Conflict Dynamics in Irregular Armed Conflict A Case Study of the Israeli Independence War Vincent R. Nieuwpoort Student Number: S1201646 Supervisor: dr. Alastair Reed Second reader: Prof. dr. Edwin Bakker Date: 13-01-2016 Leiden University Institute of Security and Global Affairs MSc Crisis and Security Management This thesis is part of the capstone project: ‘conflict dynamics: understanding the escalation and de-escalation of irregular armed conflict’ ABSTRACT Many factors cause and influence the dynamics of irregular armed conflict. Scholars either focused on single factors influencing conflict dynamics, the causes or the de-escalation of the conflict. Additionally, changing popular discourses in conflict studies influenced the way conflict has been researched. In order to identify the factors that could have driven the escalation and de-escalation of a conflict, a holistic analytical framework has been developed. The overall purpose of this project has been to create an extensive framework that can be used to research the dynamics of irregular armed conflicts. The development of the analytical framework has been done by exploring the literature on conflict. Based on these insights, the framework included fifteen factors that seem to influence the dynamics of conflict: 1) social cleavages; 2) popular support; 3) grievances; 4) local politics; 5) national politics; 6) international politics; 7) natural disasters; 8) state action – coercive force; 9) state action – policy solution; 10) state capacity; 11) strong/weak government; 12) strategy of armed groups; 13) capacity of armed groups; 14) factionalisation; 15) criminalisation. The framework has been applied to four historical cases, conflicts which experienced periods of escalation and de-escalation. The historical analysis offered in-depth knowledge on the changing dynamics of the following conflicts: the Israeli Independence War (1947-1948), the Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990), the Namibian Independence War (1966-1990) and the Sri Lankan Civil War (1983-2009). Information about the cases has been gathered by analysing primary sources and secondary literature, and conducting interviews. To structure the analysis, the conflicts have been divided into distinct phases. In order to gain new insights and improve the analytical framework, a comparative analysis has been performed. The comparative research offered several new insights. First, regional politics was considered to play a significant role in changing the dynamics in all four cases. Second, geography influenced the dynamics in both the case of Lebanon and Sri Lanka. Therefore, these factors have been added to the analytical framework. Third, the comparative research indicated that the factors influenced the dynamics of the conflicts in different ways. Fourth, the significance of the factors differed per conflict. Still, several factors played a significant role in all four cases, for example, social cleavages, popular support, and regional politics. Fifth, a combination of factors tends to explain the dynamics of the conflict throughout the phases, 2 which indicates that focusing on a single driver or discourse is insufficient. This shows the importance of using a holistic approach. The research has also revealed several limitations of the analytical framework. First, it must be noted that the analytical framework offers limited insights with regard to the direction of the interaction. Second, a combination of factors might influence the dynamics rather than one factor on its own, for instance, armed groups use grievances, caused by social cleavages, to acquire new recruits. The analytical framework might cause that the researcher focuses too much on individual factors rather than the interaction between them. Third, the exploratory nature of the research does not yet allow to generalise the outcomes. Hence, further research is necessary to improve the quality and applicability of the framework. Keywords: conflict studies, irregular armed conflict, conflict dynamics, the Israeli Independence War, the Lebanese Civil War, the Namibian Independence War, the Sri Lankan Civil War. 3 TABLE OF CONTENT Abstract ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Table of content ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 6 2. Literature review ................................................................................................................................................. 8 2.1. Conflict emergence ...................................................................................................................................... 9 2.2. Changes in conflict dynamics: escalation and de-escalation ..................................................................... 15 2.3. Dispute settlement and conflict resolution ................................................................................................. 25 2.4 Conflict theory ............................................................................................................................................ 27 2.5 Conceptualisations ...................................................................................................................................... 32 3. Methodology ..................................................................................................................................................... 42 3.1 Quantitative or qualitative methods ............................................................................................................ 42 3.2 Comparative historical analysis .................................................................................................................. 44 3.3 Single case study or comparative case studies ............................................................................................ 44 3.4 Empirical or theoretical case studies ........................................................................................................... 45 3.5 Method of data-gathering............................................................................................................................ 46 3.6 Analytical framework ................................................................................................................................. 47 3.7 Case selection ............................................................................................................................................. 58 3.8 The utility of using phases .......................................................................................................................... 63 4. The Israeli Independence War ........................................................................................................................... 64 4.1 Introduction: ............................................................................................................................................... 