Newswise — Most recent armed conflicts around the world have been flare-ups of previously settled wars, concludes a new report from University of Maryland researchers. The report also identifies current terrorism as largely “a by-product of the war in Iraq.”
“Strikingly, of the 39 different conflicts that became active in the last 10 years, 31 were conflict recurrences – instances of resurgent, armed violence in societies where conflict had largely been dormant for least a year,” reports the 2010 edition of Peace and Conflict, a biennial report produced by the University of Maryland’s Center for International Development and Conflict Management (CIDCM). http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/pc/executive_summary/exec_sum_2010.pdf
“This is a sobering reminder that we’re entering a period of destabilization that we have characterized as a conflict syndrome,” says report co-author and CIDCM researcher Joe Hewitt. “Conflicts are becoming increasingly resistant to peace efforts. It’s clearly easier to stop conflict than to rebuild countries torn apart by war. Without adequate resources and international commitment, there is no certainty that the obstacles can be overcome.”http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/staff/staff_member.asp?id=111
The report adds that internationally brokered settlement or containment initiatives launched since the early 1990s “did not deal effectively with root causes. Slow economic growth, badly timed international aid and lack of attention to social reforms are key factors that lead to recurrence.”
LEVEL OF CONFLICT
The level of conflict since the last report two years ago has remained relatively stable – 26 armed conflicts at the end of 2007 (most recent data) versus 27 at the end of 2005. But these numbers conceal a great deal of ferment, with several long-term conflicts ending and several new ones starting or flaring up again, the researchers found.
HOT SPOTS
The report finds significantly increasing instability in regions where dangers were already very high. Most are in Africa, the Middle East and Asia. The researchers use a statistical approach, analyzing a variety of indicators that have historically preceded armed conflict, including changes in democratization or authoritarian forms of government, level of global economic integration, infant mortality rates, level of militarization and insecurity in neighboring countries.
Top 25 countries at highest risk of instability: 1) Afghanistan, 2) Niger, 3) Burundi, 4) Congo, Democratic Republic, 5) Djibouti, 6) Ethiopia, 7) Mali, 8) Nigeria, 9) Tanzania, 10) Zambia, 11) Sierra Leone, 12) Liberia, 13) Mauritania, 14) Guinea-Bissau, 15) Angola, 16) Iraq, 17) Cote d’Ivoire, 18) Kenya, 19) Central African Republic, 20) Somalia, 21) Chad, 22) Benin, 23) Mozambique, 24) Malawi, and 25) Nepal.
Countries with greatest increases in instability: Congo, Democratic Republic; Burundi; Mauritania; Nigeria; Djibouti; Guinea-Bissau; Angola; Zambia; Pakistan; Nepal; Uganda; Burkina Faso; Cameroon; Tanzania; Chad; Kyrgyz Republic; Bolivia.
A color coded map is displayed in the report’s executive summary: http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/pc/executive_summary/exec_sum_2010.pdf
TERRORISM TRENDS
The United States is among the top 25 nations targeted by terrorists, coming in at number 20 in terms of attacks and number 15 in fatalities.
The figures are based on the Global Terrorism Database – the world’s most comprehensive unclassified database, based at START, the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, which is based at the University of Maryland and funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
The report describes current levels of terrorism as a “by-product of the Iraq war.” Increases in the number of terror attacks are “markedly higher if all post-2003 cases of terrorism in Iraq are included in the totals,” the report says. But adds, “even after excluding post-2003 Iraqi cases where no specific group can be identified, total terrorist attacks nearly tripled between 2000 and 2006. Still, the data strongly suggest that terrorism today is in large part a by-product of the war in Iraq, differing greatly from terrorism in the last quarter of the twentieth century.”
“Most terrorist attacks are not the well-orchestrated, sophisticated and highly lethal operations portrayed in the media,” says Gary LaFree, START director. “These big international attacks are relatively rare and take a long time to plan, but they are the most lethal and create the biggest impact.” Bombings and armed attacks were the most common terrorist operations.http://www.start.umd.edu/start/about/staff/bio.asp?id=1
“Organizations professing a democratic ideology are significantly less likely to engage in terrorism,” says University of Maryland professor Jonathan Wilkenfeld, CIDCM director. “Ethnic organizations that oppose democratic governance represent minority groups that suffer from state repression, espouse a separatist ideology, employ rhetoric that advocates violence and receive foreign support have an 89 percent likelihood of engaging in terrorism. These are the organizations we should be keeping an eye on.” http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/staff/staff_member.asp?id=28
Wilkenfeld’s research also shows that the percentage of ethno-political organizations in the Middle East using terrorism has decreased since the 1980s and mid 1990s, even as terror levels rise. “Fewer organizations are using terror as a tactic, but the ones that turn to violence are launching more, and frequently more lethal, attacks,” he says. In 1986, more than one-quarter of ethno-political organizations embraced terror tactics. In 2004, by contrast, the number dropped below 15 percent.
CIDCM
The Center for International Development and Conflict Management (CIDCM) is an interdisciplinary research center at the University of Maryland. CIDCM seeks to prevent and transform conflict, to understand the interplay between conflict and development, and to help societies create sustainable futures for themselves.
RSS