Explaining non-state armed groups perpetration of mass atrocity crimes
Lead Research Organisation:
University of York
Department Name: Politics
Abstract
Since 2010, there has been a 'dramatic resurgence' of violent conflict around the world (United Nations, 2018, p. v). As part of this trend, mass atrocity crimes, defined as genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing (GWCE), have become 'the new normal' (Human Rights Watch 2018). At this time of writing, the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (GCR2P) identifies seven countries that are 'currently' experiencing GWCE, three at 'imminent risk', seven of 'serious concern', and thirteen being 'monitored' because they have experienced GWCE in the recent past (Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect 2019). These crises have seen millions of people killed, tens of thousands raped, and underpin an unprecedented refugee crisis. Although mass violence is not a new phenomenon, non-state armed groups such as Al Qaeda, Islamic State, Boko Haram, Lord's Resistance Army, and Al-Shabaab are increasingly playing a critical role in the perpetration of atrocity crimes leading to key policymakers calling for urgent research on this specific threat (see case for support).
Responding to this new reality, the project answers the following primary research question: under what conditions do non-state armed groups perpetrate GWCE? The funding will enable us to develop the first dataset in the world that collects systematic evidence on non-state armed groups perpetrating GWCE, which we call 'correlates of non-state mass atrocities' (CONMA). To do this, we will analyse six countries and three themes. The former refers to the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Nigeria, Syria and Somalia. The latter focuses on i) interactions, for example, between the non-state armed group[s] themselves, other actors such as the government, and external actors such as UN peacekeepers, ii) local factors, for instance, geography, economics, population density, as well as natural resources, and iii) group characteristics, such as age, ideology, and external support.
The scientific impact develops in three stages. First, the unique dataset 'CONMA' will provide the necessary information to run statistical analysis to explain why, when, and where mass atrocities happen in our six chosen countries. Second, we will develop hypothesis based on our three themes that can be tested through future academic inquiry. Third, the project seeks to drive forward quantitative research into the causes of non-state armed groups perpetrating mass violence. This advance in knowledge will allow us to provide policy recommendations in order to improve international, regional, and national strategies toward mass atrocity prevention with a specific focus on policymakers in the United Nations (UN), the European Union (EU), the United Kingdom (UK), and Africa (the four case study governments and organisations such as the African Union).
We will work with three project partners, GCR2P (New York and Geneva), Aegis Trust (Kigali), and Protection Approaches (London), as well as an advisory board consisting of Alex Bellamy, Gyorgy Tatar, Ivan Simonovic, Karen E. Smith, and Kristian Skrede Gleditsch. As part of our impact strategy, we will hold end of project workshops in London, New York, and Kigali.
Outputs will include i) publicly available dataset and codebook, ii) six articles in high ranking journals, iii) an Analysis Framework for the United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the RtoP, iv) co-created policy reports with each project partner focusing on the UN, the UK, the EU, and African mass atrocity prevention strategies, v) blogposts, vi) infographics, and vii) presentations at conferences and policy-orientated meetings.
Responding to this new reality, the project answers the following primary research question: under what conditions do non-state armed groups perpetrate GWCE? The funding will enable us to develop the first dataset in the world that collects systematic evidence on non-state armed groups perpetrating GWCE, which we call 'correlates of non-state mass atrocities' (CONMA). To do this, we will analyse six countries and three themes. The former refers to the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Nigeria, Syria and Somalia. The latter focuses on i) interactions, for example, between the non-state armed group[s] themselves, other actors such as the government, and external actors such as UN peacekeepers, ii) local factors, for instance, geography, economics, population density, as well as natural resources, and iii) group characteristics, such as age, ideology, and external support.
The scientific impact develops in three stages. First, the unique dataset 'CONMA' will provide the necessary information to run statistical analysis to explain why, when, and where mass atrocities happen in our six chosen countries. Second, we will develop hypothesis based on our three themes that can be tested through future academic inquiry. Third, the project seeks to drive forward quantitative research into the causes of non-state armed groups perpetrating mass violence. This advance in knowledge will allow us to provide policy recommendations in order to improve international, regional, and national strategies toward mass atrocity prevention with a specific focus on policymakers in the United Nations (UN), the European Union (EU), the United Kingdom (UK), and Africa (the four case study governments and organisations such as the African Union).
