Ethnic defection in civil war

The study of civil war has often neglected the role of ethnicity and its construction. This paper examines the relationship between ethnic identity and civil war and points to several empirical instances of variability in the behavioural expression of ethnic identities within civil war.

The paper argues that irregular war is a social process that places a premium on territorial control. In particular, the paper highlights two processes - identity shifts and ethnic defection which are consistent with a constructionist approach.

The author finds that:

• at the micro-level, ethnic defection is best predicted by the extent of territorial control exercised by the incumbent political actor and the level of prior insurgent violence
• at the macro-level, ethnic defection is a function of the resources available to incumbent actors.

The paper draws out a number of implications from the findings for the study of conflict:

• treating ethnic groups as unitary actors, whose leaders and members all act homogeneously, can be problematic
• it is problematic to assume that the factors used to predict civil war outcomes such as their duration or termination are independent of the war itself.

The paper concludes that while individuals may enter a civil war with a set of goals or grievances, many individuals enter the war long after it has started, driven by incentives and constraints that are by-products of the war and result from innovative and adaptive strategies devised by the rival actors in the course of the conflict.