Military Strategy and Civilian Suffering in Wartime: Understanding the Consequences of War for Non-Combatants in the 20th Century

国家间战争和内战的起因一直是社会科学家关注的中心话题。此外，对双方敌对武装力量的战争结果进行了越来越多的系统研究。然而，战争基础研究的一个重大缺陷是，相对缺乏严谨的理论和实证分析，无法解释战时平民生命损失和痛苦在时间和空间上的系统性差异。本研究项目通过研究1900-2000年间219场战争中武装冲突对非战斗人口的影响，解决了学术研究中的这一关键缺陷。在这个项目中，开发了一个理性选择理论模型来解决核心问题：作为军事战略问题，战时敌对武装部队何时以及为什么会采取针对平民的政策，导致大量非战斗人员直接死亡，或者被迫忍受威胁到大量生命损失的条件？具体来说，假设是用来解释敌对武装部队从事的行为：a)对平民的直接军事攻击，b)强迫平民离开家园，导致大规模难民潮或国内流离失所人口，以及c)故意破坏农业生产系统和剥夺获得充足粮食供应的政策，导致饥荒和饥饿的威胁。这些假设是通过对20世纪219场战争（国家间、国内和非殖民化冲突）的人口统计模型进行实证检验的。比较案例分析用于说明和评估从统计结果中得出的因果推论。该项目的发表结果将对政治科学家在战争研究中一个被忽视的方面的学术文献产生重要贡献。特别是，该项目可以扩大现有的研究，包括系统分析战争何时以及为何会对非战斗人员人口产生破坏性后果。虽然现有的研究并没有为这个问题提供令人信服的答案，但这个项目的发现应该会推进这一主题的科学知识。这个项目可以产生更广泛的贡献，超越政治学家对战争的研究进展。首先，创建了219场战争中平民生命损失和痛苦的新数据集。这些新创建的数据集将向公众开放，对研究一系列相关问题的社会科学家有价值，比如战争法、战争中的外部干预和战时军事战略的变化。第二，该项目的成果应有助于公共卫生领域的学术研究。这一领域的研究人员越来越关注了解武装冲突对公共卫生造成的后果。因此，力求更好地了解政治和军事决定如何增加平民对与疾病和死亡有关的风险因素的脆弱性的公共卫生分析人员应该对所创建的数据集和该项目的调查结果感兴趣。第三，这个项目的结果应该对寻求预防和应对战时人道主义危机的国家、国际机构和非政府组织的决策者有用。例如，通过更好地了解平民人口何时面临更大的风险，政策制定者可以尝试制定政策，阻止战斗人员以强制性军事力量针对平民。

The causes of interstate and civil war have been a topic of central concern to social scientists. In addition, there is a growing body of systematic research on the outcomes of war for the opposing armed forces of each side. A significant gap in basic research on war, however, is the relative lack of rigorous theoretical and empirical analysis that seeks to account for systematic differences in civilian loss of life and suffering in wartime across both time and space. This research project addresses this critical shortcoming in scholarly research with a study of the consequences of armed conflict for non-combatant populations in 219 wars from 1900-2000. In this project a rational choice theoretical model is developed to address the central question: When and why would opposing armed forces in wartime, as a matter of military strategy, adopt policies that target civilians with the result that large numbers of non-combatant populations are directly killed, or are forced to endure conditions that threaten large losses of life? Specifically, hypotheses are developed to explain when opposing armed forces engage in: a) direct military attacks on civilians, b) coercive displacement of civilians from their homes resulting in large-scale refugee flows or internally displaced populations, and c) deliberate policies of destroying agricultural production systems and denying access to adequate food supplies resulting in conditions that threaten famine and starvation. The hypotheses are empirically tested with statistical models on the population of 219 wars (interstate, civil, and de-colonization conflicts) in the 20th century. Comparative case analyses are utilized to illustrate and evaluate the causal inferences drawn from the statistical findings. The published results of the project will produce important contributions to the scholarly literature of political scientists on a neglected aspect in study of war. In particular, the project can broaden existing research to include a systematic analysis of when and why wars can produce devastating consequences for non-combatant populations. While existing research does not provide compelling answers to this question, this project's findings should advance scientific knowledge on this topic. This project can produce broader contributions beyond advances in the research of political scientists on war. First, new data sets on civilian loss of life and suffering in 219 wars are created. These newly created data sets will be made publicly available and should be of value to social scientists studying a cluster of related issues, such as the laws of war, outside intervention in wars, and changes in wartime military strategies. Second, the results of this project should contribute to scholarship in the field of Public Health. Researchers in this field are increasingly concerned with understanding the public health consequences of armed conflict. As a result, the data sets created and the findings of this project should be of interest to Public Health analysts who seek to better understand how political and military decisions increase the vulnerability of civilian populations to risk factors associated with disease and death. Third, the results of this project should be useful to policy makers in states, international institutions, and non-governmental organizations that seek to prevent and respond to humanitarian crises in wartime. For example, by better understanding when civilian populations are at greater risk, policy makers can try to devise policies that will deter combatants from targeting civilians with coercive military force.