Studies in Comparative International Development

, Volume 48, Issue 4, pp 457–481 | Cite as

The Nepali State and the Dynamics of the Maoist Insurgency

Article

Abstract

In contrast to existing quantitative studies of the civil conflict in Nepal, we argue that combinations of motive and opportunity were crucial for the development of the Maoist insurgency and that these conditions stem largely from the nature of the Nepali state. The decade-long insurgency was characterized by two distinct dynamics. In the initiation period of the war (1996–2000), the insurgency was driven largely by newly enabled Maoist organizers capitalizing on the caste, ethnic, and economic divisions that had been codified over time by autocratic state-building efforts. In the more violent and geographically widespread maturation period of the war (2001–2006), the insurgency depended less on historical grievances than on the motivation of rebels and sympathizers by the often-indiscriminate violence perpetrated by the besieged Nepali state. We provide empirical evidence for this argument in a narrative section that contextualizes the Maoist insurgency as well as in a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) of data for the 75 Nepali districts in the two periods of the insurgency. fsQCA allows for the assessment of how combinations of the largely state-generated motivations and opportunities affected the dynamics of the insurgency.

Keywords

Nepal Maoist insurgency State Civil war Fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis 

References

  1. Adhikari P. Conflict-induced displacement, understanding the causes of flight. Am J Polit Sci. 2012. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2012.00598.x.
  2. Allison ME. The legacy of violence in post-civil war elections: the case of El Salvador. Stud Comp Int Dev. 2010;45:104–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bohara AK, Mitchell NJ, Nepal M. Opportunity, democracy, and the exchange of political violence: A subnational analysis of conflict in Nepal. J Confl Resolut 2006;50(1):108–28.Google Scholar
  4. Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). Government of Nepal. Caste ethnic population, national census 2001. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal; 2007.Google Scholar
  5. Collier P, Hoeffler A. Greed and grievance in civil war. Oxf Econ Pap. 2004;56:563–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Department of Roads, Government of Nepal. Nepal road statistics. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal; 2001.Google Scholar
  7. Do QT, Iyer L. Poverty, social divisions, and conflict in Nepal. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4228. 2007. Google Scholar
  8. Do Q, Iyer L. Geography, poverty and conflict in Nepal. J Peace Res. 2010;47:735–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eck K. Recruiting rebels: indoctrination and political education in Nepal. In: Lawoti M, Pahari AK, editors. The Maoist insurgency in Nepal: revolution in the twenty-first century. London: Routledge; 2010.Google Scholar
  10. Election Commission, Government of Nepal. General election in Nepal 1991. Kathmandu: Election Commission; 1992.Google Scholar
  11. Fearon JD. Commitment problems and the spread of ethnic conflict. In: Lake DA, Rothchild DS, editors. The international spread of ethnic conflict: fear, diffusion, and escalation. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1998.Google Scholar
  12. Fearon JD, Laitin D. Ethnicity, insurgency, and civil war. Am Polit Sci Rev. 2003;97:75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Francisco R. The relationship between coercion and protest. J Confl Resolut. 1995;39:263–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Francisco R. The dictator's dilemma. In: Davenport C, Johnston H, Mueller C, editors. Repression and mobilization. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  15. Goertz G. Assessing the trivialness, relevance and relative importance of necessary or sufficient conditions in social science. Stud Comp Int Dev. 2006;41:88–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goertz G, Starr H. Necessary conditions: theory, methodology, and applications. Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield; 2003.Google Scholar
  17. Goodwin J. No other way out: states and revolutionary movements, 1945-1991. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hoftun M, Raeper W, Whelpton J. People politics & ideology: democracy and social change in Nepal. Kathmandu: Mandala Book Point; 1999.Google Scholar
  19. Hutt M. Himalayan ‘People's War’: Nepal's Maoist rebellion. London: Hurst & Company; 2004.Google Scholar
  20. Informal Sector Service Center (INSEC). Nepal human rights year book. Kathmandu: INSEC; various years.Google Scholar
  21. Joshi BL, Rose LE. Democratic innovations in Nepal: a case study of political acculturation. Los Angeles: University of California Press; 1966.Google Scholar