64 4.2 Case Descrition ........................................................................................................................................... 65 4.2.1 Prologue: .................................................................................................................................................. 65 4.2.2 Phase 1: No resolution ............................................................................................................................. 78 4.2.3 Phase 2: Terror in Palestine ..................................................................................................................... 87 4.2.4 Phase 3: Civil War in Palestine ................................................................................................................ 96 4.2.5 Phase 4: The Jewish Offensive .............................................................................................................. 102 4.2.6 Phase 5: Interstate war of 1948 .............................................................................................................. 110 4.2.7 Epilogue: ................................................................................................................................................ 127 4.3 Analysis: ................................................................................................................................................... 129 4.4 Conclusion: ............................................................................................................................................... 139 5. Comparative analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 142 5.1 Context...................................................................................................................................................... 142 5.2 State .......................................................................................................................................................... 149 5.3 Non-state ................................................................................................................................................... 153 6. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................................... 156 6.1 Context...................................................................................................................................................... 156 4 6.2 State .......................................................................................................................................................... 157 6.3 Non-state ................................................................................................................................................... 158 6.4 Analytical framework ............................................................................................................................... 159 7. Discussion ....................................................................................................................................................... 161 8. Bibliography.................................................................................................................................................... 163 Appendix A ......................................................................................................................................................... 172 The international actors .................................................................................................................................. 172 Jewish actors ................................................................................................................................................... 172 The main Arab actors ...................................................................................................................................... 175 5 1. INTRODUCTION The post-cold war world has been marked by a number of high profile irregular wars, starting with the Balkan wars during the 1990s, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan during the 2000s and the ‘Arab Spring’ or ‘Arab Revolt’ that began in 2010. The total number of conflicts is high. This research will focus on identifying the factors driving the dynamics of irregular armed conflicts. In other words, what factors drive the escalation and de-escalation of a conflict? Post-Napoleonic interstate wars receive a lot of research attention from scholars, who research the mechanisms and variations of conflicts, which contributes to developing the academic discipline. Irregular armed conflicts on the contrary, are less studied and draw less attention in the scholarly debate. Notwithstanding, the body of knowledge on irregular armed conflicts is evolving and growing. Most of the research focuses on causes and reasons of conflict. Limited research focuses on the mechanisms that influence de-escalation of the conflict. The least research has been done on the dynamics of irregular armed conflict. This appears to be an under-researched topic. Irregular armed conflicts are often complex occurrences and scholars attempting to analyse modern day irregular armed conflicts are prone to failure. The academic literature demonstrates a gap of knowledge with regard to a holistic analytical framework. Previous research, focusing on single drivers and their effects, often analysed a small number of cases or even a single case. This research project attempts to contribute to narrowing the knowledge gap in irregular armed conflicts dynamics. New insights of the factors influencing the dynamics of conflict might contribute to more effective policies regarding irregular armed conflicts. Politicians, policymakers and NGO’s might benefit from an improved understanding of the effect of actions and policy. Additionally, the research aims to offer insights to future scholars exploring the subject, and analysts working in the field of irregular armed conflicts. The central research question is: what causal mechanisms drive the dynamics of escalation and de-escalation of irregular armed conflicts? The research consists of a comparative historical case study. Four historical cases are selected, researched and analysed, followed by a comparative analysis. The following cases have been selected for reasons that will be explained in a subsequent section: the Israeli independence war, the Lebanese civil war, the Namibian independence war, and the Sri Lankan civil war. 6 This thesis is structured as follows: first, an extensive literature review is provided, which offers a broad overview of the existing academic literature on conflict studies and, more specifically, on approaches used to research the emergence and termination of conflicts. Subsequently, the methodology chapter discusses, amongst others, the methodological choices, the method of data gathering and the case selection. It will also present the analytical framework that has been developed. This is followed by the case description and analysis of the Israeli independence war. The other individual cases are not included in this document. After this, the main findings of the comparative analysis are presented. The thesis concludes with several comments on the findings of the comparative analysis, and the discussion, in which is reflected upon the limitations of the analytical framework and recommendations for future research. 