Violent Non-State Actors in Modern Conflict (original) (raw)

Violent Non-state Actors and the Syrian Civil War

Springer eBooks, 2018

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

“(Non-)Recognition of Armed Non-State Actors: Risks and Opportunities for Conflict Transformation”

2019

Federal Armed Forces Hamburg (HSU), organised by Anna Geis, Maéva Clément, and Hanna Pfeifer I. Guiding questions and conferences results a. Research desiderata, questions, and state of the art Many contemporary violent conflicts involve non-state actors as conflict parties. Armed nonstate actors (ANSAs) are organized actors "who are (i) willing to use and capable of using violence to pursue their political objectives; (ii) not integrated into formalised state structures, such as regular armies, presidential guards, police or special forces; and therefore (iii) possess some degree of autonomy regarding their organisational structure, agendas, armed operations, resources, infrastructures and social relationships" (Schlichte/Schneckener 2015, 410). Governments are often hesitant to enter into informal talks and negotiations with ANSAs but in many violent conflicts, such (often secret) "talks" are initiated at some point. Some of the groups involved may have gained such a high relevance during a protracted armed conflict that governments face increasing pressure to negotiate with them; some ANSAs may have suffered military losses and seek such talks out of their weakness; and sometimes third parties intervene and exert pressure on both state and non-state conflict parties to start negotiations. Talking and negotiating usually imply gradual steps of recognizing and legitimizing the counterpart. Engaging with ANSAs is thus considered risky. In successful cases, armed nonstate actors can be transformed into non-violent political parties and their legitimate goals might become incorporated into state policy. In unsuccessful cases, armed non-state actors might escalate their violent struggle, often resulting in governments being perceived as weak.

Violent Non-State Actors: Countering Dynamic Systems

2004

: Violent non-state actors (VNSAs) pose a pressing challenge to human and national security across the geo-political landscape. In the midst of a global war against terrorism, collective violent action thrives as a strategy of groups ranging from the al Qaeda network to the Maoist rebels of Nepal to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). The dark dynamics of globalization enable VNSAs to prosper in a turbulent international environment marked by deepening roots of violence, failures in governance, and burgeoning illicit trade in guns, drugs and humans. With few exceptions, VNSAs play a prominent, often destabilizing role in nearly every humanitarian and political crisis faced by the international community. Successfully countering them is complicated by a host of factors, including the adaptive character of the threat and the difficulty of developing and implementing a coherent strategy that engenders measurable victories. By applying systems analysis to this intensifyin...

What’s in a name? Re-conceptualizing non-state armed groups in the Middle East

Palgrave Communications

In recent decades, the role and status of non-state armed groups (NSAGs)generally defined as armed organizations operating outside the control of the state and willing and able to use force to achieve their objectives-has attracted growing scholarly and policy interest; mirroring these groups' seemingly more prominent role in both war-making and post-conflict transitions. This is especially the case when it comes to the contemporary Middle East and North Africa, where a combination of state fragility, conflict and instability has further enhanced the military, political and social importance of NSAGs. But is there a mismatch between the organizational evolution of some NSAGs and the conceptual framework adopted to describe and analyze them? How can recognizing these limitations help better conceptualizing and analyzing violent non-state organizations? In the Middle East, organizations like Hamas or Hezbollah operate simultaneously as sophisticated armed organizations, complex political entities and as highly developed social movement organizations involved in administering and delivering social services at the grassroots level. Elsewhere in the region, the rise of the "Islamic State" offers an entirely distinct example of a socio-political project established by an actor commonly defined as a NSAG. Despite the significant ideological, organizational and strategic differences between these organizations, all three actors fall broadly within the "non-state armed groups" category. Yet, both in their use of armed force, as well in their relationship with the state, these organizations appear as characterized by multi-layered identities and strategies that defy simple labelling. Moreover, these groups' different roles as alternative providers of governance de facto blur the line between state and non-state actor and create an evolving dynamic that simultaneously challenges, contests and redefines concepts like statehood and sovereignty. The article analyzes the organizational evolution of these three actors and, in doing so, it problematizes and challenges the way we currently conceptualize and think about non-state actors in general and non-state armed groups more specifically. This article is published as part of a collection on analyzing security complexes in a changing Middle East.

Non-state Actors, Terrorism and the New Global Reality

The Nigerian Journal of Sociology and Anthropology

The reality that terrorists are increasingly enjoying a force-multiplier effect in both national and international realms is the preoccupation of this paper. The traditional thinking about international relations premised on the state as the primary actor in international politics is being greatly challenged as opposition to the supremacy of the state in international system by violent non state actors have become more rampant. Global events demonstrate how the influence of non-state actors and individuals is growing in world politics, assisted by an environment in which the flow of both information and disinformation enables the adoption of narratives that are not particularly based on sound facts and objective knowledge. The implication is that those involved in national and international security in the 21st century will need to formulate and re-strategize more effective, less military propelled ways and means that address the individual’s capacity to distinguish between rational...