Last summer we asked our readers to submit their questions about political violence for our contributors to take a crack at. We’d now like to do the same, again. Got a question about political violence and conflict? Submit your questions in the comments, and our team of contributors will try and answer. We will post the answer to the first question we’ve chosen next week.
You May Also Like
Viewpoint: Is Military Aid Really the Best Way to Help Ukraine?
- May 3, 2023
Guest post by Alexandre Christoyannopoulos, Molly Wallace, and Ned Dobos Ukraine has received tens of billions of dollars…
Weekly Links
- July 25, 2014
By Danny Hirschel-Burns The conflict in Gaza has renewed focus on Israel’s military strategy. Zack Beauchamp demonstrates that…
Weekly Links
- May 8, 2014
By Taylor Marvin On the mass kidnapping of Nigerian schoolgirls by the insurgent group Boko Haram, a crime that…
Duckies, Duckies Everywhere!
- April 19, 2013
By Barbara F. Walter Our bribes and blatant bragging worked. Recently PV @ a Glance was awarded the…
Weekly Links
- April 3, 2015
By Sarah Bakhtiari What’s on the table in the Iranian nuclear agreement—errr, in the joint comprehensive plan of…
Weekly Links
- August 5, 2013
By Taylor Marvin Al Qaeda’s Syrian recruits: the case of ‘Abu Majed’. “What draws fighters to such Islamist jihadist groups…
0 comments
1. What reforms should policy makers enact according to the peace and conflict literature you think is the most convincing in order to save greatest number of innocents’ lives?
2.What peace and conflict research do you think is the most groundbreaking of the last decade, and why?
How true is the assertion that drones actually have lower civilian death rates than more traditional methods? Is it even fair to make the comparison because it is so much easier for drones to hit targets than ground forces?
Why do different public agencies define terrorism differently? Would we be better off having a single definition?
Why does war not break out in cases in which, according to existing theories of civil war onset, violence technically should break out? In other words: why is there peace when we would expect war? (Other than GDP/per capita)
Does the level of ethnic fragmentation within a country affect the level of violence when conflict breaks out? Using the Arab Spring revolutions as case studies, can this possible association explain the varying degrees of conflict (from nonvoilent in some countries to very violent in others) witnessed throughout the Middle East and North Africa?
Along similar lines, does a minority group in a position of power predict higher levels of violence in suppressing popular anti-government revolutions? Was Syria’s initially nonviolent revolution thus doomed from the start? In such cases, I would think that high-level defections of important pillars of support for the ruling coalition (business elites, military officials, etc.) would be fewer and farther between, due to enhanced fear of reprisals from other ethnic groups not in power. Violent repression would thus persist and even increase on behalf of the government as it desperately hangs on to power, and the opposition would never truly benefit from military defections that could swing the chances of successful revolution in their favor.