Political Research Exchange

Political Violence and the State

Comparative Politics
Contentious Politics
Ethnic Conflict
Human Rights
Political Violence
Political Sociology
Section Number
Section Chair
Niall O Dochartaigh
National University of Ireland, Galway
Section Co-Chair
Stefan Malthaner
Hamburg Institute for Social Research (HIS)

The Section addresses the multi-faceted and complex role of the state in processes of armed conflict as well as the state-building practices and aspirations of insurgents. Political violence is intrinsically connected to the state. Not only do many militant or insurgent groups address, challenge, or seek to overturn governments, but violence is also a defining element of state practices and institutions.

Repressive reactions to oppositional movements, coercive forms of social exclusion and control, and military interventions can drive processes of escalation and radicalization. Political violence, in other words, typically emerges from interactions between oppositional groups and state actors.

Yet the notion of the state as a coherent, monolithic entity is too simplistic. What is commonly referred to as “the state” comprises networks of local and central actors and institutions, collaborating and competing in various ways, and forming alliances with business elites, social movements, or other societal groups to further their interests. The boundaries between state and private actors, legal and illegal activities, and public and private resources can become blurred or cease to exist. While, in some cases, this phenomenon has its roots in incomplete processes of monopolizing and centralizing the means of legitimate coercion, in other cases, it is the increasing privatization and commodification of security that undermines the state’s supposed control over violence. Alternative forms of governance and control emerge at the margins or in the shadows of official state institutions. Moreover, the state is also itself transformed in processes of political violence. Its legitimacy and political institutions may suffer. Ruling parties, institutions, and public discourse can radicalize in confrontation with, and in parallel with, the radicalization of oppositional movements. And over the course of violent conflicts military tasks are sometimes delegated to informal death-squads, paramilitary groups, or local “self-defense” committees, with hybrid actors emerging at it the state’s boundaries.

There is also another side to the role of the state. Oppositional groups not only challenge an incumbent government, they also seek to build a new state, by seceding or transforming the political order. Even when not able to militarily control an area, insurgent groups often seek to clandestinely control parts of a population, using forms of political mobilization, coercion, and social authority and control. Political violence, in other words, involves rebel governance as a state-building practice and some violent conflicts end ultimately with the capture of the state, or the creation of a new state, by insurgent groups.

Panel List

P082Dealing with the Past I: How States Deal with the Memory and Legacies of Political Violence View Panel Details
P083Dealing with the Past II: Memories of Political Violence View Panel Details
P137Former Combatants, De-Radicalisation and the State - co-sponsored with S56 View Panel Details
P142From Rebellion to the Emergence of Quasi-states. Alternative Modes of Governance among Jihadi-Salafist Groups View Panel Details
P229Militant Mobilisation and the State View Panel Details
P242Negotiations, Peace Processes, and Violence View Panel Details
P253Paramilitaries, Militias, and Self-defense Groups: The Fluid Boundary between State and non-state Armed Actors View Panel Details
P312Rebel Governance, Alternative Orders, and Contested Sovereignty View Panel Details
P313Recent Trends in European Counterterrorism: A Comparative Perspective View Panel Details
Share this page

"Politics determines the process of "who gets what, when, and how"" - Harold Lasswell

Back to top