Does Warfare Matter? Severity, Duration, and Outcomes of Civil Wars
Does Warfare Matter? Severity, Duration, and Outcomes of Civil Wars
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0022002714547903
复制
发表时间：
2014-12-01
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
Kalyvas, Stathis N.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Balcells, Laia;Kalyvas, Stathis N.
内战是作为常规的、非常规的还是对称的非常规冲突进行的，这重要吗？换句话说，叛乱技术是否会影响战争的严重性、持续时间或结果？我们的回答是肯定的。我们发现，非常规冲突比所有其他类型的冲突持续的时间要长得多，而常规冲突往往在战场杀伤力方面更为严重。非常规冲突造成更大的平民受害，往往由现任者获胜，而常规冲突更有可能以叛军的胜利告终。实质上，这些发现有助于我们理解内战是如何发生变化的：内战在战场上变得更短、更致命，对现有政府来说更具挑战性，但也更有可能以政府和武装反对派之间的某种和解而告终。理论上，我们的发现支持在研究冲突的宏观模式(如内战的严重性、持续时间和结果)时考虑叛乱技术(捕捉往往在微观层面上可见的冲突特征)；它们还指出了非正规战争对国家建设和社会变革的具体贡献。
Does it matter whether a civil war is fought as a conventional, irregular, or symmetric nonconventional conflict? Put differently, do technologies of rebellion impact a war's severity, duration, or outcome? Our answer is positive. We find that irregular conflicts last significantly longer than all other types of conflict, while conventional ones tend to be more severe in terms of battlefield lethality. Irregular conflicts generate greater civilian victimization and tend to be won by incumbents, while conventional ones are more likely to end in rebel victories. Substantively, these findings help us make sense of how civil wars are changing: they are becoming shorter, deadlier on the battlefield, and more challenging for existing governmentsbut also more likely to end with some kind of settlement between governments and armed opposition. Theoretically, our findings support the idea of taking into account technologies of rebellion (capturing characteristics of conflicts that tend to be visible mostly at the micro level) when studying macro-level patterns of conflicts such as the severity, duration, and outcomes of civil wars; they also point to the specific contribution of irregular war to both state building and social change.