IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v42y2012i04p879-901_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Combatant Fragmentation and the Dynamics of Civil Wars

Author

Listed:
  • Findley, Michael
  • Rudloff, Peter

Abstract

Civil war dynamics and outcomes are shaped by processes of change largely unaccounted for in current studies. This examination explores how the fragmentation of combatants, especially the weaker actors, affects the duration and outcomes of civil wars. Some results of a computational modelling analysis are consistent with the article's expectations, several of them are counterintuitive. They show that when combatants fragment, the duration of war does not always increase and such wars often end in negotiated agreements, contrasting with the expectations of literatures on spoilers, moderates and extremists. Empirical cases, such as Iraq, Congo, Chechnya and the Sudan, illustrate the importance of fragmentation. This study demonstrates the value of accounting for diverse changes in actors and circumstances when studying the dynamics of war.

Suggested Citation

  • Findley, Michael & Rudloff, Peter, 2012. "Combatant Fragmentation and the Dynamics of Civil Wars," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(4), pages 879-901, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:42:y:2012:i:04:p:879-901_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123412000099/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jori Breslawski & Brandon Ives, 2019. "Killing for God? Factional Violence on the Transnational Stage," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(3), pages 617-643, March.
    2. Arı Barış & Gizelis Theodora-Ismene, 2017. "Conflict Fragmentation Index," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 23(4), pages 1-7, December.

    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:bjposi:v:42:y:2012:i:04:p:879-901_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/jps .

    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.