Suchergebnisse

This article examines the nexus between international crises and civil wars. Based on the premise that not all simultaneous civil and international conflicts are related, the study aims to explore the circumstances in which civil wars affect violent escalation in international crises. The study identifies 'composite' crises – where the civil war is the core issue of the international dispute – as a unique subset of international crises. These crises are distinguished from 'unrelated-civil war' situations, in which the issues in the internal and international conflicts are separate. Using data from the ICB, COW, and UCDP/PRIO datasets, the article tests a dual-conflict argument, positing that interconnected issues and interactions between actors in composite situations inhibit moderate crisis management and aggravate interstate behavior. The findings show that while civil war in composite situations has a negative impact on crisis escalation, unrelated-civil war has an inverse impact on interstate relations in crisis.

This article examines the nexus between international crises and civil wars. Based on the premise that not all simultaneous civil and international conflicts are related, the study aims to explore the circumstances in which civil wars affect violent escalation in international crises. The study identifies 'composite' crises – where the civil war is the core issue of the international dispute – as a unique subset of international crises. These crises are distinguished from 'unrelated-civil war' situations, in which the issues in the internal and international conflicts are separate. Using data from the ICB, COW, and UCDP/PRIO datasets, the article tests a dual-conflict argument, positing that interconnected issues and interactions between actors in composite situations inhibit moderate crisis management and aggravate interstate behavior. The findings show that while civil war in composite situations has a negative impact on crisis escalation, unrelated-civil war has an inverse impact on interstate relations in crisis.

Considering the increasing role of nonstate political actors in world events, this article examines the influence of these players on international crisis dynamics. A theoretical index is developed to assess the power status of nonstate actors (NSAs), taking into account their unique characteristics, advantages and weaknesses. When applied to ethnic-NSAs that participated in interstate crises, in the Cold War and in the post-Cold War periods, the findings indicate that powerful ethnic-NSAs affect crisis outcomes, and would do better to do so under circumstances that suit their power resources and skills, namely, in the post-Cold War multi-centric world system, in crises that involve a small number of states as direct crisis actors and in prolonged international hostile situations. In conclusion, the article highlights the importance of developing theoretical tools for systemic analysis of NSAs in world politics, and suggests directions for future research in this field of IR. It also implies that to be effective, promoting peace and stability, crisis management should involve states and NSAs. Adapted from the source document.

Afghanistan has been the scene of enduring violent conflict for three decades, yet the sources of its conflict date back to the establishment of the Afghan state in the eighteenth century. The American-led military intervention in October 2001 ended the extremist Taliban rule in the torn country and facilitated democratic elections but did not terminate the Afghan turmoil and the threat of its regional spillover effects. Six years after the invasion, hopes for renovation, peace, and stability are entwined with great challenges and fears of continuing insecurity. Alongside efforts to advance social, economic, and security reforms, the Afghan government, assisted by international forces, faces escalating insurgency by Taliban and al-Qaeda militants. This complex and dangerous situation questions the possibility of imminent peace and stable democracy in a country where violence and enduring conflict have been instrumental throughout its history.
The central thesis of this essay is that to understand the Afghan conflict we must take into account a variety of interrelated factors from the global, regional, and internal cycles of analysis, none of which can be isolated or seen as satisfactory in itself. More specifically, it is contended here that efforts made by external powers to manage ethnic conflicts and establish a nation-building process in foreign countries should be based on broad consent of the parties involved.