* A conflict between organized groups within the country or between two countries created from a formerly united nation state. * A violent conflict within a country fought by organized groups that aim to take power at the center or in a region, or to change government policies. (James Fearon, “Iraq’s Civil War” in Foreign Affairs, March/April 2007.) * A high-intensity conflict, often involving regular armed forces, that is sustained, organized and large-scale. * May result in large numbers of casualties and the consumption of significant resources. (Ann Hironaka, Neverending Wars: The International Community, Weak States, and the Perpetuation of Civil War, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, Mass., 2005) * The aim of one side may be to take control of the country or a region, to achieve independence for a region, or to change government policies. (James Fearon, “Iraq’s Civil War” in Foreign Affairs, March/April 2007.)
CAUSES
1. Greed versus Grievance
According to scholars Paul Collier and Anke Hoeffler, civil wars are attracted by two opposing theories, Greed versus Grievance. (Greed and Grievance) What is Greed vs Grievance? It refers to the two baseline arguments put forward by scholars of armed conflict on the causes of civil war, though the argument has been extended to other forms of war. “Greed” is shorthand for the argument that combatants in armed conflicts are motivated by a desire to better their situation, and perform an informal cost-benefit analysis in examining if the rewards of joining a rebellion are greater than not joining. “Grievance” stands for the argument that people rebel over issues of identity, e.g. ethnicity, religion, social class, etc., rather than over economics. In practice, even proponents of strong versions of these arguments admit that the opposing argument has some influence in the development of a conflict. 2. Availability of finance
The Essay on Impact of War, Conflict & Terrorism on the UPS
If there is a war and NATO decides that the UK needs to provide direct military action then the British Army will have to be prepared. War affects the army as an organisation because it means they will lose soldiers and have to retrain new ones. An example of this would be the crash of Nimrod XV230 which killed everyone on board, that highlighted the cost-pressure of the war. The training and ...
A high proportion of primary commodities in national exports significantly increases the risk of a conflict. A country at “peak danger”, with commodities comprising 32% of gross domestic product, has a 22% risk of falling into civil war in a given five-year period, while a country with no primary commodity exports has a 1% risk. 3. Opportunity cost of rebellion
High levels of population dispersion and, to a lesser extent, the presence of mountainous terrain increased the chance of conflict. 4. Population size
The various factors contributing to the risk of civil war rise increase with population size. The risk of a civil war rises approximately proportionately with the size of a country’s population. 5. Time
The more time that has elapsed since the last civil war, the less likely it is that a conflict will recur. The study had two possible explanations for this: one opportunity-based and the other grievance-based.
EFFECTS
1. Economic Collapse – Civil wars have further resulted in economic collapse; Burma (Myanmar), Uganda and Angola are examples of nations that were considered to have promising futures before being engulfed in civil wars. 2. Fatality – Since 1945, civil wars have resulted in the deaths of over 25 million people, as well as the forced displacement of millions more. 3. Broken Families – Civil war tore families apart from each other. Loved ones were killed in battle. Women, men, and children were forced to cope with the deaths of family. 4. Slavery – People are forced to work for the opposing position for them to survive and to be with their remaining family members. 5. Depression, Hunger, Poverty
The Term Paper on Ethnic Cleansing Kosovar Albanian
... be to abandon Jerusalem. Ethnic cleansing is defined as: The systematic elimination of an ethnic group or groups from a region or ... tried for multiple accounts of war crimes. The identity cleansing has crippled the Albanian population severely, as the refugees' homes ... had to introduce new police departments, restore businesses, maintain civil order, appoint new heads of state, and reintegrate the ...
* ETHNIC CLEANSING
Definition:
* the process or policy of eliminating unwanted ethnic or religious groups * usually involves attempts to remove physical and cultural evidence of the targeted group in the territory * refer to “the systematic and violent removal of undesired ethnic groups from a given territory.” * ways of elimination:
-deportation
-forcible displacement
-mass murder
-threats
-destruction of homes, social centers, farms, and infrastructure
-desecration of monuments, cemeteries, and places of worship
Ethnic cleansing as a military, political and economic tactic The purpose of ethnic cleansing is to remove competitors. The party implementing this policy sees a risk (or a useful scapegoat) in a particular ethnic group, and uses propaganda about that group to stir up FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) in the general population. The targeted ethnic group is marginalized and demonized. It can also be conveniently blamed for the economic, moral and political woes of that region. Physically removing the targeted ethnic community provides a very clear, visual reminder of the power of the current government. It also provides a safety-valve for violence stirred up by the FUD. The government in power benefits significantly from seizing the assets of the dispossessed ethnic group As a tactic, ethnic cleansing has a number of systemic impacts. It enables a force to eliminate civilian support for resistance by eliminating the civilians — recognizing Mao Zedong’s dictum that guerrillas among a civilian population are fish in water, it removes the fish by draining the water
Ethnic cleansing as a crime under international law
There is no formal legal definition of ethnic cleansing. However, ethnic cleansing in the broad sense – the forcible deportation of a population – is defined as a crime against humanity under the statutes of both International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY).
The gross human-rights violations integral to stricter definitions of ethnic cleansing are treated as separate crimes falling under the definitions for genocide or crimes against humanity of the statutes.
The Essay on Ethnic Cleansing Group Territories Expression
Ethnic Cleansing is a process in which an advancing army of one ethnic group expels civilians of other ethnic groups from towns and villages it conquers in order to create ethnically pure enclaves for members of their ethnic group. "Ethnic cleansing is a literal translation of the expression etnicko ciscenje in Serbo-Croatian/Croat o-Serbian. The origin of this term is difficult to establish. Mass ...
The UN Commission of Experts (established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780) held that the practices associated with ethnic cleansing “constitute crimes against humanity and can be assimilated to specific war crimes. Furthermore … such acts could also fall within the meaning of the Genocide Convention.” The UN General Assembly condemned “ethnic cleansing” and racial hatred in a 1992 resolution.
There are however situations, such as the expulsion of Germans after World War II, where ethnic cleansing has taken place without legal redress (see Preussische Treuhand v. Poland).
Timothy V. Waters argues that if similar circumstances arise in the future, this precedent would allow the ethnic cleansing of other populations under international law.
