Literature Review: Diversity in Civilians’ Incentives and Multiplicity of Recruitment Strategies

  • Yuichi Kubota
Part of the Asia Today book series (ASIAT)

Abstract

This chapter looks at the literature on recruitment in civil war and considers conditions under which civilians opt to participate in armed forces. It begins by highlighting differences between collective action in civil war and outside of civil war. As the “contentious politics” thesis argues, civil war may be considered a continuation of low-level or nonviolent conflict. There are indeed models that connect low-intensity contention with civil war.1 Dynamics of large-scale armed conflict, in this sense, may be captured by concepts used in studies of collective action in contexts broader than civil war. However, this study would benefit from studies noting the peculiarity of civil war, because components such as armed groups and fragmented sovereignty, which cannot be dismissed in an exploration of combatant recruitment in civil war, uniquely influence civil-military relations.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 2.
    Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965).Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Consensus has not necessarily been reached as to whether the protection of civilians by armed groups is considered public goods (Julia A. Heath et al., “The Calculus of Fear: Revolution, Repression, and the Rational Peasant,” Social Science Quarterly, 81 (2) (2000): 622–633) or selective incentives Google Scholar
  3. (Stathis N. Kalyvas and Matthew A. Kocher, “How ‘Free’ is Free Riding in Civil Wars? Violence, Insurgency, and the Collective Action Problem,” World Politics, 59 (2) (2007): 177–216) for potential collaborators.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gordon Tullock, “The Paradox of Revolution,” Public Choice, 11 (1) (1971): 89–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. See also Allen Buchanan, “Revolutionary Motivation and Rationality,” Philosophy and Public Affairs, 9 (1) (1979): 59–82;Google Scholar
  6. Gregory S. Kavka, “Two Solutions to the Paradox of Revolution,” Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 7(1) (1982): 455–472;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gregory S. Kavka, Hobbesian Moral and Political Theory (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986); Olson, The Logic of Collective Action. Google Scholar
  8. 5.
    For instance, see Mark Granovetter, “Threshold Models of Collective Behavior,” American Journal of Sociology, 83 (6) (1978): 1420–1443;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Edward N. Muller and Karl-Dieter Opp, “Rational Choice and Rebellious Collective Action,” American Political Science Review, 80 (2) (1986): 472–487;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Karen A. Rasler, “Concessions, Repression, and Political Protest in the Iranian Revolution,” American Sociological Review, 61 (1) (1996): 132–152;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Thomas C. Schelling, “Hockey Helmets, Concealed Weapons and Daylight Saving. A Study of Binary Choices with Externalities,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 17 (3) (1973): 381–428;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Thomas C. Schelling, Micromotives and Macrobehavior (New York: W. W. Norton, 1978).Google Scholar
  13. 6.
    Russell Hardin, Collective Action (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1982). The role of convention in interest groups is analogous to that in armed groups in civil war. For instance, historical circumstances in certain areas in which rebellious movements have been active may contribute to the support of antigovernment movements because the residents are more likely to find themselves in networks of social relations with organized dissidents.Google Scholar
  14. 7.
    Dennis Chong, Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991);Google Scholar
  15. Norman Frohlich, Joe A. Oppenheimer, and Oran R. Young, Political Leadership and Collective Goods (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971);Google Scholar
  16. Michael Taylor, The Possibility of Cooperation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987). Dissident leaders may convince followers that (1) their problems are shared also by people in other communities, (2) the current conditions are unjust, (3) the state is responsible for their grievances, and (4) each one’s contribution to the movement is significant for the overthrow of the present situation.Google Scholar
  17. See T. David Mason, Caught in the Crossfire: Revolutions, Repression, and the Rational Peasant (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2004), 88.Google Scholar
  18. 8.
    For instance, Michael Hechter argues that when individuals perceive that their lives are bound to membership in a particular group, they will either leave the group or come to consider that they share vital interests with its members and begin to engage in political activity. In the latter case, individuals are willing to accept the group obligations imposed on them as a condition of access to the joint good. Michael Hechter, Principles of Group Solidarity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987),Google Scholar
  19. 10.
