Introduction to Conflict Studies – Lecture Notes (Transcript-Based)
Introduction to Conflict Studies – Lecture Notes (Transcript-Based)
Personal context and course orientation
Instructor shares how personal interests and biases influence examples and case selections (Predominantly Sub-Saharan Africa, but aims for global coverage).
Emphasis on covering broad geographic scope and incorporating diverse conflicts beyond any single region.
Acknowledges potential bias in examples and invites students to reflect on biases and ask questions.
The course uses interdisciplinary literature; expect disciplinary differences in how concepts and methodologies are presented.
Encourages analytical engagement: question assumptions, seek deeper understanding, and connect to real-world dynamics.
Goals of the course and pedagogical approach
Promote an analytical stance rather than confirmation of preconceived ideas.
Foster curiosity about why conflicts happen, what motivates actors, and the logic behind actions.
Start with small, manageable questions and build toward broader understanding.
Emphasize questioning data, definitions, and measurements when studying conflicts.
Structure of the course and expectations
Lectures + seminars structure to cover case studies and underlying theory.
In lectures: one case study is analyzed; in seminars: deeper dive into the same theory with multiple case studies; there is a capstone case study for the student.
Slides are posted on the day of the lecture to aid note-taking (sometimes published just minutes beforehand).
Attendance policy: maximum of two seminar absences (exceptions possible).
Seminar participation is mandatory and includes pre-seminar Canvas discussion (mandatory readings, questions, and comments) with some exceptions for the first week.
Clear emphasis on preparing and engaging with readings before seminars.
Course organization and assessment overview
Block structure: two main segments (Block 1: foundational concepts and case studies; Block 2: seminars and applications).
Assignments:
Conflict Case Study Briefing (group of 4–5 students): a 6-minute briefing presented in seminars to brief peers as if preparing for a mission (research or field deployment). This briefing is directly scored by peers on informativeness.
Individual Essay (end of Block 1): apply one theory to a chosen case study.
Essay topic flexibility: you may switch case studies if your interest shifts during learning; still tied to the theory under discussion.
Seminar Moderation (Block 2): you lead and organize seminars, making the content your own and integrating literature creatively.
Exam: on-site three-hour exam with three essay-style questions (new format; previously take-home).
Administrative contact: administrative questions about the minor should go to the designated point of contact.
Slides and readings: the instructor provides slides; mandatory readings for seminars are announced; most content is drawn from a mix of sources across disciplines.
Core questions and aims of the course
Three general fundamental questions frame the course (as stated by the instructor):
What are the causes of conflict?
How do theories explain dynamics at different levels of analysis (macro/interstate vs micro individual behavior)?
How do data, measurement, and definitions affect analysis, comparisons, and trend identification?
Emphasis on levels of analysis
Macro level: interstate or state-to-state dynamics.
Micro level: individual or small-group motivations and actions.
The risk of mismatches: using micro-level theory for a macro-level phenomenon (and vice versa).
Complexity of explanations
Theories that explain macro dynamics may not capture micro-level behavior, and vice versa; integrative understanding is encouraged.
Conceptual foundations in conflicts and violence
Distinguishing violence types and data interpretation
Conflict datasets depend on definitions and thresholds; data can mislead if context is not clarified.
Example: counting fatalities requires clear definitions of what counts as countable fatalities and what constitutes a conflict.
Structural violence, cultural violence, and positive/negative peace
Structural violence: social injustices and discrimination built into social, economic, and political structures that prevent full development of certain groups.
Cultural violence: attitudes and norms that underpin the legitimacy or illegitimacy of structural and direct violence.
Negative peace: the absence of direct violence; Positive peace: the presence of conditions that address underlying drivers of conflict (drivers, mindsets, institutions).
The triadic framework relates to violence types and peace concepts
Structural violence ↔ Cultural violence ↔ Direct violence (actual violence) and the broader peace landscape.
Data, measurement, and datasets discussed
Datasets and measurement issues
The Heidelberg/UTD? dataset (referenced as a common source in conflict research) contributes fatality counts and classifications.
Corridors of War, ATLAS, and other datasets provide alternative perspectives and regional emphases.
Datasets often distinguish between interstate, intrastate, and internationalized intrastate conflicts.
