ST

Study Notes on Veto Players and Civil War Duration from David E. Cunningham

Veto Players and Civil War Duration

Authors and Source Information

  • Author: David E. Cunningham, Harvard University

  • Source: American Journal of Political Science, October 2006, Vol. 50, No. 4, pp. 875-892

  • Published by: Midwest Political Science Association

  • Stable URL: Link to JSTOR

  • Contact for JSTOR: support@jstor.org

Introduction to Civil War Duration

  • Civil wars vary significantly in duration, with some ending quickly (within days) and others persisting for decades.

  • This study aims to understand the reasons behind this variation, specifically focusing on the concept of "veto players".

Key Questions Addressed

  • Why do some civil wars resolve quickly while others drag on?

  • How does the presence of veto players affect the resolution of civil wars?

Importance of Duration Analysis

  • Theoretically, understanding duration aids in comprehending why conflicts escalate to violence or reach settlements.

  • Practically, civil war costs escalate with duration:

    • Average battle deaths in wars lasting less than two years: 3,000 deaths.

    • Average battle deaths in wars lasting longer than two years: 44,000 deaths.

    • Additional causal impact: For each extra month of civil war, an average of 189 additional deaths.

Veto Players Concept

  • Definition: Veto players are multiple actors whose agreement is necessary for a settlement in a conflict.

  • Key Hypothesis (H1): The more veto players present, the longer the civil war duration due to:

    1. Smaller bargaining range.

    2. Increased information asymmetries.

    3. Incentives to hold out for better deals.

    4. Shifting alliances complicating negotiations.

Analysis Framework

  • This study utilizes a new dataset providing monthly data on all parties involved in civil wars since World War II, statistically analyzing the correlation between the number of veto players and civil war duration.

Existing Theories on War Duration

1. Economic Theories

  • Focus on costs of war; conflicts are prolonged when they are less costly for combatants.

  • Theories by Collier and Hoeffler (2004) emphasize "greed" motivations over "grievance" in motivating prolonged conflicts.

2. Informational Approaches

  • Suggest wars reflect private information about the actors involved, with negotiations influenced by battlefield outcomes.

  • Conflicts reveal information that ultimately affects negotiation terms and conflict longevity.

3. Commitment Theories

  • Focus on the ability of combatants to credibly commit to a settlement without third-party enforcement.

  • Lack of commitment leads to more prolonged conflicts, especially without enforceable peace agreements, as shown by Walter (2002) and Fearon (2004).

Critique of Existing Literature

  • Existing literature primarily views civil wars as two-party conflicts, missing the complexity presented by modern multiparty dynamics.

  • Empirical evidence highlights that many contemporary civil wars involve multiple factions, complicating negotiations.

Civil War Actors as Veto Players

  • Veto player theory analyzes conflict dynamics similar to policy negotiations in multi-actor political environments.

    • Each actor's distinct preferences and necessity for mutual agreement lead to more prolonged conflict, similar to governmental processes.

  • Important distinctions: Barriers exist to efficient negotiations, and failures lead to violent consequences for all actors involved.

Factors Leading to Multiparty Conflicts

  • Categories of Civil War Participants:

    1. Governmental forces.

    2. Internal insurgents (original and splinter factions).

    3. External actors (state interveners).

  • Statistics: Of 288 identified internal armed conflicts, 90 (30%) involved more than two actors.

    • Conflicts can yield several original and splinter factions, complicating peace negotiations.

Splinter Factions

  • Splinter groups arise from internal disputes and differing agendas among original insurgent factions.

  • Distinctions:

    1. Original parties: independent agendas.

    2. Splinter factions: emerge from splits within existing groups, complicating negotiations.

External Interveners

  • External states often intervene to pursue their independent agendas, further complicating the civil war dynamics.

Identifying Veto Players

Criteria for Veto Players

  1. Divergent Preferences: Each party's preferences must not align exactly with others; otherwise, they do not constitute separate veto players.

  2. Cohesion: Groups must maintain internal unity without factions that disrupt their negotiating power.

  3. Viability: Parties must be able to continue fighting independently; otherwise, they cannot block peace agreements.

Factors Influencing Viability

  • Several conditions enhance group viability, including troop strength, terrain type, access to resources, and external support.

Effects of Veto Players on Civil War Duration

Mechanisms That Extend Duration

  1. Bargaining Range: More veto players reduce the range of acceptable agreements, complicating negotiations.

  2. Information Asymmetries: Multiparty conflicts face unique informational challenges that can hinder negotiations.

  3. Incentives to Hold Out: Parties may prioritize remaining viable over entering settlements, especially if they perceive better outcomes may be possible.

  4. Shifting Alliances: Fluid alliances among parties can disrupt negotiation efforts and extend conflicts.

Statistical Testing of Hypotheses

  • The analysis uses binary time-series cross-sectional analysis to investigate the effects on civil war duration, employing logit regression methodologies.

Results and Findings

  • Empirical data shows a significant correlation between the number of veto players and war duration, aligning with the theoretical framework proposed.

  • Key hypotheses were statistically confirmed:

    • H1: More veto players = longer duration.

    • H2: More diverse preferences among veto players = longer duration.

    • H3: Stronger veto players = longer duration.

Implications for Policy Responses to Civil Wars

  1. Reduction of Veto Players: Strategies to decrease the number of active veto players should be prioritized.

  2. Inclusion of Key Players: Focus on negotiating with primary armed factions for effective resolutions, avoiding addition of non-combatant groups.

  3. Phased Engagement: Seeking agreements with stronger groups first could yield better outcomes.

Real-world Examples

  • Historical references, such as Crocker's Strategy in Angola, illustrate practical approaches to managing multiparty negotiation scenarios without escalating violence.

Conclusion

  • Veto player analysis reveals significant insights into why civil wars persist. Understanding the dynamics of conflict and the roles of diverse actors is crucial for designing effective policy responses aimed at conflict resolution and prevention.

References

  • A comprehensive list of cited works and literature supporting the discussed theories and findings is provided, highlighting the contributions to civil war studies from various scholars including Balch-Lindsay, Fearon, Walter, and others.