We will work with three project partners, GCR2P (New York and Geneva), Aegis Trust (Kigali), and Protection Approaches (London), as well as an advisory board consisting of Alex Bellamy, Gyorgy Tatar, Ivan Simonovic, Karen E. Smith, and Kristian Skrede Gleditsch. As part of our impact strategy, we will hold end of project workshops in London, New York, and Kigali.
Outputs will include i) publicly available dataset and codebook, ii) six articles in high ranking journals, iii) an Analysis Framework for the United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the RtoP, iv) co-created policy reports with each project partner focusing on the UN, the UK, the EU, and African mass atrocity prevention strategies, v) blogposts, vi) infographics, and vii) presentations at conferences and policy-orientated meetings.
Planned Impact
The project will contribute towards evidence based policy-making focusing on international, regional, and national mass atrocity prevention strategies. The recommendations will enable policymakers to have a better understanding of early warning indicators as well as improving their knowledge of where to allocate resources.
United Nations (UN)
I. Office on the Prevention of Genocide and the RtoP.
The research speaks to the core mandate of the Office which is made up of a small team of staff that lack the resources to conduct large scale research projects. Despite its size, the Office has significant influence as it creates 'Analysis Frameworks' that are used to train policymakers at the international, regional, and national level. We will create the first Framework of Analysis focusing on non-state armed groups which will identify new risk and trigger factors.
II. The UN Special Advisors on Genocide Prevention and the RtoP.
The advisors play a critical role in shaping international, regional, and national approaches. Specifically, they write the UN Secretary General's annual report on the RtoP which is discussed in the UN General Assembly. The reports incorporate input from experts and we will work with the Advisors to write our findings into an annual report.
III. We will also seek to have impact on other parts of the UN such as Peacekeeping, Political Affairs, and Human Rights Council. For example, the sub-national data will evidence the impact that the presence of UN Peacekeepers has on non-state armed groups perpetrating GWCE.
Regional and national level decision makers, especially in the UK, the EU, and Africa
I. The UK is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and commits itself to playing a critical role in mass atrocity prevention. Problematically, the UK Government's conflict prevention strategy has a mass atrocity blind spot (see case for support). The project's policy recommendations will strengthen the UK Government's ability to identify areas of high risk at an early stage.
II. The EU. The European External Action Service has developed an EU toolkit on mass atrocity prevention. The Co-I was a roundtable discussant at the pre-launch (October 2018) alongside Roberta Dirosa (Policy Officer on RtoP at the European External Action Service). The project will allow us to identify new risk and trigger factors that can either be written into a revised EU Toolkit or act as a supplementary set of policy recommendations.
III. Africa. We will focus on the four governments from the case studies chosen as well as regional organisations such as the African Union and its member states as these are heavily involved in Somalia, CAR, the DRC, and Nigeria. The sub-national country specific data will provide unique insight into where to allocate resources within the four countries. The project will also allow policymakers to consider how the findings may be applicable to other countries in Africa.
RtoP networks & NGOs
The research speaks to the core purpose of the following networks & NGOs. The findings will benefit those directly engaged in the six case studies, provide insight for those tackling non-state armed groups in their own countries, and identify new indicators for those seeking to pressure actors to act early.
I. RtoP Focal Points. 61 countries and two regions (the EU) have appointed an RtoP Focal Point who are senior level officials responsible for the promotion of RtoP at the national level.
II. Global Action Against Mass Atrocity Crimes (GAAMAC), which brings together governments, international and regional organisations, civil society, and academia with the stated objective of preventing GWCE.
III. Group of Friends on the RtoP (51 countries).
IV International Atrocity Prevention Working Group (7 countries).
V. NGOs. Apart from project partners, we prioritise i) UNA-UK, and ii) The International Coalition of the RtoP because of their influence on the actors identified above.
