Analyzing Political Violence During Contention I, Article Review Example

Analyzing Political Violence during Contention I

Political violence happens when a state conflicts with another country that violates or threatens the freedom of its civilians. Political violence can occur in different forms, such as genocide, terrorism, torture, assassinations, and kidnappings. The article “The Logic of Violence in Civil War” explores the difference between selective and indiscriminate violence in political violence.

Article #1

Kalyvas, Stathis N. 2006. The Logic of Violence in Civil War. New York: Cambridge University Press, Introduction, Ch. 6.

Chapter 6 Research Question

What is the logic of indiscriminate action, and why does it repeatedly occur within a state?

Main Argument

Indiscriminate violence is often used to achieve political goals, such as demonstrating a group’s power through its ability to hurt others, plunder property, and exterminate particular groups.

IV: Indiscrimination

Indiscriminate violence is based on the fact that political actors do not target a specific group of people. Indiscriminate violence occurs when no specific group is targeted. When political actors want to pass on a message or to make a statement, they ensure that the attack has happened randomly and not to a specific group. Therefore, for people to know to believe that the attack was indiscriminate, there should be no specific pattern of how the attack was carried out. Indiscrimination is, therefore an independent variable as it is the variable controlled by the actors during these attacks.

DV: Selective violence

Selective violence is the dependent variable because it is affected by the change in the independent variable. According to hypothesis 1 (Stathis, 2006, p. 169), political actors are likely to move from indiscriminate to selective violence gradually. This hypothesis suggests that a transition to a more selective form of violence is possible. Therefore, it is clear that a few ideological and strategic factors could affect the independent variable, indiscrimination, which would then mean that the political actors use selective violence.

Theoretical Arguments

According to the article, distinguishing between selective and indiscriminative violence is challenging because it is impossible to estimate the impact of each type of violence on the overall count of those murdered or injured. Indiscriminate violence is more visible because it encompasses extrajudicial killings. It happens when the targeted groups are civilians in public places, health facilities, or markets. Indiscriminate violence is common during political violence because it is easier to execute, as one actor may target a whole area, like a market.

A good example would be a suicide bomber targeting a congregation. The targeted civilians are often innocent and oblivious to ongoing violence. The targeted civilians have little to no information and scarce resources to fight back.

According to Stathis (2006, p.147), indiscriminate violence aims to displace or eliminate certain groups of people. Indiscriminate violence is used to destroy ethnic enemies and regain their territories. Indiscriminate violence is more common during a civil war. Stathis (2006, p.148) states that indiscriminate violence is often intended to dissuade people from conspiring with their enemies. This type of violence aims to scare civilians and convince them to join the attackers. As a result, the innocent civilians will refrain from conspiring with the enemies and, due to the loss of so many innocent lives, will join the attacking group. All these aspects show that indiscriminate violence is ineffective, as it causes the loss of innocent lives and creates more enemies.

Empirical Evidence

Stathis (2006, pg. 152) states that indiscriminate violence leaves civilians desperate to cooperate with the actors because of a lack of resources to retaliate. First, this is because indiscriminate violence’s main aim is to shape civilian behavior through violence indirectly. By shaping the behavior of the civilian, the enemy instills fear in the people and makes them afraid of being harmed. Therefore, the civilians resort to methods involving peace and cooperating with the actors. Second, indiscriminate violence leads to anger among the target population. The anger is created because many civilians are harmed or killed during indiscriminate violence. Losing family and close friends will anger the people involved in the violence. Finally, it creates negative emotional responses, but they are forced to accept their fate and side with the perpetrators due to a lack of resources and information that would enable them to retaliate. The negative emotional responses will allow the civilians to express their opinions and choose peace over violence.

Results

The result of indiscriminate violence is the loss of innocent civilian lives on a large scale. Indiscriminate violence will lead to a burst of negative emotion and force the civilians to cooperate with the actors. Indiscriminate violence is cheap and easy to carry out, as it will target a huge population using a few actors, such as suicide bombers.

Comments and Discussion

Indiscriminate violence should be researched more so people can understand what happens when such violence occurs. The research did not cover questions such as what the civilians need to do in case of indiscriminate violence against them. Civilians are the main target of indiscriminate violence, and the article should have provided solutions to the civilians to ensure they stay safe if such violence occurs. In the future, more research should be done into the role of the government, especially the army, in case of indiscriminate violence against innocent civilians.