    See also Ravi Bhavnani, Michael Hechter, Principles of Group Solidarity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987), 10.Google Scholar
  20. See also Ravi Bhavnani, “Ethnic Norms and Interethnic Violence: Accounting for Mass Participation in the Rwandan Genocide,” Journal of Peace Research, 43 (6) (2006): 651–669;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. James S. Coleman, Foundation of Social Theory (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1990);Google Scholar
  22. Lee A. Fujii, 2008, “The Power of Local Ties: Popular Participation in the Rwandan Genocide,” Security Studies, 17 (3) (2008): 568–597;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jack A. Goldstone, “Is Revolution Individually Rational? Groups and Individuals in Revolutionary Collective Action,” Rationality and Society, 6 (1) (1994): 139–166;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Michael Hechter, Internal Colonialism: The Celtic Fringe in British National Development 1536–1966 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975);Google Scholar
  25. Gerald Marwell and Pam Oliver, The Critical Mass in Collective Action: A Micro-Social Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Anthony R. Oberschall, “Rational Choice in Collective Protests,” Rationality and Society, 6 (1) (1994): 79–100;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Roger D. Petersen, Resistance and Rebellion: Lessons from Eastern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. James W. White, “Rational Rioters: Leaders, Followers, and Popular Protest in Early Modern Japan,” Politics and Society, 16 (1) (1988): 35–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 11.
    George Graham, “People’s War? Self-Interest, Coercion and Ideology in Nepal’s Maoist Insurgency,” Small Wars and Insurgencies, 18 (2) (2007): 231–248, especially 244–245;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gordon H. McCormick and Frank Giordano, “Things Come Together: Symbolic Violence and Guerrilla Mobilization,” Third World Quarterly, 28 (2) (2007): 295–320, especially 300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 12.
    For instance, Albert O. Hirschman, Shifting Involvements: Private Interest and Public Action (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982);Google Scholar
  32. Howard Margolis, Selfishness, Altruism, and Rationality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982);Google Scholar
  33. T. David Mason, “Individual Participation in Collective Racial Violence: A Rational Choice Synthesis,” American Political Science Review, 78 (4) (1984):1040–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 13.
    Jean-Paul Azam, “On Thugs and Heroes: Why Warlords Victimize Their Own Civilians,” Economics and Governance, 7 (1) (2006): 53–73;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. James DeNardo, Power in Numbers: The Political Strategy of Protest and Rebellion (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jeffrey Goodwin, No Other Way Out: States and Revolutionary Movements, 1945–1991 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001); Mason, “Nonelite Response;”CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. T. David Mason and Dale A. Krane, “The Political Economy of Death Squads: Toward a Theory of the Impact of State-Sanctioned Terror,” International Studies Quarterly, 33 (2) (1989): 175–198; Kalyvas and Kocher, “How ‘Free’ Is Free Riding?” Mason contends that, when state repression becomes indiscriminate, civilians are more likely to join the rebels for the sake of their survival.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. T. David Mason, “Insurgency, Counterinsurgency, and the Rational Peasant,” Public Choice, 86 (1–2) (1996): 63–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. See also T. David Mason, “Women’s Participation in Central American Revolutions: A Theoretical Perspective,” Comparative Political Studies, 25 (1) (1992): 63–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 14.
    Richard Maclure and Myriam Denov, “‘I Didn’t Want to Die So I Joined Them’: Structuration and the Process of Becoming Boy Soldiers in Sierra Leone,” Terrorism and Political Violence, 18 (1) (2006): 119–135, especially 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. See also Christopher Blattman and Jeannie Annan, “The Consequences of Child Soldiering,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92 (4) (2010): 882–898;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Macartan Humphreys and Jeremy M. Weinstein, “Who Fights? The Determinants of Participation in Civil War,” American Journal of Political Science, 52(2) (2008): 436–455; Kalyvas, “Civil Wars;” Kalyvas and Kocher, “How ‘Free’ Is Free Riding?”CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 15.
    Carlos Ivan Degregori, “Harvesting Storms: Peasant Rondas and the Defeat of Sendero Luminoso in Ayacucho,” in Steve J. Stern (ed.), Shining and Other Paths: War and Society in Peru, 1980–1995 (Durham: Duke University Press, 1998), 128–157;Google Scholar
  44. Harry R. Kedward, In Search of the Maquis: Rural Resistance in Southern France 1942–1944 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993);Google Scholar
  45. Steve I. Levine, Anvil of Victory: The Communist Revolution in Manchouria, 1945–1948 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987).Google Scholar
  46. 16.
    Herschel I. Grossman, “Make Us a King: Anarchy, Predation, and the State,” European Journal of Political Economy, 18 (1) (2002): 31–46;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Jack Hirshleifer, The Dark Side of the Force: Economic Foundations of Conflict Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001);Google Scholar
  48. David Keen, “Introduction,” Adelphi Papers, 38 (320) (1998): 9–13;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. David Keen, Conflict and Collusion in Sierra Leone (London: James Currey, 2005). Speaking from an economic perspective, whether economic motivations are opportunistic or not, individuals’ opportunity costs for participation in acts of violence are likely to be low because, under the circumstances, they cannot expect sufficient returns from regular economic activities. This, for instance, is when unemployment is high and returns from productive activities such as agriculture are low.Google Scholar
  50. See Collier and Hoeffler, “On Economic Causes of Civil War”; Grossman, “Make Us a King”; Barbara F. Walter, “Does Conflict Beget Conflict? Explaining Recurring Civil War,” Journal of Peace Research, 41 (3) (2004): 371–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 18.