Fatality thresholds and classification of war vs. non-war
A common threshold used is: fatalities (for war classification).
Limited or non-internationalized conflicts use different, often lower, thresholds (represented as or similar terms).
Regional and temporal patterns
Post-Cold War shift: rise of intrastate and “new wars,” with more actors (state, non-state, and international actors) and more civilian casualties.
The trend shows a decline in interstate wars, with rises and dynamics in intrastate conflicts across regions, notably in Asia and Africa.
The “New Wars” hypothesis (Mary Keller/Kaldor)
Since the end of the Cold War, warfare has shifted away from clear state-to-state battles toward conflicts involving many non-state actors operating within cities and civilian spaces; these wars are typically more deadly to civilians.
Note: the field also faces criticisms of this framing and emphasizes nuanced categorizations of conflict types.
Geographic nuance and interpretation
Global maps can obscure localized crises within countries; regional concentration of violence can be high even when a country appears broadly “in conflict.”
Example considerations: in countries like the DRC, conflict may be concentrated in eastern regions; in other contexts, multi-actor dynamics complicate overall counts.
Key examples and illustrative points from visuals in the lecture
Motives and legitimacy in conflict definitions
Comparing different contexts (e.g., Afghanistan, Northern Ireland, Mexico) shows that motives, state actors, and the role of external interventions shape the interpretation of conflicts.
Government actions (e.g., counter-insurgency, nation-building claims) influence the framing of a conflict and the interpretation of external interventions.
Data interpretation and practical implications
The same dataset may yield different conclusions depending on definitions of conflict, actor classification, and time frame considered.
Always question what is being counted and how; ensure comparisons are valid across datasets and time periods.
Practical implications for students and researchers
When selecting a conflict case study for essays or seminars, ensure alignment between the level of theory used and the level of analysis of the case study.
Be prepared to discuss the regional context, actor types, and data limitations when presenting or writing.
Use the three-block structure to organize learning: (1) foundation and case study, (2) deeper theory and alternative cases in seminars, (3) applied assessment (briefing, essay, exam).
Be proactive in communicating questions and uncertainties; the instructor explicitly invites interruptions for clarification during lectures.
Important reminders and ethical considerations
The course encourages critical evaluation of sources, biases, and methodological choices.
Respectful engagement with peers holding different views is expected in all seminars.
The course acknowledges that personal and cultural references shift across generations; students should feel comfortable challenging assumptions.
Final notes on the learning objectives
Build a robust, analytical framework for understanding conflict through multiple lenses (macro, micro, and data-driven perspectives).
Develop the ability to explain conflicts with grounded evidence, while recognizing data limitations and definitional nuances.
Produce well-structured, evidence-based analyses in both group and individual formats, culminating in an on-site exam that tests synthesis across the block content.
Quick glossary (guided by lecture content)
Structural violence: institutionalized social injustice and discrimination within societal structures.
Cultural violence: societal attitudes and norms that justify or perpetuate violence indirectly.
Negative peace: absence of direct violence.
Positive peace: conditions that address root causes and promote enduring peace, including justice and capable institutions.
Interstate conflict: wars between states.
Intrastate conflict: wars within a state, often involving non-state actors.
Internationalized intrastate conflict: intrastate conflict with significant external involvement.
New wars: post-Cold War conflicts characterized by multiple actors and often high civilian casualties.
Fatality thresholds: numerical criteria used to classify conflicts (e.g., ).
Reflection prompts for students (to guide seminar discussions)
How do data definitions shape our understanding of a conflict’s severity or duration?
In what ways might a macro-level theory fail to explain micro-level actor behavior in a given case study?
Which case study would you select for your essay, and how will you justify the choice using a specific theory?
How do regional patterns influence the global interpretation of warfare trends after the Cold War?
Practical next steps for students
Review the slide deck released on the day of the lecture and read the mandatory readings ahead of the first seminar.
Prepare a short answer in Canvas discussion for the upcoming seminar, including a question or critical comment about the readings.
Form a group (4–5 students) for the conflict case briefing and decide on a case study to investigate for Block 1 assessments.
Consider potential conflicts you might want to study for your essay and how you would apply a theory to that case.