As one of the longest lasting ongoing conflicts, the Genocide in Darfur has prompted condemnation from the international community for nearly two decades. Most explanation of the violence used by...Show moreAs one of the longest lasting ongoing conflicts, the Genocide in Darfur has prompted condemnation from the international community for nearly two decades. Most explanation of the violence used by the Sudanese government center on ethnic tensions between African and Arab tribes, but fewer analyses have applied the concept of genocide as strategy to the case of Darfur. This qualitative research approaches the conflict through a constructivist lens by applying two theories that fit this mold, Draining the Sea and Genocidal Consolidation. Through an analysis of the genocide’s timeline constructed from public and academic sources, it concludes that the government’s actions conform to President al-Bashir’s objective of retaining his position, but not that the mass killings were strictly meant to starve rebels of their support base.Show less
In this dissertation, an integrated theory is proposed in order to test why authoritarian regimes engage in mass killings during counterinsurgency operations. The current state of research is...Show moreIn this dissertation, an integrated theory is proposed in order to test why authoritarian regimes engage in mass killings during counterinsurgency operations. The current state of research is limited, scholars who studied the phenomenon either stuck to explaining parts or lacked the necessary overview of factors that can lead to mass killings in counterinsurgency operations. Within this research, three strands of literature that relate to either mass killings, authoritarian counterinsurgency or counterinsurgency in general are proposed that provide competing answers to the research objective. Subsequently, this integrated body of literature is applied to three cases: Iraq, Guatemala and the Soviet Union. The findings show that the threats stemming from the insurgents, and in this conceptualization more specifically the nature of the insurgency, the regime crisis as a result of the insurgency and the dysfunctionality of previous conventional measures provide the most feasible explanations for why authoritarian regimes engage in mass killings. Additional value is attributed to both veto player interests and elite ideology in determining authoritarian decision-making in the light of draconian counterinsurgency measures. The research moreover shows that the respective reasons to engage in mass killings influence and sometimes enforce each other.Show less
