Search results

Despite the substantial transformative impact wars have on people's lives, the social and institutional consequences of war remain the least understood. This dissertation adds to a sparse, but growing body of literature on the micro-level consequences of war and advances our understanding of its societal legacy by analyzing how war influences individual attitudes in post-war societies. It contributes to the study of peace and conflict by drawing attention to the micro level and exploring how both interstate and internal wars may shape individual attitudes relevant for building long-lasting peace. Further, it expands the general literature on political science on the determinants of social and political attitudes and behavior by exploring the hitherto largely ignored impact of war on such attitudes. The impact of war on individual attitudes is analyzed empirically in three chapters. Chapter 2 (co-authored with Markus Freitag) scrutinizes the impact of individual and contextual war exposure on social trust in post-war Kosovo. Drawing from the psychological literature on war-related distress and posttraumatic growth, this study is motivated by the question whether the consequences of war for social attitudes always are negative, or whether war also can contribute to growth in social trust. Combining both individual and municipal data on war exposure in a multilevel framework, it further explores which of these types of war exposure have the strongest impact on individual attitudes. The findings of this chapter indicate that individual war experience has had a consistent, negative impact on social trust more than 10 years after the end of the war. The effect of municipal war exposure is not robust and is sensitive to the exclusion of specific municipalities. The second study in Chapter 3 takes a step back and examines the long-term impact of war exposure by studying the role that experiences during World War II have on people's level of satisfaction with life in a comparative study of 34 countries. Motivated by the findings from related academic disciplines on the intergenerational transmission of the consequences of trauma exposure, this chapter not only scrutinizes the effect of war on directly affected individuals but also analyzes how family members' experiences with war affect the well-being of members of the subsequent generations. The empirical findings are twofold. First, injury to oneself or injury or death of parents or grandparents has a lasting negative influence on individuals' level of life satisfaction more than sixty years after the end of the war. This effect is remarkably robust and suggests that war experiences or their consequences become transmitted to subsequent generations. Second, the effect of war experiences is stronger for older respondents. Individuals reporting experiences from World War II are thereby less likely to experience the general upward trend in life satisfaction with age. Trying to understand the possible mechanisms through which the transmission of war experiences takes place, the study finds that war exposure is significantly related to lower self-reported health and a lower paternal level of education among relevant age cohorts. Finally, Chapter 4 (co-authored with Carolin Rapp) analyzes in detail how war affects political tolerance of the Sinhalese and Tamil populations toward each in post-war Sri Lanka. Using unique, all-island survey data collected after the 26-year-long civil war the chapter devotes special attention to the mechanism that may drive the relationship between war and individual attitudes. With structural equation modeling techniques, the chapter closely studies the role played by intergroup forgiveness and ethnic prejudice in the relationship between war experience and granting civil liberties. The analyses reveal that the likelihood to grant civil liberties in both ethnic groups depends on the civil liberty in question. Whereas a majority from both ethnic groups are willing to grant the right to vote, hold a speech, and to hold a government position, the right to demonstrate is highly contested and is only granted to the other group by very low shares of both ethnic groups. Further, the empirical findings show that the direct impact of war experience is less powerful than expected and, again, depends on the right in question. Instead, not being willing to forgive the other group, driven by war experience and ethnic prejudice, is a more consistent predictor of intolerance. These studies together imply that wars may have lasting, negative societal consequences. The effect may stretch across generations and have important implications for post-war peacebuilding and recovery policies. The finding that the impact of war on individual attitudes is not necessarily a direct result of war exposure but is driven by psychological responses to such events, in this case, the willingness to forgive, suggests that there are ways in which societies can promote positive social attitudes by focusing on the mechanisms at work. Further research on the mechanisms at work is needed to develop the most efficient policies for peaceful intergroup relations and thereby lasting peace.

