IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/diebps/42016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pro-government militias, human rights abuses and the ambiguous role of foreign aid

Author

Listed:
  • Carey, Sabine C.
  • Mitchell, Neil J.

Abstract

Many governments worldwide make use of unofficial armed groups. This practice substantially increases the risks for civilians, as the activities of such pro-government militias (PGMs) are usually accompanied by a higher level of human rights violations, including killings, torture and disappearances. Examples are the Shia militias in Iraq, the Shabiha militia in Syria and the Imbonerakure in Burundi. Better knowledge about these groups is essential, given the extreme suffering, violence and instability they are linked to. This briefing paper shows that PGMs exist not only in failed states, poor countries or those engulfed in civil war and armed conflict. They can also be found in more or less democratic governments and are most common in semi-democracies. Governments outsource security tasks to irregular forces because they provide efficiency gains when leaders perceive themselves to be under threat in an uncertain environment. PGMs are attractive to governments because they are cheaper, more flexible and often better informed than regular forces. They complicate lines of accountability for the violence committed, and therefore lower the political costs for governments when there is a controversial use of violence. These aspects make PGMs particularly attractive to governments that intend to use violence against a domestic opponent but fear national and international repercussions for excessive human rights violations. Although these groups make conflict more feasible financially and are perceived to lower political costs, they may bring – sometimes unintended – consequences, such as increased suffering and violence for civilians, as well as greater instability and crime in the medium- and long term. The risks that PGMs bring for peace, security and stability can only be reduced if the international community knows how governments delegate security tasks and holds governments responsible for the violence that their various state and non-state agents commit. The international community needs to pay attention to unintended consequences when promoting democracy. When incentivised to limit repression, governments in target countries might distance themselves from the violence rather than seek to reduce it. Aid decisions should be informed by a thorough assessment of the security sector, which should include regular as well as irregular forces. Governments are responsible for protecting the lives of their citizens. If civilians are targeted by militias, a government has failed in this task and should therefore be held accountable for such violence.

Suggested Citation

  • Carey, Sabine C. & Mitchell, Neil J., 2016. "Pro-government militias, human rights abuses and the ambiguous role of foreign aid," Briefing Papers 4/2016, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:diebps:42016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/199768/1/die-bp-2016-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sabine C. Carey & Michael P. Colaresi & Neil J. Mitchell, 2015. "Governments, Informal Links to Militias, and Accountability," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 59(5), pages 850-876, August.
    2. Neil J. Mitchell & Sabine C. Carey & Christopher K. Butler, 2014. "The Impact of Pro-Government Militias on Human Rights Violations," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(5), pages 812-836, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Carey, Sabine C. & Mitchell, Neil J., 2016. "Regierungsnahe Milizen, Menschenrechtsverletzungen und die ambivalente Rolle der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit," Analysen und Stellungnahmen 4/2016, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    2. Chelsea Estancona & Lindsay Reid, 2022. "Pro-government militias and civil war termination," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 39(3), pages 291-310, May.
    3. Britt Koehnlein & Ore Koren, 2022. "COVID-19, state capacity, and political violence by non-state actors," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(1), pages 90-104, January.
    4. Brittney Koehnlein & Ore Koren, 2021. "Covid-19, State Capacity, and Political Violence by Nonstate Actors," HiCN Working Papers 349, Households in Conflict Network.
    5. Nelson, Phillip, 2023. "What’s in a name? Militias and the need for further systematic research," SocArXiv 2vcmf, Center for Open Science.
    6. Philip Hultquist, 2017. "Is collective repression an effective counterinsurgency technique? Unpacking the cyclical relationship between repression and civil conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(5), pages 507-525, September.
    7. Aniruddha Bagchi & João Ricardo Faria & Timothy Mathews, 2019. "A model of a multilateral proxy war with spillovers," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 229-248, June.
    8. Sabine C Carey & Belén González, 2021. "The legacy of war: The effect of militias on postwar repression," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(3), pages 247-269, May.
    9. Sabine Otto, 2018. "The Grass Is Always Greener? Armed Group Side Switching in Civil Wars," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(7), pages 1459-1488, August.
    10. Ore Koren, 2017. "Means to an end: Pro-government militias as a predictive indicator of strategic mass killing1," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(5), pages 461-484, September.
    11. Aleksandras Krylovas & Rūta Dadelienė & Natalja Kosareva & Stanislav Dadelo, 2019. "Comparative Evaluation and Ranking of the European Countries Based on the Interdependence between Human Development and Internal Security Indicators," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-18, March.

    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:zbw:diebps:42016. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ditubde.html .

    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.