United Nations (UN)
I. Office on the Prevention of Genocide and the RtoP.
The research speaks to the core mandate of the Office which is made up of a small team of staff that lack the resources to conduct large scale research projects. Despite its size, the Office has significant influence as it creates 'Analysis Frameworks' that are used to train policymakers at the international, regional, and national level. We will create the first Framework of Analysis focusing on non-state armed groups which will identify new risk and trigger factors.
II. The UN Special Advisors on Genocide Prevention and the RtoP.
The advisors play a critical role in shaping international, regional, and national approaches. Specifically, they write the UN Secretary General's annual report on the RtoP which is discussed in the UN General Assembly. The reports incorporate input from experts and we will work with the Advisors to write our findings into an annual report.
III. We will also seek to have impact on other parts of the UN such as Peacekeeping, Political Affairs, and Human Rights Council. For example, the sub-national data will evidence the impact that the presence of UN Peacekeepers has on non-state armed groups perpetrating GWCE.
Regional and national level decision makers, especially in the UK, the EU, and Africa
I. The UK is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and commits itself to playing a critical role in mass atrocity prevention. Problematically, the UK Government's conflict prevention strategy has a mass atrocity blind spot (see case for support). The project's policy recommendations will strengthen the UK Government's ability to identify areas of high risk at an early stage.
II. The EU. The European External Action Service has developed an EU toolkit on mass atrocity prevention. The Co-I was a roundtable discussant at the pre-launch (October 2018) alongside Roberta Dirosa (Policy Officer on RtoP at the European External Action Service). The project will allow us to identify new risk and trigger factors that can either be written into a revised EU Toolkit or act as a supplementary set of policy recommendations.
III. Africa. We will focus on the four governments from the case studies chosen as well as regional organisations such as the African Union and its member states as these are heavily involved in Somalia, CAR, the DRC, and Nigeria. The sub-national country specific data will provide unique insight into where to allocate resources within the four countries. The project will also allow policymakers to consider how the findings may be applicable to other countries in Africa.
RtoP networks & NGOs
The research speaks to the core purpose of the following networks & NGOs. The findings will benefit those directly engaged in the six case studies, provide insight for those tackling non-state armed groups in their own countries, and identify new indicators for those seeking to pressure actors to act early.
I. RtoP Focal Points. 61 countries and two regions (the EU) have appointed an RtoP Focal Point who are senior level officials responsible for the promotion of RtoP at the national level.
II. Global Action Against Mass Atrocity Crimes (GAAMAC), which brings together governments, international and regional organisations, civil society, and academia with the stated objective of preventing GWCE.
III. Group of Friends on the RtoP (51 countries).
IV International Atrocity Prevention Working Group (7 countries).
V. NGOs. Apart from project partners, we prioritise i) UNA-UK, and ii) The International Coalition of the RtoP because of their influence on the actors identified above.
| Description | We hired six coders for twelve months (one of them left the project so we had to re-hire) but essentially, these complete the data collection in June 2022. We will then analyse the data and produce the research findings which we can then use for outputs and impact. |
| Exploitation Route | As we explained in our pathways to impact The overarching aim is to improve existing international, regional, and national approaches to mass atrocity prevention by providing policymakers with new early warning indicators thus helping them to effectively allocate resources. During research design process (2017-2019), we discussed the project (including questions, case studies, and objectives) with project partners, advisory board, and the policymakers identified below. This knowledge exchange helped us create specific impact objectives and pathways for each beneficiary, but we will also work to maximise impact by working to create and respond to new opportunities as they arise. To facilitate this, we will disseminate infographics at the start and end of the project to help communicate key information in an accessible manner. We will also hold three end of project workshops in New York, London, and Kigali. The United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect Objective: create a 'Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes Perpetrated by Non-State Armed Groups' to be used by the UN, Member States, NGOs, and academics. We discussed the project with Mario Buil-Merce (Political Affairs Officer) who noted 'the country situations you list are indeed very relevant to our mandate' and is willing to contribute to discussions throughout. In month one, we will meet Mario Buil-Merce and Gillean Kitley (Senior Officer) in New York to gain further insight into their policy needs. We will hold follow up Skype meetings