Matching Items (3)
Description
Civil conflicts with ethnic motivating factors are more likely to experience recurrence than nonethnic conflicts. In this paper I conduct a survival analysis on a group of 175 conflict episodes from 1946-2005. I argue that grievances based on religion, race, culture, language, and/or history are difficult to resolve due to the concept of indivisibility that makes compromise on ethnic issues unpopular. Along with Clausewitz’s theory on the influence of passion, chance, and reason in war, I also argue the importance of following clear objectives. When goals change over time, strategy becomes confounded and conflict recurrence increases. Utilizing the Cox Proportional Hazards model, the hazard rate is found to be significantly higher for ethnic conflicts than nonethnic conflicts. They also face shorter periods of peace. To highlight how ethnic mechanisms effect similar conflict scenarios, a case study of the first Indo-Pakistani and Chinese Civil War is made. I find that in the absence of ethnic grievances through China’s cultural assimilation campaigns, they were able to effectively curb violent disputes while India could not.
ContributorsNguyen-Morris, Kelly (Author) / Thomson, Henry (Thesis advisor) / Wright, Thorin (Committee member) / Siroky, David (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021
Description
A growing body of literature has sought to explain the nature and effects of conflict-related sexualized violence. However, a critical problem that persists concerns why wartime rape varies both within and across conflicts. Political science literature mainly addresses these questions of variation in sexualized violence through group-level or structural explanations. Yet, clear patterns of combatant non-participation in conflict-related sexualized violence is apparent, even in cases where sexual violence is severe and pervasive. What allows one combatant to refrain, while another combatant, even within the same combat unit, perpetrates sexualized violence? In this dissertation, I argue that critical differences concerning attitudes, beliefs, and motivations exist between individual combatants. In light of these differences, I reintroduce the individual combatant onto the theoretical map as a critical unit of analysis and I explore the implications of gender inequality as an important and relevant factor related to sexualized violence in political conflict. Drawing on findings from social psychology, political psychology, sociology, and political science, the theory developed argues that combatants differentially internalize important norms related to gender that become particularly activated based on primarily externalized contextual influences. To test the theory, I conduct a mixed-method, sub-national comparative analysis of combatants and attitudes and beliefs associated with gender inequality during the Bosnian War (1992 – 1995). I rely on qualitative data generated from semi-structured, comprehensive interviews with psychologists, victim’s advocates, and legal experts managing sexual violence war crimes cases, and combat veterans directly associated with the Bosnian War (1992 – 1995) to assess differences at the individual-level of analysis. To additionally determine the broader effects of gender inequality, I employ an ordered probit regression analysis to ascertain the relationship between gender inequality related to institutional health and education factors and the severity of wartime rape. The combined results of these analyses demonstrate that individual differences between combatants better predicts the likelihood of a combatant to commit sexualized violence compared to structural or institutional accounts alone.
ContributorsWilliamson, Holly, Ph.D (Author) / Kittilson, Miki (Thesis advisor) / Lake, Milli (Committee member) / Wood, Reed (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
We live in an era where the notion of feminism is widespread. Just walking on the Arizona State University campus, one can see people wearing t-shirts and holding coffee cups that say "FEMINIST," working from computers covered in stickers calling for gender equity. I, myself, am a feminist. On any given day, I fit in perfectly with many others on campus - sporting a t-shirt that says, "Raise Boys and Girls the Same Way," and lugging around my laptop covered in feminist propaganda stickers. I subscribe to Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's definition of feminism. In essence, a feminist is "a person who believes in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes," regardless of religion, ethnicity, race, and class (Adichie, 2012). Through the lens of this definition and those like it, women have made many advancements (though there is still significant progress to be made in this arena, particularly for women of color) – more women participate in the workforce and education, women have gained greater autonomy over their bodies, and domestic responsibilities are, in many societies, no longer only assumed by women.
ContributorsFletcher, Rachel Aliya (Author) / Ali, Souad T. (Thesis director) / Gallab, Abdullahi A. (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor, Contributor, Contributor) / School of Human Evolution & Social Change (Contributor) / Watts College of Public Service & Community Solut (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05