Search Climate Insights Directory

The research argues that the 'unitary actor assumption' in civil war studies overlooks the critical role of internal fragmentation. By analyzing self-determination movements from 1960 to 2005, the author finds that movements with more internal factions are significantly more likely to experience the onset of civil war and to remain in active conflict. This is attributed to the fact that multiple factions create uncertainty for states regarding the movement's preferences and capabilities, and make it difficult for any single faction to provide a credible commitment to a settlement.

The document analyzes the illicit arms trade, categorizing it into semi-legal, state-sanctioned, and wholly illicit flows. It argues against the 'amorphous image' of easy global access to weapons, asserting instead that supply and demand are geographically and temporally variable. The authors detail how weapons are diverted from legal stocks, the role of illicit pricing as an indicator of supply constraints, and the multi-level governance structures—societal, national, and international—used to counter trafficking. It also evaluates international instruments like the Arms Trade Treaty and the UN Programme of Action, noting the challenges posed by state complicity and capacity gaps in developing nations.

The research paper analyzes how the AKP government transitioned Turkey's role in Syria from a projected 'humanitarian superpower' to a state focused on national security. It examines the tension between 'humanitarian diplomacy'—which emphasizes Islamic identity and solidarity—and the 'securitisation' of Kurdish autonomy in Northern Syria. The author argues that Turkey's foreign policy is deeply linked to its domestic political shift toward authoritarianism and the need to appease nationalist allies, ultimately prioritizing state security over human security.

The research paper examines the 'triangular drama' between Israel, Transjordan, and the UN during the 1949 armistice negotiations. It argues that while official talks occurred at Rhodes under UN Acting Mediator Ralph Bunche, the substantive agreements were reached through secret bilateral channels in Jerusalem and Shuneh. Israel exploited a significant power asymmetry, using military 'facts on the ground' (such as Operation Uvda) and direct blackmail regarding Iraqi troop withdrawals to coerce Transjordan into conceding strategic territory. The author contends that Ralph Bunche, acting as a 'weak mediator' without the support of Great Powers, allowed these secret talks to proceed to expedite the mission, ultimately granting international legitimacy to a treaty negotiated through coercion. The document concludes that the lack of a strong third party to counterbalance Israel's power established a precedent of unsustainable peace in the region.

The report finds that 2025 was the third most violent year since 1989, with 245,000 battle-related deaths. It highlights a record high of 65 state-based conflicts and a concerning doubling of international conflicts to eight in 2025. While non-state conflicts decreased slightly, one-sided violence surged to 76,500 fatalities, primarily driven by massacres in Sudan.

The research argues that ethnic terrorism declines when governments implement accommodation strategies, such as granting political power or regional autonomy to marginalized groups. Using a dataset linking the Global Terrorism Database to the Ethnic Power Relations project, the authors find that moves away from active discrimination significantly reduce the expected number of terrorist attacks. While transitions to democracy generally reduce ethnic terrorism, the effect is heterogeneous, with some Asian countries showing increased activity. The study also notes that while overall terrorism declines after accommodation, attacks by splinter groups may increase as hardliners reject settlements.

The research examines nine donor-supported active citizenship programs implemented between 2010 and 2015 in Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, and Tunisia. The authors argue that these programs, primarily funded by the US and Europe, employ a 'neo-liberalization of citizenship' approach that emphasizes formal participation and technical skill-building over political dissent and social mobilization. Through interviews with approximately 250 activists, the study finds a significant gap between the normative, Western-inspired training modules and the actual political constraints in the MENA region, such as secretive decision-making, unreliable judicial systems, and the dominance of informal power networks. The paper concludes that these programs risk bolstering the legitimacy of non-democratic regimes by encouraging tokenistic engagement and disconnecting activists from their local communities.

The paper argues that while digital technologies offer opportunities for efficiency in crisis response, they are not neutral and can compromise fundamental humanitarian principles. It identifies key analytical prisms—humanitarian space, public-private partnerships, resource distribution (e.g., digital food/cash), human relations, and data-driven vulnerabilities—to guide future academic inquiry into the 'technological turn' of humanitarian action.

The authors argue that non-violent direct action is more effective at undermining autocracies and significantly more likely to lead to democratic transitions than violent conflict. Using a multinomial logit model for the period 1900-2004, the study finds that non-violent campaigns substantially increase the probability of democratization, particularly when the state has a high proportion of democratic neighbors. Conversely, violent direct action is less effective at destabilizing regimes overall and makes transitions to new autocracies relatively more likely. The research suggests that non-violence promotes power dispersion and elite defection, whereas violence tends to centralize power and justify further repression.

The report identifies ten common areas for comparing the mediation strategies of Qatar and Norway, highlighting differences in their identities, the role of civil society, and regional engagement, while noting shared dependencies on the United States and the use of financial resources to cultivate soft power.