and in the data analysis phase meet them to present preliminary findings (two case studies) to evidence the utility of the project. A short term impact measure will be if they allow us to produce the aforementioned Framework which we would then launch at the end of project workshop. If not, we will seek to have our policy recommendations written into a future version of the Framework or act as a supplementary report. In the medium and long-term we will evaluate whether this Framework is being used by the UN, Member States, NGOs and academics by liaising with the Office who has data on implementation. Throughout this period, we will work with Simon Adams (project partner) to make new impact opportunities arise with other UN Departments (Peacekeeping, Political Affairs, and Human Rights Council). We will offer to write policy briefs and invite them to the workshop. The United Nations Special Advisors on Genocide Prevention and the RtoP Objective: write our conclusions into one of the UN Secretary-General's annual reports on the RtoP. These are written by the Special Advisors with input from experts and debated in the UN General Assembly. The ECR2P Co-Director Cristina Stefan (alongside the Co-I) wrote sections of the 2017 annual report. We have discussed the project with the newly appointed RtoP Special Advisor, Karen Smith, who described it as 'both interesting and groundbreaking'. The three impact trips to New York will allow us to meet both Special Advisors (Adama Dieng and Karen Smith) at the start, middle, and end of the project to discuss how our findings can be incorporated into an annual report in 2023 or 2024. The PI and Co-I will work with Ivan Šimonovic, Alex Bellamy (advisory board) and Cristina Stefan as they have written these reports in the past. To evidence impact, we will first establish whether our results feature in an annual report. Furthermore, because representatives submit written statements as part of the General Assembly debate, we can then assess whether they specifically refer to our research. UK Government Objective: improve the UK Government's mass atrocity prevention strategy. The Government's 'stabilisation strategy' sets out to prevent conflict worldwide but suffers from a mass atrocity blind spot (case for support). The Co-I met with James Kariuki (the newly appointed Multilateral Policy Director and UK RtoP Focal Point) in April 2019 who is drafting a UK mass atrocity prevention strategy and expresses a need for sub-national data. Working with Kate Ferguson and James Smith (project partners), we will travel to London to meet key stakeholders in the first month such as James Kariuki and Tom Tugendhat MP (Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity as well as the Foreign Affairs Select Committee) to further understand their policy needs. We will hold follow up meetings to present preliminary research in order to evidence how the findings can improve UK mass atrocity prevention. We will co-author a major report with Dr Ferguson outlining policy recommendations for the UK and EU, which will be launched at the workshop. The Co-I has discussed the workshop with RUSI and the funding will enable us to hold it at Whitehall thus helping to secure the involvement of beneficiaries from the UK and the EU, RtoP Focal Points, and NGOs. To measure impact we will evaluate whether our results feature in future versions of the stabilisation strategy or a UK mass atrocity prevention approach. The EU (European External Action Service, RtoP Focal Points, and member states) Objective: inform the EU's Toolkit on Mass Atrocity Prevention. The three trips to Brussels will allow us, first, to meet with stakeholders (including Roberta Dirosa and the EU RtoP Focal Point, Christian Leffler) to explain more about the project and better understand their policy requirements. Second, present preliminary findings to show how the research can be used to inform the EU Toolkit. Third, present the co-authored report with Protection Approaches outlining recommendations for the EU. We will invite EU beneficiaries to the London workshop. During this process we will work with Karen E. Smith (advisory board) to enhance the potential impact at the EU. To measure medium-term impact we will evaluate whether we can provide a supplementary report or write our results into a revised version of the Toolkit. In the long-term we will assess whether the EU and member states are using these findings in their regional and national approaches, for example, by contacting RtoP Focal Points. Policymakers and practitioners in Africa Objective: improve mass atrocity prevention strategies with a specific focus on the four case study governments, the African Union and the Economic Community of West African States. Since we cannot travel to the four countries we will work with James Smith (project partner) and Gregory Tatar (advisory board) in three ways. First, hold meetings in the first month to gain an understanding of what policy needs we can address. Second, work with them to disseminate preliminary research (two case studies) to stakeholders. Third, utilise their network links to secure the participation of relevant research users at the Kigali workshop. A medium term measure of impact will be whether the stakeholders engage with our research i.e., ask us to write policy briefs. A long-term measure of success will be if they utilise our policy recommendations in the future. Responsibility to Protect Networks