Preventing Civil War through International Action

University Of Maryland, College Park, College Park MD

Investigators

Abstract

A large literature suggests that conflict management activities—such as mediation and peacekeeping — contribute to reductions in violence and the resolution of long-running civil wars. Many of the same actors that engage in these activities — including the United Nations, regional organizations, non-governmental organizations, and national governments — also express a commitment to working to prevent violence from occurring in the first place. There is much less academic research on whether, how, and in what contexts conflict prevention can work. This project presents the first systematic study of the effect of conflict prevention actions in a wide range of intrastate disputes. The project’s findings will contribute to understanding of why civil wars happen and whether and how international actors can work to prevent them from occurring. The results of the study will both help to inform scholars seeking to understand these dynamics and policymakers interested in determining how and when to work to prevent violent conflicts. This project identifies whether, how, and in what contexts international actors can prevent civil war in disputes that are not currently violent, but have the potential for escalation. Drawing on literature on state-dissident interactions, the project presents a theoretical framework examining the strategic interaction between these two actors and how international actors can influence this interaction, before mass mobilization or civil war breaks out. This framework focuses on two ways that conflict prevention can work: by convincing dissidents and states to use nonviolent means in these disputes, and by helping dissidents resolve these disputes peacefully. This research will produce the first global dataset on conflict prevention efforts for disputes that are primarily nonviolent but can escalate to civil war. These data will be used to test implications of the theoretical argument and to examine whether international action can lead to a reduced likelihood of civil war, and if so, which actions are most effective in various contexts. The statistical approach will use matching methods to compare disputes that are generally similar in the likelihood of escalation to civil war and to examine the effect of actions in these disputes. These quantitative tests will be supplemented with qualitative analysis designed to more directly examine the underlying mechanisms and effects of preventive actions on dissident and state decision-making. This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.