  22. Kalyvas SN. The logic of violence in civil wars. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kalyvas SN, Kocher MA. “How ‘free’ is free-riding in civil war? Violence, insurgency, and the collective action problem. World Politics. 2007;59:177–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Karki A, Seddon D. The People's War in Nepal: left perspectives. Delhi: Adroit; 2003.Google Scholar
  25. Khawaja M. Repression and popular collective action: evidence from the west bank. Social Forum. 1987;8:47–71.Google Scholar
  26. Kilcullen D. The accidental guerrilla: fighting small wars in the midst of a big one. New York: Oxford University Press; 2009.Google Scholar
  27. Kocher MA, Pepinsky TB, Kalyvas SN. Aerial bombing and counterinsurgency in the Vietnam War. Am J Polit Sci. 2011;55:201–18.Google Scholar
  28. Lichbach MI. Deterrence or escalation? The puzzle of aggregate studies of repression and dissent. J Confl Resolut. 1987;31:266–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lyall J. “Does indiscriminate violence incite insurgent attacks? Evidence from Chechnya. J Confl Resolut. 2009;53:331–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mahat RS. In defense of democracy: dynamics and fault lines of Nepal's political economy. Delhi: Adroit; 2005.Google Scholar
  31. Mansfield ED, Snyder JL. Democratic transitions, institutional strength, and war. Int Organ. 2002;56(2):297–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mason TD, Crane DA. The political economy of death squads: toward a theory of the impact of state-sanctioned terror. Int Stud Q. 1989;33(2):175–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McAdam D, Tarrow S, Tilly C. Dynamics of contention. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ministry of Finance, Government of Nepal. Budget speech. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal; various years.Google Scholar
  35. Muller E, Seligson M. Inequality and insurgency. Am Polit Sci Rev. 1987;81:425–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Murshed MS, Gates S. Spatial-horizontal inequality and the Maoist insurgency in Nepal. In: Kanbu R, Venables AJ, Wan G, editors. Spatial disparities in human development: perspective from Asia. New York: United Nations University Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  37. Nepal M, Bohara AK, Gawande K. More inequality, more killings: the Maoist insurgency in Nepal. Am J Polit Sci. 2011;55(4):886–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peceny M, Stanley W. Counterinsurgency in El Salvador. Polit Soc. 2010;38:67–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pettigrew J, Schneiderman S. Ideology and agency in Nepal's Maoist movement. Himal. 2004;17:19–29.Google Scholar
  40. Prachanda A. Inside the revolution in Nepal. In: Karki A, Seddon D, editors. The People's War in Nepal: left perspectives. Delhi: Adroit; 2003.Google Scholar
  41. Ragin C. Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  42. Ragin C. Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schneider CQ, Wagemann C. Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: a guide to qualitative comparative analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Steinberg D, Saideman S. Laissez fear: assessing the impact of government involvement in the economy on ethnic violence. Int Stud Q. 2008;52:235–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stoll D. Between two armies in the Ixil towns of Guatemala. New York: Columbia University Press; 1993.Google Scholar
  46. Tarrow S. Power in movement: social movements, collective action, and politics. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1996.Google Scholar
  47. Thapa D, Sijapati B. A kingdom under siege: Nepal's Maoist insurgency, 1996 to 2003. Kathmandu: Printhouse; 2003.Google Scholar
  48. United Nations Development Program (UNDP). Nepal human development report, 2004. Kathmandu: United Nations Development Program; 2004.Google Scholar
  49. United States Institute of Peace (USIP). Transitional justice in Nepal: a look at the International Experience of Truth Commissions. http://www.usip.org/files/resources/transitional_justice_nepal.pdf. Washington, DC: USIP; 2007.
  50. Verkuilen J. Assigning membership in a fuzzy-set analysis. Sociol Methods Res. 2005;33:462–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Whelpton J. A history of Nepal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  52. Wickham-Crowley TP. Guerrillas and revolution in Latin America: a comparative study of insurgents and regimes since 1956. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1992.Google Scholar
  53. Wood EJ. Insurgent collective action and civil war in El Salvador. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceCentral Michigan UniversityMount PleasantUSA
  2. 2.Kellogg Institute for International StudiesUniversity of Notre DameNotre DameUSA

Personalised recommendations