The document examines the complex geopolitical landscape of the Middle East through a series of expert perspectives. Key themes include the failure of Western 'exceptionalism' in diplomacy, the systemic human rights abuses in countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and the critical role of water scarcity as a driver of intra-state conflict. It provides detailed analysis of the 'bottom-up' stabilization efforts in Iraq via local ceasefires, the strategic threat of Iranian nuclear proliferation, and the use of public diplomacy by non-state actors like Hizbollah. Additionally, it addresses the stalled peace process between Israel and Palestine and the specific challenges of the Cyprus division.

The document argues that AI can strengthen the information basis for peace-building by enhancing conflict data collection, improving the accuracy of conflict forecasting, and supporting scenario modelling for anticipatory action. While acknowledging risks such as surveillance and disinformation, the author suggests that AI tools—including large language models and satellite imagery analysis—can help humanitarian actors and governments better anticipate and mitigate the impacts of armed conflict.

The authors argue that while digital technologies offer opportunities for efficiency in crisis response, they are not neutral and can compromise core humanitarian principles. The paper identifies five analytical prisms for future research: the politics of humanitarian space, the rise of public-private partnerships, new methods of aid distribution (such as e-transfers), the reorganization of relationships between aid providers and recipients, and the emergence of new data-driven vulnerabilities. It concludes that the 'do no harm' imperative requires a more reflective approach to technology to ensure that digital divides do not marginalize the most vulnerable and that data collection does not create new security risks.

The author argues that mediation is not merely a tool for conflict resolution but a strategic foreign policy instrument that allows middle powers to create 'extra political power space'. By engaging in mediation, these states can build stronger Best Alternatives to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA), create issue linkages for 'logrolling' with senior allies, and establish network ties. The paper illustrates this through an analysis of Turkey's mediation efforts under the AK Party government between 2002 and 2011, suggesting that Turkey leveraged its role as a peace broker to secure alliance benefits from the US and consolidate domestic political power.

The paper examines the implementation of the United Nations' Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda in Bosnia and Herzegovina, focusing on the localization of gender equality norms. Through focus group interviews, the authors identify two primary narrative responses: 'narratives of support' and 'narratives of resistance'. Support is articulated at the macro level, framing gender equality as a legacy of the socialist past, a marker of Western modernization, or a space for religious manoeuvrability. Conversely, resistance occurs at the meso and micro levels, driven by deep-rooted patriarchal traditions and ethno-nationalist divisions. The authors argue that effective implementation of UNSCR 1325 requires moving beyond state-centric policies to address these interpersonal and intrapersonal psychological barriers.

The Middle East has hosted the world's deadliest conflicts over the last decade, with Syria being the deadliest since 1989. While state-based conflicts and battle-related deaths declined in 2019, internationalized civil wars reached record levels since 2015. Non-state conflicts peaked in 2014 and have since declined, though they remain higher than pre-2011 levels. One-sided violence fatalities doubled from 2018 to 2019, driven by IS, Syrian insurgents, and Iran. Despite an increase in ceasefires, peace agreements are rare in the region compared to Africa and Asia, with only one full peace agreement recorded between 1989 and 2018.

The document provides a comprehensive overview of global conflict trends from 1989 to 2019, noting a record high of 54 state-based conflicts in 2019. It highlights the significant role of the Islamic State (IS) in driving recent conflict increases and the prevalence of internationalized civil conflicts. While battle-related deaths have generally decreased over the last 20 years, specific hotspots in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia remain deadly. The paper also analyzes the decline in peace agreements since 2015 and the persistence of non-state conflicts, particularly violent drug cartel activity in Latin America and communal violence in Africa.

The paper analyzes conflict dynamics in Africa from 1989 to 2019, noting a record high of 25 state-based conflicts in 2019, many of which are low-intensity or involve the Islamic State. While Africa faces rising non-state conflicts and one-sided violence, it also leads other regions in the number of definitive ceasefires and peace agreements. The study further details the growth of UN peacekeeping operations in the region from 1994 to 2018, highlighting a significant increase in troop deployment peaking in 2010.

The research examines the causal chain from formal (de jure) power-sharing institutions to peace, arguing that institutions operate primarily by inducing specific behavioral practices (de facto power-sharing). Using a global dataset of 180 countries from 1975 to 2010, the authors find that inclusive institutions increase the share of ethnic groups in government, which reduces the likelihood of rebellions by excluded groups but increases the risk of infighting among coalition partners. Dispersive institutions, such as federalism, are found to decrease the risk of ethnic conflict by increasing regional autonomy for minorities, although this effect is less statistically robust than that of inclusive institutions.

The authors examine the Patani conflict in Southern Thailand to illustrate how the 'jihadist' label can misinterpret local political struggles. They argue that while religion is a key motivating factor, it is intertwined with ethnic Malay identity and nationalistic goals of independence from the Thai state. The paper rejects the notion that the insurgency is driven by transnational Salafi-Jihadism or groups like ISIS, asserting instead that the conflict is driven by a 'nation-oriented' rationale rooted in local grievances and historical colonization.