How does civil war shape the prospects of lasting peace between formerly opposing ethnic groups after the end of violence? This article addresses the complex relationship between war experience, interethnic attitudes, interethnic forgiveness, and the willingness to permit basic civil liberties to former enemies in the context of postwar Sri Lanka. Despite the end of the 26-year-long civil war in 2009, social and political tensions between the two largest ethnic groups, the Sinhalese and the Sri Lankan Tamils, still prevail. Political tolerance is in the literature considered a crucial micro-level condition for peaceful coexistence, yet, its determinants, in particular the role of war experiences, have not received sufficient attention. Using new and unique all-island representative survey data (N = 1,420), we examine the mutual permission of civil liberties of these two ethnic groups. Our analyses reveal two important findings: first, the likelihood of granting civil liberties varies by civil liberty and ethnic group. Whereas most members of both ethnic groups are willing to grant the right to vote, to hold a speech, and to hold a government position, the right to demonstrate is highly contested, with only low shares of both Tamils and Sinhalese being willing to grant the other group this right. Second, the structural equation models reveal that the direct impact of war exposure is less powerful than expected and depends on the political right in question. Not forgiving the other ethnic group, partly driven by war experience and ethnic prejudice, appears to be a more consistent predictor of intolerance. These results imply that postwar efforts to further forgiveness are important to promote political tolerance and thereby long-lasting peace.

While a new, growing subset of the literature argues that armed conflict does not necessarily erode social cohesion in the postwar era, we challenge this perspective and examine how civil war experiences shape social trust in Kosovo after the war from 1998 to 1999. Based on a nationwide survey conducted in 2010 and the disaggregated conflict event data set of the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project, we simultaneously analyze the impact of individual war-related experiences and exposure to war in the community through hierarchical analyses of twenty-six municipalities. Our findings confirm that civil war is negatively related to social trust. This effect proves to be more conclusive for individual war experiences than for contextual war exposure. Arguably, the occurrence of instances of violence with lasting psychological as well as social structural consequences provides people with clear evidence of the untrustworthiness, uncooperativeness, and hostility of others, diminishing social trust in the aftermath of war.

While a new, growing subset of the literature argues that armed conflict does not necessarily erode social cohesion in the postwar era, we challenge this perspective and examine how civil war experiences shape social trust in Kosovo after the war from 1998 to 1999. Based on a nationwide survey conducted in 2010 and the disaggregated conflict event data set of the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project, we simultaneously analyze the impact of individual war-related experiences and exposure to war in the community through hierarchical analyses of twenty-six municipalities. Our findings confirm that civil war is negatively related to social trust. This effect proves to be more conclusive for individual war experiences than for contextual war exposure. Arguably, the occurrence of instances of violence with lasting psychological as well as social structural consequences provides people with clear evidence of the untrustworthiness, uncooperativeness, and hostility of others, diminishing social trust in the aftermath of war.

This article contributes to the debate evolving around the political legacy of armed conflict. We evaluate the effect of war experiences during the 1998–1999 civil war in Kosovo on various modes of political participation. We find that war victims are on average more likely to participate in non-institutionalized forms of participation such as signing petitions and to participate in protests in the postwar era. In addition, we show that the impact of war experiences on political protest is contingent upon the postwar situation. War experiences are linked to protest behavior when a survivor is economically disadvantaged after the war. However, war experiences lose their impact on protest behavior when people do not encounter economic grievances in the postwar environment. In this vein, exploring the postwar context enriches our understanding of the political legacy of war victimization.

Sexual violence is believed to be widespread during war. Yet empirical evidence concerning its prevalence is often limited. Victims, out of feelings of shame or fear, underreport this form of violence. We tackle this problem by administering a list experiment in a representative survey in Sri Lanka, which is only recently recovering from an ethnic civil war between Sinhalese and Tamils. This unobtrusive method reveals that around 13 percent of the Sri Lankan population has personally experienced sexual assault during the war—a prevalence ten times higher than elicited by direct questioning. We also identify vulnerable groups: Tamils who have collaborated with rebel groups and the male-displaced population suspected of collaboration with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Our experimental evidence thus lends support to reports on the asymmetric use of sexual violence by government forces, qualifies conventional wisdom on sexual violence during war, and has important implications for policy.

This article contributes to the debate evolving around the political legacy of armed conflict. We evaluate the effect of war experiences during the 1998–1999 civil war in Kosovo on various modes of political participation. We find that war victims are on average more likely to participate in non-institutionalized forms of participation such as signing petitions and to participate in protests in the postwar era. In addition, we show that the impact of war experiences on political protest is contingent upon the postwar situation. War experiences are linked to protest behavior when a survivor is economically disadvantaged after the war. However, war experiences lose their impact on protest behavior when people do not encounter economic grievances in the postwar environment. In this vein, exploring the postwar context enriches our understanding of the political legacy of war victimization.