemporary world, electoral processes are used to explain the patterns of civilians’ victimization. This study focuses on irregular civil wars as the effects of elections on the distribution of violence against civilians in those wars is particularly understudied. Elections provide crucial information to armed groups about the preferences of the local population and therefore also the presence of potential collaborators or enemies. In addition, local political elites have incentives to favour or curb the violence against civilians, according to their electoral strength in a specific area. The thesis tests the implication with a quantitative study in the case of Colombia by analysing the long- and short-term effects of electoral results on the distribution of violence. Contrary to conventional civil wars, the findings suggest that civilians living in political strongholds in irregular civil wars, areas where a political party has strong support, are more likely to be targeted.