Question: What is the international community’s role when indiscriminate violence occurs?

Comment: The international court of law is against the violation of human rights. Future research should also focus on the international community’s role in indiscriminate violence against civilians. The international community is supposed to protect innocent civilians during war and prevent mass murder. The United Nations was created to ensure that the loss of civilian lives does not occur, and in such a case, they are supposed to send their peacekeepers to help protect innocent civilians.

Article #2

Kalyvas, Stathis N. 2006. The Logic of Violence in Civil War. New York: Cambridge University Press, Introduction and chapter Ch. 7.

Chapter 7 Research Question

How is selective violence perpetuated, and what is its possibility of happening?

IV: Asymmetric information regarding victims

Independent variables are the variables that the experimenter controls in an experiment. In the case of selective violence, political actors control the source, nature, and accuracy of information provided regarding their potential victims. Stathis (2006, p. 184) explains the various ways information is obtained and the various measures put across to ensure that the information provided is accurate. One of the methods discussed is cross-checking which requires a high level of control and an efficient bureaucracy. Cross-checking may sometimes be impossible when the resources are spread thin. Therefore, political actors opt to use secondary profiling, which involves looking for visible features that may signal loyalty or disloyalty and separate true from false denunciations from a list of names provided. Clearly, asymmetrical information regarding victims is the independent variable in selective violence since the actors put in so many measures to ensure its authenticity.

DV: Selective violence

Selective violence depends on information obtained from potential targets. Political actors collect this information using different means and then evaluate the accuracy of the information. Selective violence is, therefore, a dependent variable since it depends on the information collected. Information changes at any given time, changing the mode of selection used when identifying the target. Generally, changes in the information provided cause a change in the criterion used by political actors in using selective violence.

Main Arguments Selective

Selective violence occurs when actors solicit information from individuals who pass the data between individual civilians and political actors.

Theoretical Arguments

When actors have information about their potential target, selective violence is likely to occur. Particular actors acquire the information through the solicitation of individuals. According to Stathis (2006, p. 175), no efforts are made by the actors to persuade the individuals to collaborate with them, and this results in political denunciation or malicious acts by the actors. To prevent the actors from acquiring false information, political actors will have informants on undo to ensure they have accurate information. The data can come from captured prisoners, civilians, captured documents, intercepted messages, informants, and spies.

There are three significant sources of information: consensual provisions, such as those from civilians; violent extraction, such as blackmail; and material indices, such as intercepted messages and documents. Information is the crucial resource that determines the strength of selective violence. Violent extraction often leads to false information because the victim is trying to save themselves from further agony. Victims of torture will give incorrect information to protect themselves. Information from material indices comes from photographs, documents, and intercepted letters. Photos will detail their position and the structure of their camps, which would be helpful in case of an ambush.

Empirical Evidence

Innocent individuals are killed due to selective violence in acquiring information. Information is acquired through crude means, such as torturing those willing to withhold information. Political actors will often implement indirect rule through decentralization to ensure the delegation of power to militias or local communities. The people on the ground will be able to receive accurate, first-hand information. The accuracy of information will be achieved through trust as the local communities will put their trust in local leaders. The accuracy of the information can also be achieved through fear, where militia instills fear in civilians by threatening to cause them harm. The fear forces the civilians to give accurate information to the militia, who relay the same information to the political actors. As a result, more local data will be acquired through devolution. The people in power in the local communities ensure the political actors constantly have agents on the ground who gather information from the civilians.

Results

Decentralization creates a moral hazard because inaccurate information will lead to indiscriminate violence, leading to counterproductive results. Having informants will lead to denunciation as the political actors will be facilitated with evidence they can use in their favor in case they are criticized for their actions. This is because the political actors can evaluate the accuracy of the censure they receive. For example, during World War II, Germany used civilians to denounce their family members when they spoke against the government. Sometimes the information is false, and the political actors know this, so they will try to filter it and ensure they have accurate information because incorrect information can lead to indiscriminate violence.

Comments and Discussion

There needs to be more future research on the effects of Selective violence on the civilians who are spied upon. In addition, there ought to be more information on selective violence in communities.

Question: What were the consequences of particular violence for the innocent victims who gave wrong information thinking it was accurate?

Comment: Most regimes that practiced selective violence were brutal and used any means necessary, including torture, to acquire knowledge. Individuals who gave false information were tortured or murdered. Incorrect information led to indiscriminate violence and the mass murder of many innocent civilians.