    Pamela E. Oliver, “Formal Models of Collective Action,” Annual Review of Sociology, 19 (1993): 271–300, especially 273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 19.
    Chong, Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement, 32–33; Mark Irving Lichbach, “What Makes Rational Peasants Revolutionary?” World Politics, 46 (3) (1994): 383–418, especially 390;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Douglas Van Belle, “Leadership and Collective Action: The Case of Revolution,” International Studies Quarterly, 40 (1) (1996): 107–132, especially 109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 21.
    Eamon Collins (with Mick McGovern), Killing Rage (New York: Granta Books, 1999);Google Scholar
  55. Karl-Dieter Opp, “Soft Incentives and Collective Action: Participation in the Anti-Nuclear Movement,” British Journal of Political Science, 16 (1) (1986): 87–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 22.
    Frank Kitson, Gangs and Counter-Gangs (London: Barrie and Rockliff, 1960).Google Scholar
  57. 23.
    Valery Tishkov, Chechnya: Life in a War-Torn Society (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. See also Steven E. Finkel, Edward N. Muller, and Karl-Dieter Opp, “Personal Influence, Collective Rationality, and Mass Political Action,” American Political Science Review, 83 (3) (1989): 885–903;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Edward N. Muller, Henry A. Dietz, and Steven E. Finkel, “Discontent and the Expected Utility of Rebellion: The Case of Peru,” American Political Science Review, 85 (4) (1991): 1261–1282;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Muller and Opp, “Rational Choice and Rebellious Collective Action”; Karl-Dieter Opp, The Rationality of Political Protest (Boulder: Westview Press, 1989);Google Scholar
  61. Karl-Dieter Opp, “Process of Collective Political Action: A Dynamic Model and the Results of a Computer Simulation,” Rationality and Society, 3 (2) (1991): 215–251;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Karl-Dieter Opp, “Repression and Revolutionary Action: East Germany in 1989,” Rationality and Society, 6 (1) (1994): 101–138;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Karl-Dieter Opp and Christian Gern, “Dissident Groups, Personal Networks and Spontaneous Cooperation—The East German Revolution of 1989,” American Sociological Review, 58 (5) (1993): 659–680;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Moris Silver, “Political Revolution and Repression: An Economic Approach,” Public Choice, 17 (1) (1974): 63–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 24.
    Francisco G. Sanín, “Criminal Rebels? A Discussion of Civil War and Criminality from the Colombian Experience,” Politics & Society, 32 (2) (2004): 257–285. Not only the Colombian guerrillas but also other insurgents are reported to have joined the rebellion due to emotions such as anger and moral outrage, and the desire for revenge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. For instance, see Sam Adams, War of Numbers: An Intelligence Memoir (South Royalton: Steerforth Press, 1994);Google Scholar
  67. Richard Berman, Revolutionary Organization: Institution-Building within the People’s Liberation Armed Forces (Lexington: D. C. Heath, 1974);Google Scholar
  68. Mervyn Brown, War in Shangri-La: A Memoir of Civil War in Laos (London: Radcliffe Press, 2001);Google Scholar
  69. Lynn Horton, Peasants in Arms: War and Peace in the Mountains of Nicaragua, 1979–1984 (Athens: Ohio University Center for International Studies, 1998);Google Scholar
  70. Aarti Iyer, Toni Schmader, and Brian Lickel, “Why Individuals Protest the Perceived Transgressions of Their Country: The Role of Anger, Shame, and Guilt,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33 (4) (2007): 572–587;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ralph Thaxton, Salt of the Earth: The Political Origins of Peasant Protest and Communist Revolution in China (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997);Google Scholar
  72. Martijn Van Zomeren et al., “Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is! Explaining Collective Action Tendencies through Group-based Anger and Group Efficacy,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87 (5) (2004): 649–664;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Francis J. West, The Village (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1985). Fear and revenge can motivate people to participate in pro-government militias as well.Google Scholar
  74. See David Anderson, Histories of the Hanged: The Dirty War in Kenya and the End of Empire (New York: W. W. Norton, 2005).Google Scholar
  75. 25.
