The Political Effectiveness of Non-State Violence: A Two-Level Framework to Transform a Deceptive Debate
The Political Effectiveness of Non-State Violence: A Two-Level Framework to Transform a Deceptive Debate
复制标题
非国家暴力的政治有效性：转变欺骗性辩论的两层框架
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Peter Krause
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Peter Krause
当前关于非国家暴力的政治有效性的学术争论中最引人注目的一点是，经过仔细研究，没有发现太多争论。尽管看似不可调和的立场声称恐怖主义和叛乱“有效”或“无效”，但这些辩论的根源在于不同的案例选择和成功门槛，而不是对经验记录的分歧。尽管这种以前未被认识到的经验共识有助于解决现有争端，但它依赖于单层战略框架，无法从暴力使用者的角度捕捉暴力的有效性。本文提出了一种基于两级框架的政治有效性的替代概念，该框架解释了叛乱不是单一行为者这一事实，而是以武装团体为标志，这些团体追求有利于其更大的社会运动的战略目标（例如推翻政权或撤出敌军），同时追求有利于团体本身的组织目标（例如增加成员或资金）。对跨越时空的叛乱和恐怖主义研究中常见的八个范式运动的实证分析表明，两级框架比现有的单级模型更好地捕捉了非国家暴力的政治有效性，并为强有力的新理论奠定了基础，这些理论解释了非国家暴力的使用和有效性的更大差异。
The most striking aspect of the current scholarly debate over the political effectiveness of non-state violence is that, upon careful examination, there is not much of a debate to be found. Despite seemingly irreconcilable positions claiming that terrorism and insurgency “work” or “do not work,” varying case selection and thresholds for success lie at the root of these debates, not disagreements over the empirical record. Although this previously unrecognized empirical consensus helps to resolve existing disputes, it relies on single-level strategic frameworks that fail to capture the effectiveness of violence from the perspective of those who employ it. This article presents an alternative concept of political effectiveness based on a two-level framework that accounts for the fact that insurgencies are not unitary actors, but are instead marked by armed groups that pursue strategic objectives that benefit their larger social movements (such as the overthrow of a regime or the withdrawal of enemy troops), while they simultaneously pursue organizational objectives that benefit the groups themselves (such as increasing membership or funding). Empirical analysis of eight paradigmatic campaigns common to studies of insurgency and terrorism across time and space reveals that the two-level framework better captures the political effectiveness of non-state violence than existing single-level models and primes the subfield for powerful new theories that explain greater variation in the use and effectiveness of non-state violence.