7 2. LITERATURE REVIEW The review of the extensive body of literature on conflicts indicates that the Cold War is a turning point in the history of conflict studies. The occurrence of conventional wars with states fighting states, such as World War II, diminished over time. Simultaneously, another type of conflict characterises the post-Cold War period: unconventional conflicts (also called irregular armed conflicts or civil wars). Despite the fact that civil wars have been the most common type of armed conflict since the 19th and 20th century, experts on conflict studies were focusing mainly on interstate warfare during the Cold War period. In the 1990s, a wave of civil conflicts took place (see figure 1) that, in combination with the end of the Cold War, shifted the focus of conflict studies (Duyvesteyn, 2012, p. 601). Ever since, irregular armed conflicts have increasingly received attention from scholars, which leads to a wide range of literature, theories and conceptualisations. All this research aims to find out what factors cause conflicts and, to a smaller extent, what factors explain their dynamics (Ouellet & Pahlavi, 2011; Pahlavi & Ouellet, 2012; Fearon & Laitin, 2003). Figure 1. Number and percentage of countries with ongoing civil wars by year from 1945 to 1999 (Fearon & Laitin, 2003, p. 77). 8 2.1. CONFLICT EMERGENCE 2.1.1. GREED AND GRIEVANCE The growing number of unconventional conflicts raised an interesting question: what causes these conflicts? The conceptual distinction between greed and grievance instigated probably one of the most influential theoretical debates in conflict studies. Paul Collier analysed statistical data of civil wars since the mid-1960s and concluded in 1999 that the grievance- based explanations of civil war were invalid. He argued that, in order to understand the causes of civil war, the focus should be on greed aspects (Berdal, 2005, p. 687). The greed thesis of Collier defines the circumstances under which greed driven wars are likely to break out, namely: a state that relies on primary commodity exports, in which the unemployment rate is high, and young, poorly educated men are in abundance. If such a state also experiences a period of rapid economic decline, a conflict is likely to break out. However, unconventional conflicts cannot be explained by economic factors only. They interact with grievances of socio-economic and political nature, which triggers the outburst of warfare (Berdal, 2005, p. 691). Grievance can cause a conflict when state actions fuel feelings of grievance among a minority population. For instance, when a minority group experiences a high level of exploitation for a long time, they can be tempted to start a rebellion. The grievances can be political, caused by, for instance, the absence of suffrage, but also economic and social of nature (Collier & Sambanis, 2002, p. 4; Fearon & Laitin, 2003, p. 88). 2.1.2. GREED OR GRIEVANCE A new perspective on conflict dynamics is given by Paul Collier and Nicholas Sambanis, who performed 18 case studies of internal insurgencies. Collier and Hoeffler, like Fearon and Laitin (2003), concluded that there is a significant correlation between a country's dependency on primary commodity export and civil war, and the role of the ethnicity. The findings of Collier and Sambanis suggested that these conclusions needed to be revised. In short, their research indicated that "resource predation might be the result of pure ‘greed’ or only a side product of ‘grievance" (Tarrow, 2007, p. 595). This led to a clear, twofold conclusion. First, resource predation is not a correlation but a mechanism. Second, the correlation between the presence of natural resources and civil war is compatible with several alternative mechanisms (Tarrow, 2007, p. 595). Collier and Sambanis’ other major finding relates to the issue of ethnicity and its role in triggering civil war. In contrast to earlier quantitative studies, which 9 suggested that ethnic fractionation was not important in triggering civil war, several of their case studies led to different results. When ethnicity is operationalised into ethnic fractionation and ethnic dominance, the former can even contribute to peace by increasing the costs of coordinating rebellion across ethnic lines, whereas the latter can increase the risk of civil war. Tarrow (2007) explained this contradicting finding by using the work of Collier and Sambanis, and other researchers to define three possible mechanisms: mutual recognition between members of the same and/or different ethnic groups; fear of victimisation or exclusion, especially when ethnic divisions overlap with class cleavages; and civil society segmentation or interaction, where ethnic differences are bridged by instrumental interdependencies among ethnic groups, and their interactions undercut political entrepreneurs’ calls for ethnic mobilisation (2007, p. 595). In addition to resource predation and ethnicity, Collier and Sambanis indicated other possible relevant factors that might complicate the analysis. Examples are neighbourhood and spill-over effects, as a nearby insurgency might spread to countries whose internal indicators did not predict disturbances. Furthermore, civil wars may be part of regional cycles of violence (Tarrow, 2007, p. 595). Finally, Collier and Sambanis promoted the following hypothesis: "government repression increases opposition and, if repression is incomplete, it can lead to violence" (Collier and Sambanis, 2003, vol. 1, p. 318, referred by Tarrow 2007, p. 595). 2.1.3. WEAK AND FAILED STATES Fearon and Laitin wrote that decolonisation creates financially, bureaucratically and militarily weak states. Poverty, state weakness, instability and large populations are factors that increase the risk of insurgent wars. They argued that these factors are better predictors of insurgent wars than ethnic or religious diversity, or measures of grievances such as economic inequality, lack of democracy or civil liberties, or state discrimination. They concluded that economic growth may only correlate to a limited extent with civil wars, but that the best chance for preventing civil wars is to make sure that the government is well-financed and administratively competent (2003, p. 88). Rotberg focused on the dynamics of nation-state failure. A state fails due to internal violence and the inability to ensure political goods to the public (2010, p. 10). The government loses its legitimacy, and the public does no longer see the nation state as legitimate. Rotberg distinguished strong from weak states. The capacity of a state is defined by the level of effective delivery of political goods to the public. Strong states have control over their 10