Political hierarchies and landscapes of conflict across Africa

Almost all African states experience substantial and widespread political insecurity in a variety of forms. This analysis explains how relationships between groups and governments create incentives and disincentives for distinct forms of political violence to emerge. It argues that ethno-regional communities across Africa are situated within a power hierarchy that determines their relative importance to, and inclusion in, regimes. A dynamic power landscape emerges from relative group positions. Various positions within a hierarchy are associated with particular dominant forms of organized political violence as groups challenge political elites, but are bounded by their goals and characteristics. A failure to consider the political hierarchies and landscapes operating within African states has led to an under specification of the causal mechanisms driving different forms of violence, and an overstatement of benefits from declining civil war rates and inclusive governing coalitions. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Almost all African states experience substantial and widespread political insecurity in a variety of forms throughout their territory (Raleigh, Linke, Hegre,& Carlsen, 2010). This analysis highlights the variety in, and explanations for, political violence. It argues that ethno-regional communities across Africa are situated within a power hierarchy that determines their relative importance to, and inclusion in, regimes; these relative group positions create a dynamic power landscape. Positions within governance hierarchies are associated with a dominant form of conflict as relationships between governments and groups create incentives and disincentives for distinct forms of political violence. A failure to consider the political hierarchies and landscapes operating within African states has led to an under specification of the causal mechanisms driving different forms of violence, and an overstatement of benefits from declining civil war rates and inclusive governing coalitions. Many conflict researchers explore explanations for conflict variation and occurrence. Studies distinguish whether states experience a ‘revolutionary’ or ‘separatist’ civil war (Buhaug, 2006); whether communal or ‘livelihood’ violence is triggered by environmental change (Raleigh, 2010a; Raleigh & Kniveton, 2012; Straus, 2011); or how ‘warlord’ violence, characterized by high rates of criminal activity and violence against civilians (see Bates, 2008; Reno, 1998), is the basis of the ‘new war’ thesis (Kaldor, 1999). The underlying motive often differentiates violence: the greed versus grievance literature proposes that ‘sons of the soil’ contests (Fearon, 2006) differ from those aiming to control the state and access rents and resources (Collier & Hoeffler, 2002, 2004; Le Billon, 2001). Recent research suggests that a key source of heterogeneity in civil wars is rebellion technology, itself a function of the relative balance of power between opponents (Kalyvas & Balcells, 2010). Violence types differ on levels of public support, funding sources (Weinstein, 2007), or by the use of child soldiers and sexual violence (see Dixon, 2009). These studies further our understanding about how specific forms of violence are produced, but no explanation yet offers specific distinctions between types of violence, how those forms are deliberately shaped by groups, found in specific locations, and strategically scaled on the local, regional and national levels. Using present theories of conflict, how and why multiple forms of violence emerge in countries such as DRCongo, Nigeria and Kenya is unexplained. This is a quite serious limitation. This article argues that multiple, distinct forms of political violence co-occur within states but have limited rates of spatial overlap. Heterogeneous violence is a result of subnational political processes that triggers its emergence. A broad definition of political violence allows for an examination into its heterogeneity, spatial characteristics and variation in occurrence. ‘Political violence’ is the use of force by a group with a political purpose or motivation, often designed to secure resources, and access or alter paths to power. A key determinant of African political violence is that political, ethnic, religious or regional groups and areas are targeted. For the purpose of this analysis, non-state political violence is classified into three forms: civil wars, militia violence, and communal conflict. These forms differ based on E-mail address: [email protected].