    Graham, “People’s War?” This also refers to one’s sense of belonging to a group (Kay Deaux et al., “Ideologies of Diversity and Inequality: Predicting Collective Action in Groups Varying in Ethnicity and Immigrant Status,” Political Psychology, 27 (1) (2006): 123–146;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Bernd Simon and Bert Klandermans, “Politicized Collective Identity: A Social Psychological Analysis,” American Psychologist, 56 (4) (2001): 319–331;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Henri Tajfel and John Turner, “An Integrative Theory of Inter-group Conflict,” in William G. Austin and Stephen Worchel (eds.), The Social Psychology of Inter-group Relations (Monterey: Brooks/Cole, 1979), 33–47) and success in achieving group goalsGoogle Scholar
  78. (Burt Klandermans, The Social Psychology of Protest (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997);Google Scholar
  79. Turner et al., Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory (Oxford: Blackwell, 1987)).Google Scholar
  80. 26.
    Elizabeth J. Wood, Insurgent Collective Action and Civil War in El Salvador (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 27.
    Lorraine Bayard de Volo, “The Nonmaterial Long-Term Benefits of Collective Action Empowerment and Social Capital in a Nicaraguan Women’s Organization,” Comparative Politics, 38 (2) (2006): 149–167, especially 151–152. Wilson also claims that purposive selective incentives can exist when the collective good is political.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. James Q. Wilson, Political Organizations (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974).Google Scholar
  83. 28.
    Daniel Brook, “The Continuum of Collective Action,” Peace Review, 13 (2) (2001): 265–271, especially 265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 33.
    Lisa Hultman, “Battle Losses and Rebel Violence: Raising the Costs for Fighting,” Terrorism and Political Violence, 19 (2) (2007): 205–222, especially 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. See also Macartan Humphreys and Jeremy M. Weinstein, “Handling and Manhandling Civilians in Civil War,” American Political Science Review, 100 (3) (2006): 429–447;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Marie-Joëlle Zahar, “Protégés, Clients, Cannon Fodder: Civilians in the Calculus of Militias,” in Adekeye Adebajo and Chandra Lekha Sriram (eds.), Managing Armed Conflicts in the 21st Century (London: Frank Cass, 2001).Google Scholar
  87. 34.
    Jean-Paul Azam, “Looting and Conflict between Ethnoregional Groups: Lessons for State Formation in Africa,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 46 (1) (2002): 131–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 35.
    Andrew W. Martin, John D. McCarthy, and Clark McPhail, “Why Targets Matter: Toward a More Inclusive Model of Collective Violence,” American Sociological Review, 74 (5) (2009): 821–841, especially 826. Armed groups may also seek media attention and the opportunity to present their agenda to an audience.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. See Carol W. Lewis, “The Terror That Failed: Public Opinion in the Aftermath of the Bombing in Oklahoma City,” Public Administration Review, 60 (3) (2000): 201–210; McCormick and Giordano, “Things Come Together.”CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 36.
    Claire M. Metelits, Inside Insurgency: Violence, Civilians, and Revolutionary Group Behavior (New York: New York University Press, 2010), 23 and 25.Google Scholar
  91. 37.
    Metelits observes that some groups shift from solicitous to the violent treatment of civilians, and vice versa, even in cases in which resources remain fixed. She argues that coerciveness of governance is a function of active rivalry between groups because, given that the presence of rivals and competition leads to a scarcity of resources, the “most efficient method of extracting resources quickly is through the use of force.” Metelits, Inside Insurgency, 27. The groups, therefore, behave in a less coercive manner toward civilians when they are not faced with rivals. See Metelits, “The Consequences of Rivalry,” 10–11. Kasfir also observes that the National Resistance Army (NRA) in Uganda could establish noncoercive democratic village management in territories it controlled when the NRA soldiers were secure and that it withdrew this commitment when it was under military pressure. Nelson Kasfir, “Guerrillas and Civilian Participation: The National Resistance Army in Uganda, 1981–86,” Journal of Modern African Studies, 43 (2) (2005): 271–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 38.
    For the discussion of contractual and coercive civil-military relations, see Claire M. Metelits, “The Logic of Change: Pushing the Boundaries of Insurgent Behavior Theory,” Defense & Security Analysis, 25 (2) (2009): 105–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 40.
    Kristine Eck, “Coercion in Rebel Recruitment,” in Raising Rebels: Participation and Recruitment in Civil War, Doctoral Dissertation, Uppsala University (2010).Google Scholar
  94. 41.
    Bernd Berber and Christopher Blattman, “The Logic of Child Soldiering and Coercion,” International Organization, 67 (1) (2013): 65–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 47.
    For instance, see Kalyvas, “Wanton and Senseless?”; Mason, “Nonelite Response”; Joel S. Migdal, Peasants, Politics, and Revolutions (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974); Tullock, “The Paradox of Revolution.”Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Yuichi Kubota 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuichi Kubota

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations