IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/joupea/v60y2023i1p124-140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Choosing tactics: The efficacy of violence and nonviolence in self-determination disputes

Author

Listed:
  • Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham

    (Department of Government and Politics, University of Maryland and Peace Research Institute Oslo)

Abstract

Disputes over self-determination (SD) have led to many civil wars, and a primary alternative, nonviolent campaign, is rarely successful in this context. Yet, while secession is rare, these movements often achieve more limited successes in the form of concessions from the state. This article provides a new assessment of the efficacy of different tactics – violent, nonviolent and conventional political action. It advances an argument that nonviolent tactics can help SD movements to generate indirect pressure on states that contributes to movement success, including greater autonomy. Nonviolence is used to garner attention from international actors using a human rights frame for their cause. International actors that are receptive to these human rights narratives then incentivize concessions for the SD movements and dis-incentivize repression. This happens through a variety of means, such as public shaming of the host state and withholding inter-governmental organization membership. Statistical analysis of violent and nonviolent tactics in SD movements shows that nonviolence can be effective in successfully obtaining concessions. Movements that use nonviolence are twice as likely to see concessions in any given year compared to those that just make demands but do not use nonviolence or violence. The effect of nonviolence is slightly larger than that of violence, which is also associated an increased chance of concession.

Suggested Citation

  • Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham, 2023. "Choosing tactics: The efficacy of violence and nonviolence in self-determination disputes," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 60(1), pages 124-140, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:60:y:2023:i:1:p:124-140
    DOI: 10.1177/00223433221145961
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00223433221145961
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00223433221145961?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James K. Boyce, 2002. "Aid Conditionality as a Tool for Peacebuilding: Opportunities and Constraints," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 33(5), pages 1025-1048, November.
    2. Hendrix, Cullen S. & Wong, Wendy H., 2013. "When Is the Pen Truly Mighty? Regime Type and the Efficacy of Naming and Shaming in Curbing Human Rights Abuses," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(3), pages 651-672, July.
    3. Dunning, Thad, 2004. "Conditioning the Effects of Aid: Cold War Politics, Donor Credibility, and Democracy in Africa," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 409-423, April.
    4. Beardsley, Kyle & Cunningham, David E. & White, Peter B., 2017. "Resolving Civil Wars before They Start: The UN Security Council and Conflict Prevention in Self-Determination Disputes," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(3), pages 675-697, July.
    5. Coggins, Bridget, 2011. "Friends in High Places: International Politics and the Emergence of States from Secessionism," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 433-467, July.
    6. Pemstein, Daniel & Meserve, Stephen A. & Melton, James, 2010. "Democratic Compromise: A Latent Variable Analysis of Ten Measures of Regime Type," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 426-449.
    7. Jakana Thomas, 2014. "Rewarding Bad Behavior: How Governments Respond to Terrorism in Civil War," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(4), pages 804-818, October.
    8. Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham & Marianne Dahl & Anne Frugé, 2020. "Introducing the Strategies of Resistance Data Project," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(3), pages 482-491, May.
    9. Zsuzsa Csergő & Philippe Roseberry & Stefan Wolff, 2017. "Institutional Outcomes of Territorial Contestation: Lessons from Post-Communist Europe, 1989–2012," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 47(4), pages 491-521.
    10. Carter, David B. & Signorino, Curtis S., 2010. "Back to the Future: Modeling Time Dependence in Binary Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(3), pages 271-292, July.
    11. Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., 2008. "Sticks and Stones: Naming and Shaming the Human Rights Enforcement Problem," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 62(4), pages 689-716, October.
    12. Cook, Scott J. & Hays, Jude C. & Franzese, Robert J., 2020. "Fixed effects in rare events data: a penalized maximum likelihood solution," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 92-105, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Erica Chenoweth & Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham, 2023. "Guest Editors’ introduction: Nonviolent resistance and its discontents," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 60(1), pages 3-8, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nicholas Sambanis & Micha Germann & Andreas Schädel, 2018. "SDM: A New Data Set on Self-determination Movements with an Application to the Reputational Theory of Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(3), pages 656-686, March.
    2. Laura Huber & Sabrina Karim, 2018. "The internationalization of security sector gender reforms in post-conflict countries," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(3), pages 263-279, May.
    3. Sam R. Bell & K. Chad Clay & Amanda Murdie, 2019. "Join the Chorus, Avoid the Spotlight: The Effect of Neighborhood and Social Dynamics on Human Rights Organization Shaming," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(1), pages 167-193, January.
    4. Simone Dietrich & Joseph Wright, 2012. "Foreign Aid and Democratic Development in Africa," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2012-020, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    5. Cullen Hendrix & Wendy Wong, 2014. "Knowing your audience: How the structure of international relations and organizational choices affect amnesty international’s advocacy," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 29-58, March.
    6. Alyssa K Prorok & Deniz Cil, 2022. "Cheap talk or costly commitment? Leader statements and the implementation of civil war peace agreements," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(3), pages 409-424, May.
    7. repec:unu:wpaper:wp2012-20 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Daniel Berliner, 2016. "Transnational advocacy and domestic law: International NGOs and the design of freedom of information laws," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 121-144, March.
    9. Amanda Murdie & Dursun Peksen, 2013. "The impact of human rights INGO activities on economic sanctions," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 33-53, March.
    10. Desha M. Girod, 2015. "Reducing postconflict coup risk: The low windfall coup-proofing hypothesis," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 32(2), pages 153-174, April.
    11. Iasmin Goes, 2023. "Examining the effect of IMF conditionality on natural resource policy," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 227-285, March.
    12. Bermeo, Sarah Blodgett, 2011. "Foreign Aid and Regime Change: A Role for Donor Intent," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 2021-2031.
    13. Nils-Christian Bormann & Burcu Savun, 2018. "Reputation, concessions, and territorial civil war," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 55(5), pages 671-686, September.
    14. Ryan M. Welch, 2019. "Domestic politics and the power to punish: The case of national human rights institutions," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(4), pages 385-404, July.
    15. Sara Kahn-Nisser, 2021. "For better or worse: Shaming, faming, and human rights abuse," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(3), pages 479-493, May.
    16. Andrew Boutton, 2014. "US foreign aid, interstate rivalry, and incentives for counterterrorism cooperation," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 51(6), pages 741-754, November.
    17. Kyungwon Suh, 2023. "Nuclear balance and the initiation of nuclear crises: Does superiority matter?," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 60(2), pages 337-351, March.
    18. Jordan Becker & Sarah E Kreps & Paul Poast & Rochelle Terman, 2024. "Transatlantic Shakedown: Presidential Shaming and NATO Burden Sharing," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 68(2-3), pages 195-229, March.
    19. Kirssa Cline Ryckman & Jessica Maves Braithwaite, 2020. "Changing horses in midstream: Leadership changes and the civil war peace process," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(1), pages 83-105, January.
    20. Robert Ulrich Nagel, 2021. "Gendered preferences: How women’s inclusion in society shapes negotiation occurrence in intrastate conflicts," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(3), pages 433-448, May.
    21. Sarah E Croco & Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham & Taylor Vincent, 2023. "Protests and persuasion: Partisanships effect on evaluating nonviolent tactics in the United States," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 60(1), pages 26-41, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:joupea:v:60:y:2023:i:1:p:124-140. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.prio.no/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.