Objective: use these networks to influence regional and national mass atrocity prevention strategies. The RtoP Focal Point Network: The PI and Co-I will attend their annual meeting to raise awareness of the project and present research conclusions (2023). Although the focus is on six countries, our results may highlight predictors that are relevant to their specific needs. We will also invite RtoP Focal Points to the end of project impact workshops. A long-term measure of success will be whether the RtoP Focal Points incorporate our results into their respective national strategies. The Co-I will assess this by attending annual meetings in 2024-2027. Global Action Against Mass Atrocity Crimes (GAAMAC): The PI and Co-I will attend in spring 2023 to raise awareness of the project and present research findings. We will proactively work to write policy briefs and a long-term measure of impact will be whether our findings feature in their future prevention approaches. For example, the RtoP Group of Friends attend GAAMAC and this provides us with a chance to create new avenues for impact. International Atrocity Prevention Working Group. Consisting of the US, UK, Germany, Australia, Denmark, Netherlands, and Canada. The Co-I attended a meeting in 2019 where they expressed a critical need for in-country data. The Co-I will utilise this group to create further opportunities for impact and assess whether these states are incorporating our conclusions into their national strategies. NGOs Objective: encourage NGOs to use our research as they pressure organizations such as the UN and governments to fulfil their RtoP. We will also invite them to attend one of the impact workshops. The United Nations Association UK (UNA-UK) The Co-I co-supervises a PhD with Fred Carver (Head of Policy) and will meet Fred Carver during the first trip to London. We will ask UNA-UK to disseminate the infographics to their network of over 20,000 members to build awareness (first infographic) and disseminate research findings (second infographic) in order to foster new impact opportunities. The International Coalition for the RtoP (ICRtoP) brings together NGOs from all regions of the world and disseminates reports to government officials and civil society. We will work with advisor, Alex Bellamy (ICRtoP Steering Committee), to disseminate the first infographic to raise awareness of the research and the final infographic to foster opportunities for medium and long-term impact. |
| Sectors | Government, Democracy and Justice |
| Title | Correlates of Non-state Mass Atrocities (CONMA) |
| Description | This data collection is ongoing. The following number report the progress in what the team of coders have read through in terms of Nexis news articles and how many data points (observations) the number of reports has generated. The numbers are relatively low for Somalia given that we needed to hire a new coder for that case. This is the current data collection situation across 12 different variables (mass atrocity event types): Nigeria (149113 reports/1001 events); Syria (333600 reports/664 events); Somalia (23214 reports/160 events); CAR (104186 reports/639 events); DRC (41486 reports/212 events); Iraq (168933 reports/401 events). |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2021 |
| Provided To Others? | No |
| Impact | N/A- this is still ongoing. |
| Description | Meeting with co-chair of the Group of Friends of Responsibility to Protect |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | We had a private meeting with Ivan Šimonovic, Permanent Representative of Croatia and co-chair of the Group of Friends of the Responsibility to Protect. He is also, Permanent Representative of Croatia to the UN. We had a four hour meeting with Simonovic in New York. He has been a long term champion of the project and explained that he is raising our research findings in meetings at the UN and with Member States. He will attend the end of project workshop in New York in June 2023. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| Description | Meeting with co-director of NGO Fighting for Humanity |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Third sector organisations |
| Results and Impact | We met with Anki Sjoeberg to discuss the key findings and she is willing to attend our workshop in London in late May 2023. Fighting for Humanity is a leading organisation on armed groups. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| Description | Meeting with someone at the UN Institute for Disarmament Research |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | We had a meeting in Geneva with Asa Cusack who is digital communications specialist at UNIDR. We discussed findings with him and implications for UNIDIR. He explained that he is communicating key findings to individuals within UNIDIR and is willing to attend the end of project workshop in London in late May 2023. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| Description | Meeting with the UN Office on the Prevention of Genocide and the Responsibility to Protect |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | We had a one hour briefing meeting in which we raised key research findings with Jamie Scudder who is the Office's expert on armed groups. She has since left the Office but has raised the importance of our research with the Office and we are inviting them to end of project workshop in New York. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |