The Frontlines Have Shifted: Explaining the Persistence of Pro-State Militias after Civil War

Many ceasefire and peace agreements stipulate the disarmament and demobilization of pro-state armed groups involved in the conflict, yet few of these groups ever completely demobilize. This study seeks to explain the process of incomplete demobilization by advancing a theoretical argument that pro-s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Studies in conflict and terrorism 2024-08, Vol.47 (8), p.817-837
Main Authors: Shaw, Daniel Odin, Aliyev, Huseyn
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Armed Forces
Arms control & disarmament
Civil war
Groups
Military demobilization
Militia
Militias
Monopolies
Paramilitary forces
Peace treaties
Truces & cease fires
Violence
Weapons
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Many ceasefire and peace agreements stipulate the disarmament and demobilization of pro-state armed groups involved in the conflict, yet few of these groups ever completely demobilize. This study seeks to explain the process of incomplete demobilization by advancing a theoretical argument that pro-state armed groups are least likely to disarm and demobilize when the monopoly on violence is fragmented, and when there is relative balance of capabilities and interests between the government and pro-state armed groups. Under these circumstances, both governments and pro-state armed groups may favor incomplete demobilization enabling them to pursue their strategic objectives. We draw on unique interview data with pro-state paramilitaries from Ukraine to empirically illustrate our theoretical expectations.
ISSN:1057-610X
1521-0731
DOI:10.1080/1057610X.2021.2009633