The field of conflict studies used to be dominated by the search for causes, however, such grand theories striving for universal laws often cannot properly account for the complex circumstances of long duration/low intensity of contemporary civil wars. The interpretative, micro-political turn in conflict studies further contributed to understand conflicts such as the intractable conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). This essay aims to illustrate the contributions and shortcomings of the respective debates, with regard to the intractability and low intensity of contemporary civil conflicts in Sub-Saharan Africa.
The case of the DRC will be used as exemplary case, whereas I start by laying out the framework of the conflict and briefly address the challenges of understanding conflict. I continue by elaborating on the greed vs. grievance debate, further focus on group inequalities and contrast it to the debate of identity and conflict. Subsequently, I will use this as a bridge to outline the beneficial value of the state-building debate, while taking into account the embeddedness into the international system. Hence, I will illustrate how institutional explanations can be seen as counterpart to this debate, and finally refer to the significant debate about explaining violence.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction: Challenges of understanding conflict
2. Economic motives, inequality and the role of identities
3. State formation and going beyond the idea of weak states
4. Explaining violence and practices of rebel recruitment
5. Ontological assumptions: final remarks and conclusion
Objectives & Core Topics
This academic essay aims to evaluate how various debates within conflict studies contribute to explaining the long duration and low intensity of contemporary civil wars, using the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) as an illustrative case study.
- Analysis of economic versus social/identity-based explanations for conflict.
- Critique of state-building paradigms and the "failed state" narrative.
- Examination of the interplay between positivist and interpretative research methodologies.
- Evaluation of how political and horizontal inequalities drive long-term conflict dynamics.
- Investigation into the construction of identity and its role in prolonged civil violence.
Excerpt from the Book
Economic motives, inequality and the role of identities
Considering the fact that the conflict in the DRC is often framed as resource conflict, economic factors have to be acknowledged as highly influential. However, as the greed vs. grievance debate shows, the role of natural resources in conflict is more complex than it looks, whereas the rational actor perspective as explained by Collier (e.g. 1999) does not explain everything in conflict and political economic factors do need to be investigated (Cramer 2003).
On the one hand side of the debate, the orthodox economic approach is partly useful in understanding the duration of conflict. Collier sees greed as motive and his argument that life is cheap has some value in explaining "why" conflict persists: looting of resources is highly profitable (see for instance Cramer 2002: 1849) and there is a lack of (profitable) alternatives for a vast young population. However, Cramer (and probably Langer/Stewart as well) would argue that these factors may be the reason for the intractability of the conflict but not its initial cause (Cramer 2002: 1858), and they strongly criticize the adequacy of proxies. Moreover, Collier’s implications of risk reduction by controlling a high proportion of primary commodity exports and a diversification of economies jointly with development assistance (Collier 1999: 11 f.) have failed to ease the intractable conflict in the DRC. While this can be taken as evidence of neglecting specific/local contexts, economic factors still have to be taken into consideration to understand the persistence of many rebel groups, and their looting defines the low intensity characteristic of many conflicts. In terms of causality, however, it might have been grievances that delivered the opportunity for individual motivations such as loot. Therefore, we need to switch from the positivist to the interpretative perspective to better understand the "how" of the intractability, which refers to in-depth understanding of the whole context.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Challenges of understanding conflict: The author introduces the shift in conflict studies from universal laws to micro-political turns and sets the framework for analyzing the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
2. Economic motives, inequality and the role of identities: This section critiques the greed vs. grievance debate and argues that horizontal inequalities and local social factors are essential to understanding conflict persistence.
3. State formation and going beyond the idea of weak states: The chapter explores the link between globalization, state-building, and conflict, questioning the "failed state" narrative in favor of more nuanced negotiating statehood approaches.
4. Explaining violence and practices of rebel recruitment: The author examines how violence is constructed and legitimized, comparing positivist quantitative research with interpretative approaches to civilian abuse.
5. Ontological assumptions: final remarks and conclusion: The concluding chapter synthesizes the findings, reflecting on how ontological assumptions influence research outcomes and the overall understanding of conflict intractability.
Keywords
Conflict studies, Democratic Republic of the Congo, DRC, Greed vs. Grievance, Intractability, State-building, Positivism, Interpretative turn, Horizontal inequalities, Civil war, Ontology, Globalization, Rebel recruitment, Political economy, Local context.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary objective of this research paper?
The paper aims to investigate how different theoretical debates in conflict studies explain the specific characteristics of long-duration, low-intensity contemporary civil wars, focusing on the DRC.
Which central topics are addressed in the text?
The text covers economic motives, horizontal inequalities, the role of identity, state-building paradigms, and the methodology of conflict analysis.
What methodological approach does the author employ?
The author employs a comparative analysis, contrasting positivist approaches that seek universal causal mechanisms with interpretative, constructivist approaches that focus on context-specific meanings.
How is the "greed vs. grievance" debate evaluated?
The author acknowledges the partial utility of economic explanations but argues they are insufficient for understanding the intractability of conflict, suggesting a need to incorporate social and identity-based factors.
What critique is leveled against the "failed state" narrative?
The author argues that defining states solely by their failure is reductive and suggests that "negotiating statehood" models offer a better explanation for how power operates in rural areas.
What is the importance of the DRC as a case study?
The DRC serves as an exemplary case because of its multifaceted, interconnected causes of violence and the clear limitations of applying universalized state-building models to its complex reality.
How do horizontal inequalities contribute to conflict?
According to the text, inequalities between groups (horizontal) are more significant than individual differences in fueling conflict, especially when they intersect with political and socio-economic exclusion.
What role does the "interpretative turn" play in the author's argument?
The interpretative approach is presented as a necessary shift to capture the complexity of the "how" of conflict, which positivist models often miss due to their focus on aggregated data and simple causal factors.
- Quote paper
- Kai-Uwe Ratheiser (Author), 2017, Conflicting Theories in Conflict, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/385616
