IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v105y2011i02p275-297_00.html

Divide and Conquer or Divide and Concede: How Do States Respond to Internally Divided Separatists?

Author

Listed:
  • CUNNINGHAM, KATHLEEN GALLAGHER

Abstract

Why do states make concessions to some self-determination movements but not others? This article explores the role of the internal characteristics of these movements, demonstrating that their internal structures play a major role in determining which groups get concessions. Using new data on the structure of self-determination movements and the concessions they receive, I evaluate whether states respond to internally divided movements by trying to “divide and conquer” or “divide and concede.” Consistent with the latter approach, I find that internally divided movements receive concessions at a much higher rate than unitary ones and that the more divided the movement is the more likely it is to receive concessions. Yet, concessions to unitary movements appear to work better to settle these disputes. This suggests that states use concessions not only as a tool to resolve disputes, but also as part of the bargaining process.

Suggested Citation

  • Cunningham, Kathleen Gallagher, 2011. "Divide and Conquer or Divide and Concede: How Do States Respond to Internally Divided Separatists?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(2), pages 275-297, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:105:y:2011:i:02:p:275-297_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055411000013/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:apsrev:v:105:y:2011:i:02:p:275-297_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    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.